Ontario Hansard — 1 December 2014 (41st Parliament, 1st Session)
2014-12-01
Ontario — Debates (Hansard)
role="main" class="main-container container js-quickedit-main-content" id="main-content">
December 1, 2014
41st Parliament, 1st Session
< Previous sitting day
Next sitting day >
Hansard Transcripts
vol. A
Hansard Transcripts
vol. B
Votes and Proceedings
Orders and Notices
Hansard Transcripts 2014-Dec-01 (PDF)
L035A - Mon 1 Dec 2014 / Lun 1er déc 2014
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO
ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO
Monday 1 December 2014 Lundi 1 er décembre 2014
Introduction of Visitors
Wearing of ribbons
Wearing of ribbons
Visitors
Wearing of hat
Oral Questions
Social Assistance Management System
Community care access centres
Social Assistance Management System
Child advocate
Child care
Automobile insurance
Secrétaire générale de la Francophonie / Secretary General of La Francophonie
Government accountability
Elderly persons centres
Social Assistance Management System
Infrastructure program funding
Public transit
Community care access centres
Agri-food industry
Housing Services Corp.
Introduction of Visitors
Members’ Statements
Doctor shortage
John McGivney Children’s Centre
Worlds AIDS Day
Majestic Women’s Institute
Events in New Liskeard
York Memorial Collegiate Institute
Secrétaire générale de la Francophonie / Secretary General of La Francophonie
Paralympic athletes
Journée mondiale du SIDA
Visitors
Reports by Committees
Standing Committee on Estimates
Introduction of Bills
Utility Task and All-Terrain Vehicles Act, 2014 / Loi de 2014 sur les autoquads et les véhicules polyvalents
Protection of Public Participation Act, 2014 / Loi de 2014 sur la protection du droit à la participation aux affaires publiques
Motions
House sittings
Petitions
Alzheimer’s disease
Ontario Drug Benefit Program
Child care
Hospital parking fees
Credit unions
Rural and northern Ontario transportation
Lyme disease
Legal aid
Hydro rates
Correctional facilities
Credit unions
Wind turbines
Off-road vehicles
Legal aid
Orders of the Day
Child Care Modernization Act, 2014 / Loi de 2014 sur la modernisation des services de garde d’enfants
Better Business Climate Act, 2014 / Loi de 2014 visant à instaurer un climat plus propice aux affaires
Security for Courts, Electricity Generating Facilities and Nuclear Facilities Act, 2014 / Loi de 2014 sur la sécurité des tribunaux, des centrales électriques et des installations nucléaires
The House met at 1030.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Good morning. Please join me in prayer.
Prayers.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): A point of order from the member for Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock.
Ms. Laurie Scott: I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion with respect to a select committee on sexual harassment in the workplace.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock is seeking to put forth a motion. Do we agree? I heard a no.
Introduction of guests.
Introduction of Visitors
Mr. Gilles Bisson: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce, in the gallery, believe it or not, someone who actually worked for me for 22 years and put up with me: Helen Gerteis, who was in the constituency office.
Applause.
Mr. Gilles Bisson: Yes, you should give her a standing O.
Helen was in my constituency office for 20 years and has been retired for a number of years. We have lunch every now and then. She still talks to me after all this time.
Ms. Indira Naidoo-Harris: Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome members from Epilepsy Ontario, who are here today from across the province for Epilepsy Action Day. A special welcome to the local epilepsy agency that serves my riding: Epilepsy Halton Peel Hamilton. Welcome to Cynthia Milburn, Nicole Palmieri and Harrison Milburn.
I would also like to remind all members that there is a reception in the legislative dining room from 5 to 7 this evening. I hope all members can attend.
Mr. Jim Wilson: The parents of page Nick Sammon, from Simcoe–Grey, are in the members’ gallery today: Sherry Banks and Peter Sammon. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Ms. Cindy Forster: I would like to welcome Smokey Thomas and Eddy Almeida from OPSEU. They’re in the members’ gallery today.
Hon. Tracy MacCharles: It’s my pleasure to introduce, from Durham region, Dianne McKenzie, executive director of Epilepsy Durham Region; along with Chelsea Kerstens, community outreach associate, also with Epilepsy Durham Region. Welcome and thank you.
Mr. Rick Nicholls: I’m pleased to introduce the family of Mikaila Nouhra: her father, Michel; her mother, Micheline; along with her grandmother Sammira Yammine. Mikaila is serving as the page captain today and attends école élémentaire catholique Saint-Michel in Leamington. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Ms. Sophie Kiwala: I would like to welcome Dr. Nikki Porter, project manager of Epilepsy Ontario; Suzanne McGuire, a director of Epilepsy Niagara; and Susan Harrison, executive director of our wonderful riding of Kingston and the Islands’ Epilepsy and Seizure Disorder Resource Centre.
Mr. Joe Dickson: I would like to introduce the family of page captain Haniah Iqbal here this morning: mother, Kubra; father, Asif; sister Nuha; great-aunt Malik; great uncle Amjad; aunt Syeda; uncle Mohammed; and cousin Hafsa.
We also have with us Carruthers Creek Public School teachers Catherine Oikawa and Sandy Taylor. Welcome all.
Mr. Han Dong: It’s my pleasure to introduce to Queen’s Park the Cross-Border Institute at the University of Windsor, led by Dr. Bill Anderson, joined by Sarah Dunphy and Monika Burdzy. Welcome.
M me France Gélinas: It is also my pleasure to introduce Rozalyn Werner-Arcé, executive director; Dr. Suzanne Nurse; and Mrs. Suzanne Moffatt, all from Epilepsy Ontario. They came and visited me this morning.
Mr. Lou Rinaldi: I’m not sure they’re here yet, but Jeff and Angela Hurst from Cobourg are joining me for lunch today and a tour of Queen’s Park. Welcome.
Wearing of ribbons
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.
Hon. Eric Hoskins: I don’t have an introduction, Mr. Speaker, but I have a point of order.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): A point of order from the Minister of Health.
Hon. Eric Hoskins: I believe that you will find that we have unanimous consent that all members be permitted to wear ribbons in recognition of World AIDS Day.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Health is seeking unanimous consent to wear ribbons. Do we agree? Agreed.
The Attorney General on a point of order.
L’hon. Madeleine Meilleur: Monsieur le Président, je me lève pour demander un consentement unanime pour que tous les partis puissent faire une courte déclaration sur la nomination de M me Michaëlle Jean comme nouvelle Secrétaire générale de l’Organisation internationale de la Francophonie. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to seek unanimous consent for all parties to make a brief statement on the appointment of Michaëlle Jean as the new Secretary General of the International Organisation of La Francophonie.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Attorney General is seeking unanimous consent for all three parties to make a statement on the appointment of Michaëlle Jean. Do we agree? I heard a no.
Wearing of ribbons
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Ottawa South.
Mr. John Fraser: A point of order, Mr. Speaker: I believe you will find that we have unanimous consent that all members be permitted to wear ribbons in recognition of Epilepsy Action Day.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member is seeking unanimous consent to wear ribbons for Epilepsy Action Day. Do we agree? Agreed.
Visitors
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Today in the Speaker’s gallery, we have a delegation from the Standing Committee of the People’s Congress of Hubei Province of the People’s Republic of China. Please welcome our guests from China.
Wearing of hat
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): A point of order from the member from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek—and don’t tell me.
Go ahead.
Mr. Paul Miller: I request unanimous consent, out of respect for my team that came so close yesterday, to wear the Tiger-Cat hat.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek is seeking to wear his hat as a result of their participation in the Grey Cup. Do we agree? Agreed.
Put it on.
It is now time for question period.
Oral Questions
Social Assistance Management System
Mr. Jim Wilson: My question is for the Premier. Your government spent over $250 million of taxpayers’ money on the Social Assistance Management System, or SAMS. The system was supposed to improve the delivery of social assistance for recipients of Ontario Works and the Ontario Disability Support Program.
The Minister of Community and Social Services in fact said during a November 4, 2014, meeting of the estimates committee that she felt “fairly confident that the new system will have a pretty seamless rollout….”
Premier, we don’t need another eHealth. Will your government recall the estimates committee so we can hear directly from witnesses and front-line workers to get to the bottom and help you get out of another Liberal scandal?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I appreciate the question from the member opposite. I just want to step back and say that the reason this new system is being implemented is that there was an outdated computer system in place. This new system is designed ultimately to allow for better service to clients, to make sure that front-line workers will be able to spend more time with clients, that clients will have 24-hour-a-day, seven-day-a-week access to online information and more information about their cases.
The reality is that there was a glitch. I understand that. There are 500,000 cheques that go out every month. There was a problem with a portion of those. My understanding is that less than 1% now, a little over 100 cheques, still need to be dealt with, but that 99% of the error has been corrected.
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Before we get going, I’m going to ask for a stop to the injections into this conversation.
Supplementary?
Mr. Jim Wilson: Again to the Premier: Your government continues to demonstrate an inability to manage Ontarians’ best interests. Your minister signed off on this expensive new system, a $250-million system that was flawed from the beginning, and you were forewarned. A letter written by OPSEU President Warren “Smokey” Thomas in July to your minister responsible stated, “Unless improvements are made to SAMS, the launch in late fall will be rife with problems, delays and poor service.”
Premier, Ontario’s most vulnerable rely on these payments. I don’t believe you, and I don’t think anyone believes, that 99% of the problem is fixed at this point. What is your government going to do to make sure these people aren’t left behind, that they have their money for Christmas?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I would welcome Smokey Thomas to the Legislature today. He’s here, and I’m sure that he shares with me a desire to make sure that clients of the system get the very best service possible.
The system that was in place was outdated. There was an overpayment error. It was caught immediately. Within 24 hours, about 99% of the payments were stopped or they were retracted immediately. There’s about 1%, a little over 100 situations, that still need to be dealt with.
I’m sure the Leader of the Opposition is not saying there should never be change. I’m sure he’s not saying that we should never update a system and make sure that caseworkers would have more time with clients—because that is what we are doing. We are in the business of improving service to the people of Ontario, making sure that people get better service. Along the way, when there is a situation like this, we act quickly to rectify. That is what has happened in this situation.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.
Mr. Jim Wilson: Premier, you only acted after the fact. Mr. Thomas, the president of OPSEU, warned you back in July. He told you that his members were telling him there would be major problems with the rollout. He was exactly right. Why didn’t you heed his warnings? Why did you buy an expensive program that doesn’t appear to work from the get-go, and why are you moving forward defending this when it’s just going to turn out to be another Liberal scandal? How much is this Liberal scandal going to cost us?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Community and Social Services.
Hon. Helena Jaczek: I’m pleased to have the opportunity to set the record straight on the error that occurred last week. I think it’s worth knowing that SAMS is a technology that uses the Cúram case management software—the same platform that it used in many jurisdictions globally—now owned by IBM. We have a contract with them to assist us through the transition of going live with SAMS.
As the Premier has stated, clearly this is a new system that is replacing a totally outdated computer system. It will bring our services into the 21st century. We have spent the last many months training the users on SAMS, some 11,000 users both in municipal OW offices as well as ODSP offices—extremely extensive training.
We thank the workers for all their hard work, but clearly the opposition is trying to make a mountain out of a very small molehill.
Community care access centres
Mr. Jim Wilson: This is also for the Premier. Last week, your health minister bowed to public outrage and provided the Erie St. Clair Community Care Access Centre with an additional $4.1 million toward their deficit.
There are 14 CCACs in Ontario. Throughout the province, CCACs are being forced to claw back health care services because of budgetary pressures.
Earlier this year, my colleague the member for Dufferin–Caledon brought to your attention the fact that the Central West CCAC would have to cut the number of new patients it could accept. That is despite the fact that since 2010 the amount of patients needing that CCAC’s services has nearly doubled.
Premier, is your health minister going to provide new funding for all CCACs?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I know the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care will want to speak to this in the supplementary, but the fact is, we are investing more than $4.3 billion in the community sector, Mr. Speaker. We’ve increased that funding by $270 million this year, in 2014-15. So we continue to invest more in the community sector.
As I have said many times in this House, we are in a transition. There is no doubt about that. We are changing the way we deliver health services in Ontario. People want care in their homes; they want care in the community. We are moving to a system that provides much more of that care in the community, Mr. Speaker. But we have to continue to work with the CCACs, work with the community agencies, to make sure that people get the care that they need when they need it. To that end, we continue to invest and increase funding to that sector.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mr. Jim Wilson: Back to the Premier: The Canadian Union of Public Employees, CUPE, says there has been a 33% spike in the demand for home care. We can expect this trend to continue as our population ages.
CUPE says the South West Community Care Access Centre—
Interjections.
Mr. Jim Wilson: And the NDP obviously think this is funny—which services patients in a large geographical area from London to Grey-Bruce, is resorting to cutting care for some ill patients and denying care to others altogether.
Premier, do you believe the $250 million you squandered on the failed SAMS computer system could have been better used to help people who need care through our CCACs?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Health.
Hon. Eric Hoskins: I appreciate the question.
Mr. Speaker, we’re investing more than $4 billion this year in home and community care across the province. That’s an increase of more than $250 million from last year.
I want to talk about what we’re particularly proud of. We have got a team that’s being led right now by Gail Donner. Those in the home and community sector see this woman for the experience that she has got and the leadership that she is providing to help us look at our home and community sector as we continue to transform as a province and transform our health care system.
We have been focusing, as everyone in this Legislature knows, over the past several years on our acute-care facilities. Now we’re beginning to turn our attention in a very substantive way to home and community care.
We know there are improvements that need to be made. We know that we need to make sure that we are providing the highest quality of care to people where they need it as close to home as possible. We’re working on that, and, with Gail Donner’s leadership, I expect to report back in January. I’m sure that we’re going to have solid recommendations to help guide us into the future.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.
Mr. Jim Wilson: Again to the Premier. Premier: our CCACs have their backs against the wall. The reason they are not receiving adequate funding is because the government has dug a deep fiscal hole. Over a decade of Liberal mismanagement means we’re spending millions on servicing debt interest payments and waste. That money should be invested towards safeguarding front-line health care and providing for patients in need.
Premier, your health minister even vowed to “personally address any issues with specific clients who say they are not getting the care they need.” Well, we’re hearing dozens of stories by the day, hundreds by the week. So, Premier, have you asked your minister to directly report to you about these individual cases and, if so, how many house calls has the good doctor made?
Hon. Eric Hoskins: I’d be happy to make a few house calls if that is going to lead us down the important path of continuing to improve our health care system. But the same thing I did privately last week with the NDP I want to do publicly, not just with the Conservatives but with the NDP: to actually implore them, if they have specific examples—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Essex, come to order. The member from Dufferin–Caledon, come to order.
Interjection.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Essex, second time.
Hon. Eric Hoskins: —in fact, with my colleagues on this side of the Legislature as well; it’s an important part of my job. It’s a responsibility that I take very, very seriously as the Minister of Health and as a health care professional.
I would ask them, if they are aware, through their constituency offices or elsewhere, of specific individuals whose health is being compromised because of what they perceive is a real or actual change in the support they’re providing at home and in the community, to bring those specific cases to my attention, and I commit to working with them to resolve them.
Social Assistance Management System
Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is for the Premier. Nearly a million people rely on social assistance to put food on the table and a roof over their heads, but the Liberals’ new software program is causing chaos for clients and staff. How could the Premier sign off on a quarter-billion dollar lemon, frankly, having been warned in advance that it could turn into a nightmare for our province’s most vulnerable?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I will answer this question again. The fact is, there was an outdated system in place that needed to be upgraded. We needed to improve the service to the people of the province who rely on social assistance. We needed to have in place a system that was going to allow front-line workers, caseworkers, to have more time with their clients. That’s what this system is about.
Five hundred thousand cheques go out every month. There was an error earlier in the month, earlier this week. It was immediately caught. Within 24 hours, 99% of the payments were stopped or retracted. Ministry officials are working to make sure the final 1% of cases get dealt with.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Ms. Andrea Horwath: Folks on social assistance trust the government to get things right, but the Liberals rolled out a program full of bugs, causing a $20-million glitch. Payments are being lost, cheques are being delayed, people are suffering and staff are at their wits’ end. Can the Premier tell me how many Ontarians faced empty cupboards this past weekend and what the government did to help them?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: The first question I asked of my staff this morning was whether people who were relying on these cheques did get their money. My understanding is that they did, and that there are still about a hundred or so cheques that need to be rectified; not that people didn’t get cheques, but that the amounts need to be clarified.
To the best of my ability, I asked this question, and to my understanding, people did get their money and there were about 1% of situations where there still needs to be some change. But the fact is that the ministry acted immediately and 99% of the cases were dealt with. All of that speaks to how important it is, obviously, that we be vigilant, but it does not suggest there should never be change. It does not suggest that we shouldn’t update systems. It does not suggest that we shouldn’t put in place a system that allows caseworkers to spend more time with their clients.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: The Liberals’ quarter-billion dollar app is full of bugs, and it’s causing havoc for people on social assistance. The most vulnerable people deserve better than trial and error. They deserve a social assistance program that actually works for them. How can the Premier allow the most vulnerable Ontarians to pay for the Liberals’ mistakes?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Those are broad, sweeping generalizations that bear little or no resemblance to what is actually going on.
The ministry trained 11,000 users to make sure that they knew what was required with the new system. In addition to that, because there was this error, there are now staff being deployed to go to offices to make sure those final problems get worked out.
The fact is, we made a change. Yes, I am very, very clear that it was necessary to make a change, to put a better system in place. When there was an error, there was an immediate reaction, and there continues to be a reaction that gives support to those front-line workers to make sure people have the money that they need. That was my concern this morning: to make sure that people who were counting on those cheques got them, and that has happened.
Child advocate
Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier. Will the Premier tell the parents of children in youth detention centres, mental health facilities and schools for the severely disabled—some of the most vulnerable kids in Ontario—why she’s preventing the child advocate from protecting the rights of their children?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Mr. Speaker, what I would say to the leader of the third party and to all those people who are paying very close attention to advocacy and accountability in this province is that we are expanding the authority of the child advocate. We are increasing the powers. In fact, the measures that are contained in Bill 8 were ones that the child advocate was very positive about when we first brought them in.
My understanding is that the current requests are things that go beyond the mandate of the child advocate. But we’ve expanded the authority of the child advocate; we have done that in the bill. As that bill works through the Legislature, the child advocate will have more authority, not less authority. That is as it should be.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Ms. Andrea Horwath: The Premier seems more interested in talking about accountability than she does about doing anything about it. Experts call Bill 8 troubling—
Interjections.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: Experts, Speaker, are calling Bill 8 troubling. They say it falls seriously short. Experts like the child advocate, Patients Canada and the Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies have some serious concerns about the gaps that currently exist in Bill 8. Why isn’t the Premier interested in what the experts have to say on transparency and accountability?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Mr. Speaker, I know that the Minister of Children and Youth Services is going to want to comment on the final supplementary. But we have worked with many experts, including the experts that the leader of the third party is talking about. We actively consulted with the child advocate as we drafted Bill 8. We appreciate the feedback that we got from him and his office. We have accepted amendments that the advocate brought forward. We’ve accepted amendments to the bill that we consulted with him about.
The fact is, Bill 8 expands the powers of the child advocate, Mr. Speaker. The NDP, I understand, plans to vote against our legislation, but the fact is that we are expanding the authority of the child advocate. We are increasing his powers. We are creating advocacy and accountability in the health care system that didn’t exist before. So I hope the third party would be able to work with us on this.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, the Liberals’ so-called transparency bill seems to be more about slapping a nice name on a Stephen Harper-type omnibus bill than it is about increasing transparency in our province. When something as basic as addressing aboriginal children and youth—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock, please.
Mr. Mike Colle: She should withdraw that.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Eglinton–Lawrence might himself be withdrawn.
Please finish.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: When something as basic as addressing aboriginal children and youth being cared for by children’s aid societies is left out, people wonder what the heck is going on.
Why is the Premier shutting out the advice of people like the child advocate?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Children and Youth Services.
Hon. Tracy MacCharles: We are definitely not shutting out the advice of the provincial advocate. We have met with the advocate numerous times. The reason we’re recommending expansion of his investigatory powers to children’s aid societies is because it’s a natural fit. Children don’t have a natural voice. We thought it was a perfect fit for the advocate to oversee children’s aid societies. We know there has been a general call for that.
I also want to assure the member of the third party and everybody in this House that for every other ministry program under the Ministry of Children and Youth Services, the Ombudsman has investigatory power. I mentioned last week in the House that he does have powers to investigate things like youth justice facilities. We are extending the powers to the children’s aid societies. We feel the advocate is well-positioned for that, given his background, and that he’ll do a great job in the interest of children and youth.
Child care
Ms. Lisa MacLeod: My question is to the Minister of Education. Bill 10 will likely pass this week, after limited and sparse public debate and public consultation. Given the minister’s personal commitment to Bill 10 and her desire, can she provide a detailed assessment of how many child care spaces will be impacted by her plan? In other words, can she tell us how many fewer child care spaces there will be in Ontario as a result of her bill?
Hon. Liz Sandals: Actually, the good news in child care is that if you look at the number of spaces that have been created over the last several years, not only have we created 130,000 since 2003—if you look at each of the last several years, we’ve created, on average, 18,000 a year. We have no reason to think that is going to change; that we’ll see any slowdown in the creation of high-quality spaces for our children. We would anticipate that we’ll in fact see over 70,000 new spaces created in the next several years.
In particular, if the licensed home child care operators take advantage of the opportunities, we could see 6,000 more spaces just in private home child care.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Ms. Lisa MacLeod: [ Inaudible ] and not acknowledge that’s the impending crisis. In addition, this was the same minister who told me, over a year and a half ago, that reopening contracts didn’t cost $500 million, yet the auditor last week did tell us just that.
The ministry knows that the range of lost child care spaces will be 140,000, as a result of what the Coalition of Independent Childcare Providers suggested, and up to 180,000 if we follow the Ombudsman’s numbers.
Bill 10 is not about safety. We should be talking about hiring more inspectors, if that is the case, or ensuring we have stronger enforcement and regulations, or creating an independent registry. But we’re not. Instead, we’re talking about eliminating spaces, changing pedagogy of Montessori and private religious schools, and eliminating parental choice.
I ask the minister, finally and once and for all, in the name of transparency: Will she tell this assembly how many child care spaces her government is going to eliminate?
Hon. Liz Sandals: I’m glad that the member mentioned some of those safety factors, Speaker, because I’d like to tell you what the Tories propose to do to Bill 10 with their amendments. For example, they were going to limit the scope of child care to children under 10 years of age, which would have the effect of removing subsidies from a number of very needy children. That was what they were going to do.
They were, despite the evidence from Yellowood, actually going to increase the number of children who are allowed in private home child care centres above and beyond what we put in Bill 10, despite all the problems we’ve had. They were going to remove the new administrative penalties from the bill—that’s what actually allows us to go in and find people—and they were going to limit the protection orders where you get to actually close places down. They were going to—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. New question.
Automobile insurance
Mr. Jagmeet Singh: My question is to the Minister of Finance. This government claims to be a government based on transparency and accountability. I hope we’ll see that in the answer to the question.
According to the fall economic statement in early November of this year, the first annual Automobile Insurance Transparency and Accountability Expert Report was delivered to the Minister of Finance. The whole point of this report was to let the public know why premiums are staying so high despite the fact that we had draconian benefit cutbacks in 2010 and subsequent years that reduced the costs for insurance companies. Despite promising over a week ago to make this report public “momentarily,” the government has refused to release it.
What’s in this report that the government does not want the eight million drivers of Ontario to know about?
Hon. Charles Sousa: Yes, last year, our government took leadership in launching the Auto Insurance Cost and Rate Reduction Strategy, something that I thought that member opposite would have been supportive of, given that it would have initiated the ability for us to reduce the cost of claims, enabling us to reduce the cost of premiums—and we are doing so, obviously, now without their support. We did commission a report, a report that would have been available to us much sooner, of course, had we not had an unwanted election, again, prompted by that party.
We will continue to do our work. We’ll have the report out in due course. We’re reviewing it now, Mr. Speaker.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance said, weeks ago, that this report would be out momentarily. Where is the report?
The fact is, you said you would release this report momentarily and you haven’t.
New Democrats have long argued that the insurance companies already pocketed billions of dollars of savings but none of those savings have been passed on to drivers. That’s why we called for a 15% premium cutback. We are the ones who championed this cause for the people of Ontario.
Mr. Mike Colle: But you voted against the bill, though.
Mr. Jagmeet Singh: We voted against a bill that stripped the right to sue from the people of Ontario, that stripped the right for people to stand up to insurance companies, and we proudly did so—
Interjection.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Eglinton–Lawrence come to order.
Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Our question, very directly, to the Minister of Finance: Why won’t you release this transparency report? Why are you delaying? What’s in this report that you don’t want people to know about?
Hon. Charles Sousa: What the people should know, Mr. Speaker, is the history that’s gone to get to where we are now and the constant obstacles that we had to deal with, primarily from the third party in many circumstances.
In 2003, we introduced the Auto Insurance Rate Stabilization Act. In 2005, we introduced a regulation to prohibit auto insurance from using certain information, such as credit scoring. In 2008, we completed our first five-year review of the auto insurance system. In 2010, we provided new reforms for increased consumer choices to stabilize rates. In 2011, we created the Auto Insurance Anti-Fraud Task Force. In 2012, we strengthened FSCO’s authority to deal with unfair practices. In 2013, we made a commitment to reduce auto insurance rates by 15%.
We introduced legislation this week so that we can get this under way, and it was voted against by that member, by that party, Mr. Speaker.
Our report is in hand—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Be seated, please.
New question.
Secrétaire générale de la Francophonie / Secretary General of La Francophonie
M me Eleanor McMahon: Ma question s’adresse à la première ministre en sa qualité de ministre des Affaires intergouvernementales. L’Organisation internationale de la Francophonie, connue de façon informelle comme la Francophonie, est une organisation composée de 57 États et gouvernements membres, trois membres associés et 20 observateurs.
The modern organization of the Francophonie was created in 1970. Starting as a small group of northern French-speaking countries, the Francophonie has since evolved into a global organization whose numerous branches co-operate with its member states in the fields of culture, science, economy, justice and peace.
Speaker, as a Canadian, I am proud of our rich French heritage and our participation with la Francophonie.
Premier, yesterday Canadians heard the news that former Governor General Michaëlle Jean has been chosen as Secretary General of la Francophonie, the first woman and the first Canadian to lead this vital organization.
Madame la Première Ministre, quelle est votre réaction à cette nouvelle historique et qu’est-ce que cela signifie par rapport à notre riche héritage francophone?
L’hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Je tiens à offrir mes sincères félicitations à M me Michaëlle Jean.
She has been chosen by consensus as the new Secretary General of the Organisation internationale de Francophonie. As the first woman and the first Canadian to hold this position, Madame Jean is breaking down barriers.
Notre communauté francophone fait
partie intégrale de notre histoire comme Ontariens et Canadiens, dans notre passé comme dans notre futur. La nomination de M me Jean à ce poste reflète cela. C’est un moment de fierté pour nous, Canadiens. Nous pouvons facilement soutenir solidement ce que prône M me Jean, une Francophonie internationale qui sait prendre sa juste place, l’élargissement du rôle des femmes et des jeunes dans le développement économique et un rapprochement entre le Sud et le Nord. Félicitations.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
M me Eleanor McMahon: Merci, madame la Première Ministre. C’est en effet une excellente nouvelle pour le pays tout entier, qui se réjouit ce matin. La Francophonie est bien plus qu’un rassemblement de forces culturelles, mais c’est aussi un atout économique, politique et social.
Monsieur le Président, est-ce que la première ministre, dans son rôle de ministre des Affaires intergouvernementales, peut nous éclairer sur la place de l’Ontario dans la Francophonie internationale?
L’hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: La ministre déléguée aux Affaires francophones.
L’hon. Madeleine Meilleur: Vaste est le monde francophone. En effet, dans l’Organisation internationale de la Francophonie, ses 80 États, gouvernements et 890 millions de personnes, l’Ontario a su se tailler une place de choix et nous avons participé aux six derniers sommets de l’OIF.
Je fais écho des paroles de la première ministre et c’est avec une profonde fierté que je félicite ma commettante d’Ottawa–Vanier, M me Michaëlle Jean. Elle a su faire tomber les barrières, déjouer les stéréotypes et défier les conventions. C’est tout à l’honneur de M me Jean, qui s’est présentée malgré les défis présents. C’est aussi à l’honneur des états membres, qui n’ont pas eu peur de changer les conventions et qui ont vu en elle une force rassembleuse, moderne et audacieuse.
Le résultat? Le poste de Secrétaire générale de la Francophonie mondiale est pour la première fois comblé par une femme et par une personnalité canadienne. Merci.
Government accountability
Mr. Randy Hillier: My question is to the Minister of Infrastructure. Minister, your sheer incompetence running a government portfolio is having deep consequences for the people of Ontario. You’ve wasted over $400 million on a building that was supposed to be dedicated to medical research. Instead, you’ve invested that money into a comfy glass palace for your bureaucrats rather than front-line services. Simply put, that money could have been invested in just about anything else and it would have been money better spent.
Minister, do you not agree that the money you’ve blown on MaRS should have been invested into improving our essential services?
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Economic Development—
Hon. Brad Duguid: Mr. Speaker—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): —Employment and Infrastructure. I’ve got to get it all out.
Hon. Brad Duguid: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We struggle with this every time, don’t we, the long name? Premier, we might have to shorten it eventually.
Insults aside, I think it’s very clear that what the member talks about is a loan, not a grant—a loan that is fully secured on a property that’s worth more than what has been dedicated by the province. We put forward over 700 documents that verify and confirm that. Now what we’re looking for is advice from Michael Nobrega and Carol Stephenson on what’s the best path forward on a project that had some challenges during the recession. We’re looking forward to that advice.
I’m not sure why the member continues to try to use question period just to hurl insults at us. He should take a look at what we’ve done and what we’re trying to do to ensure that this project moves forward in a positive way.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mr. Randy Hillier: Minister, I’ve heard your excuses for many months now, and nobody believes you, especially your fairy-tale happy ending, and especially not a constituent of mine, Jim Buchanan.
Jim Buchanan was told that even though he desperately needs a knee replacement, there is no money left at the hospital. The quota for knee replacements has been reached. Let me repeat that again: While a constituent of mine is told there is no money for needed surgery, you and your government have blown millions on a glass palace for your bureaucrats. This, sadly, isn’t a surprise anymore, just a disturbing reality and trend of your government’s terrible mismanagement.
Minister, do you not agree that the $400 million you’ve blown on MaRS should have been better spent providing essential access to surgeries like knee replacements for Jim Buchanan and many, many others?
Hon. Brad Duguid: We all feel a very strong amount of support for the Minister of Health’s work that he’s doing to ensure that we continue to invest more and more in health care. I think the minister would tell you, if I referred the question to him, that wait times are down for knee replacements across this province as a result of the efforts we’ve made.
For the member to compare a totally repayable secured loan with somehow money that has been spent either indicates that the member doesn’t understand this issue after all the time we’ve spent on it or that he’s trying to make his constituent think something that’s simply incorrect.
The fact is that what we’ve invested in phase 2 with MaRS is a loan that’s fully repayable and fully secured. We will move forward on a positive basis on this issue. The member ought to start working constructively with us on this instead of inaccurate things like—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. New question.
Hon. Eric Hoskins: I appreciate the question from the member opposite. It’s important, when we talk about French-language services in the province—it’s imperative—that all of us, particularly we, on the government side, do everything we can in a responsible way to provide those services.
I’m not sure if the reference was specifically to 911. I know that the member opposite has already made me and the Attorney General aware of some legitimate concerns concerning translation services and the ability for a citizen of this province to converse—particularly, as you can imagine, in a 911 situation—in the language of their choice. We are working on solving that particular issue, and I’ve talked with the member opposite about other issues where we need to continue to strengthen and make sure that we meet our responsibility.
It’s a responsibility that I take very seriously: that we provide French-language services throughout the health care system for the people who need during those times.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mais il semble que cette échappatoire demeure. Le gouvernement a dit au commissaire que si les RLISS engagent un fournisseur de services de santé, ils n’ont pas besoin de se conformer à la loi. Dans son rapport annuel, le commissaire a qualifié cette situation de menace sérieuse, et il a tout à fait raison.
Hon. Eric Hoskins: To the Attorney General.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Minister responsible for francophone affairs.
Maintenant les contrats qui avaient déjà été signés—on avait donné une certaine période pour pouvoir s’ajuster et s’adapter à ces nouvelles recommandations-là.
Vous avez tout à fait raison, et je veux féliciter le ministre de la Santé, qui a vraiment réagi très, très bien lorsqu’on a apporté ce problème du—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Merci. New question.
Elderly persons centres
Ms. Indira Naidoo-Harris: My question is for the minister responsible for seniors affairs.
Minister, seniors are our lifeline to the past and our future. They play an active and important role in our province’s communities and economy. Ontario is home to approximately two million people over the age of 65.
In my own riding of Halton, seniors are a thriving, active and incredibly engaged group in our community.
However, as we all know, there are challenges that our seniors face as they grow old.
I recently joined the minister for an important funding announcement for province-wide elderly persons centres, including one in my own riding. These centres promote the safety, well-being and health of seniors in Ontario.
Can the minister please tell us about EPCs and why they are an important investment for our seniors?
Hon. Mario Sergio: I want to thank the member from Halton for a very thoughtful question. Investing in elderly persons centres is only one of the many ways of helping our seniors stay active, engaged and connected in their own community. Indeed I’m very, very pleased to inform you, and inform the Legislature, that Ontario is investing over $11.5 million supporting 265 elderly persons centres located throughout our province.
This is what I call investment at work for our seniors—investment to improve the quality of life of our seniors to live a healthy and more meaningful and fulfilling life.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Ms. Indira Naidoo-Harris: I would like to thank the minister for his response.
Mr. Speaker, I recently had the pleasure of attending a coffee house social at the local Milton seniors’ centre, which is receiving over $54,000 this year. This centre is incredibly important to the well-being of seniors in Halton. Each time I visit, I am delighted to see first-hand the difference elderly persons centres’ funding is making in my community. The Milton seniors’ centre has something for everyone. There are fitness classes, computer classes, arts and crafts and so much more.
Mr. Speaker, can the minister please elaborate on how funding for EPC is a key component of Ontario’s Action Plan for Seniors?
Hon. Mario Sergio: Again, I want to thank the member from Halton for the question. EPC is indeed only one of the major components of Ontario’s Action Plan for Seniors. Out of the 265 elderly persons centres, more than 60% are run by non-profit organizations and some 40% are run by local municipalities.
I visited the centre in Milton, and I have to say that they are getting $54,000 to assist them with their programs. If you really want to see how our investment for seniors is working, you have to visit this particular centre in Milton, which is called the coffee house social—seniors enthusiastically bursting with activities, fitness classes for every level of mobility, one-on-one computer classes, arts, crafts, knitting, dancing and music. This is what I call, Speaker—this it is what it’s all about—caring and investing for our seniors.
I thank you, Speaker. There is more to come.
Social Assistance Management System
Mr. Bill Walker: Earlier today my leader, the member for Simcoe–Grey, shared with this House that a quarter of a billion dollars and four years was spent with a new system that’s supposed to support those most needy in our society.
We also learned that this system is wrought with bugs and exploitable weaknesses.
We also learned that the minister knew about the computer problems all along but ignored—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Sorry. I did not get who the question was to.
Mr. Bill Walker: To the Minister of Community and Social Services, Speaker. Thank you.
We also learned that the minister knew about the computer problems all along but ignored staff’s warning, who summed up the computer situation in one simple word: chaos.
In fact, not only were they ignored, but in estimates on November 4, the minister said, “I feel fairly confident that the new system will have a pretty seamless rollout next week.” “Fairly confident” and “pretty seamless” don’t seem to equate to the reality of today, Mr. Speaker.
Minister, it’s your word against the front line. Who is telling the truth?
Hon. Helena Jaczek: Thank you to the member for Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound for allowing me the opportunity to reiterate what the Premier said so very clearly earlier in question period. This new computer system is state-of-the-art. It is a very large and involved system, clearly. It has taken many, many months of training of many staff to get into good working order.
I want to assure the member opposite that the concerns that were raised earlier in the summer by the presidents of CUPE and OPSEU were taken extremely seriously by officials in my ministry, and that’s why we accelerated some of the training that was provided. Again, some 11,000 users were trained in some 257 offices. There is no chaos whatsoever.
Individuals received their cheques last week, and the final number will be getting them today.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mr. Bill Walker: Again, to the Minister of Community and Social Services: Well, Minister, state-of-the-art—I think SAMS should sadly be another money scandal coming at us. The minister responsible for eHealth too was working out glitches until the billion-dollar scandal surfaced.
The fact is, your government has a track record of asleep-at-the-switch oversight. In the case of this specific oversight, mistaken payments were sent to 6,000 social service recipients to a tune of at least $300,000.
Minister, we want to restrike the Standing Committee on Estimates so we can call witnesses and get to the bottom of this. We hope you’ll actually adhere to this this time so we can ensure that this does not turn into another eHealth boondoggle.
Will you support the striking of the Standing Committee on Estimates so we can get to the truth?
Hon. Helena Jaczek: Again, to set the record straight, the new system processed both the Ontario Works and the Ontario Disability Support Program monthly payments to some 570,000 individuals totally successfully. As the Premier stated earlier, there were a small number of overpayments. Those on direct deposit—some 85% of individuals receive their payments through direct deposit—were changed, and the correct amount deposited within 24 hours. The few remaining, who do receive paper cheques, are being issued new cheques today. We are down to contacting some 119 people as of 10:30 this morning.
We have coped with this very small glitch in an extremely effective way. In fact, I would like to thank all the front-line workers who were so diligent.
Infrastructure program funding
Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is for the Premier. In Sudbury, there are 30-tonne mining trucks that are constantly driving along Lasalle Boulevard, a main shopping street, because it’s the only way that the trucks can travel between the mine site and the smelter. Sudbury officials want to extend Maley Drive so that the slurry trucks don’t have to mix with shoppers and residents.
The people of Sudbury have set aside millions of dollars for this top-priority project. The government has repeatedly promised to fund the project—it was right there in their budget—but so far not a single dollar has flowed. Once again, we have a promise but no action. When will the provincial government actually keep its promise to the people of Sudbury and fund the project?
Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure.
Hon. Brad Duguid: The leader of the third party would be aware that before the election we brought forward a budget that committed to moving forward on this project. She didn’t support that; she made us go through an election. So we brought forward the budget again where she had a second chance to support this project, and she failed to do that—because in the second budget we brought forward, this project was clearly identified as a government priority, as we recognized it was a priority for the community of Sudbury.
Now you’re getting up to tell us that you support the project. Thank you for your support, but we’ve got it in hand. It’s a commitment we made in the budget. It’s a commitment we will fulfill, and we’re looking forward to moving on it as soon as we can.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Ms. Andrea Horwath: Gee, all that talk, and still no action. Where’s the money? That’s the question.
The people of Sudbury have been waiting over 10 years for Maley Drive to be extended. They’ve waited long enough, Speaker. They have set aside—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock, please.
Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, come to order. Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, come to order.
Please finish.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: The people of Sudbury have set aside their share of the project money. It’s time for the government to pay its share. Will this government stop playing games, stop talking a good game, and actually ante up the funding for the extension of Maley Drive in Sudbury?
Hon. Brad Duguid: I guess I want to know, which budget do you want me to refer to: the one that you rejected and sent us to an election on, or the one that we passed with our majority here in this House, which you opposed? Both of them refer to Maley Drive as a commitment of $26.7 million for the first phase of expansion. We’re committed to the project. We will be moving on the project. I’m looking forward very soon to moving on it.
We are in discussions with the federal government with regard to federal funding. It could be part of that; it may not be. It all depends. We’ve just received information—after asking since March—from the federal government with regard to the details of the federal program. We expect to be able to move forward soon, Mr. Speaker, but we don’t have a date as of yet.
Public transit
Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Often in this House, we speak about transit in the GTHA. I know there are many investments being made here, whether it’s the Eglinton Crosstown, UP Express or GO Transit. The problem, Mr. Speaker, is that there are those who say our government is only investing in Toronto transit, stating that those types of key investments aren’t being made in other parts of the province.
In my community of Ottawa South, people care very much about their transit and transportation. They rely on OC Transpo to get to work, school and doctors’ appointments—all those things people do in their daily lives.
My community wants to know that our government is committed to investing in transit all across the province, including Ottawa South. Can the minister please tell members of this House what the government is doing to invest in transit and transportation in other parts of Ontario?
Hon. Steven Del Duca: I want to thank the outstanding member from Ottawa South for that question but also for his advocacy on behalf of his community.
I appreciate the question because, of course, I’ve heard some of the same concerns. I know that Ontarians want to know that our government is investing right across the province, not just in the GTHA.
Speaker, as you know, we have a bold $29-billion, 10-year plan called Moving Ontario Forward, which will invest in transit and transportation infrastructure right across the province, and we’ve already delivered in other ways.
Using the member’s region in particular, our government is investing in the Ottawa LRT. We’ve invested $600 million in that project. This is the single largest investment ever made to that city’s public transit system from the provincial government.
But we’re also investing in local transit all over Ontario by providing municipalities with permanent gas tax funding to support their transit growth.
Whether it’s Moving Ontario Forward or gas tax funding, we are committed to building up all of Ontario.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mr. John Fraser: I thank the minister for his response. It’s good to know that our government is committed to making transit investments that count in Ottawa. The Ottawa LRT is a great project that will help commuters get moving across the city.
Mr. Speaker, the minister mentioned that our government is supporting local transit systems through gas tax funding. I know that Ottawa received over $33 million in gas tax funding this year to support public transit. Could the minister please tell the members of this House more about the gas tax program and how it can help those living in our communities?
Hon. Steven Del Duca: I want to thank that member again for that outstanding question.
Just a number of days ago, I was happy to announce the amount of gas tax funding being provided to municipalities this year to support their local transit. The member mentioned that Ottawa is receiving over $33 million in gas tax funding, but I want to highlight the fact that over $321 million is being provided to communities all over Ontario. This means that municipalities—whether it’s Ottawa, Waterloo, Windsor or Sudbury—will be able to continue to invest in their local transit systems.
Through the 2013 budget, our government made two cents on every litre of gas a permanent source of funding for municipalities. This funding demonstrates that our government is committed to improving public transit all over Ontario. We’ll continue to work closely with our municipal partners to make sure that wherever they are, we continue to make those investments in transportation that matter to Ontarians.
Community care access centres
Ms. Sylvia Jones: My question is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. In responding to my leader’s question earlier today, you said you would “personally address any issues with specific clients who say they are not getting the care they need.”
Minister, I have a letter from you from last week saying you cannot intervene in matters concerning the provision of CCAC home care. Which is it: You can address specific issues, or you can’t?
Hon. Eric Hoskins: The member opposite knows that I’m happy to sit down any time with any member of this Legislature and speak about individual cases. If they feel that an individual is not receiving the support they require, that’s part of my job. It’s a responsibility that I take very seriously. If there are specific instances with the member opposite, I’m more than happy to sit down with her and see what we can do.
Obviously, Mr. Speaker, from time to time reassessments are made of individuals in home care. Sometimes those individuals require more care based on the assessment, and sometimes they require a little bit less. Those are some of the changes that naturally occur within a home care system that we’re continuing to fund. But I would certainly offer and encourage the member opposite to sit down with me and discuss particulars.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Ms. Sylvia Jones: Minister, then you better block off a week, because I deal with these CCAC questions all the time in the constituency office. We need to know, when we write you, that you’re actually going to do something about it.
The CCAC is funded 100% by your ministry. Our constituents need to know that when they need home care, it will be there.
Will you commit to review the decision by Central West CCAC to ensure their budget is being used for front-line care, and when MPPs write you on behalf of our constituents, you will not dismiss us out of hand?
Hon. Eric Hoskins: Members on all sides of this Legislature know—those who have come forward and worked with me in a co-operative fashion on individual cases, whether it’s to do with home care or any situation with regard to health care—that I work as hard as I can, and constructively. Party politics does not get into this in any fashion. So I would again encourage the member to sit down with me and talk about the particulars.
The truth is, we are investing $4 billion-plus in home and community care. We’re doing the best that we can with our local LHINs—the LHINs that, of course, are the objects the official opposition would have gotten rid of in the first place—and the LHINs with our CCACs, to make sure that we’re providing the care to those who need it most.
Obviously, as with all that we do in government, we have budgets, but the budget for our CCACs is going up as we continue to move care closer to where people live.
Agri-food industry
Mr. Shafiq Qaadri: Ma question est pour le ministre de l’Agriculture, de l’Alimentation et des Affaires rurales, l’honorable Jeff Leal.
Speaker, as the saying goes, farmers feed cities, and we in the government recognize that they are an integral part of our $34-billion agri-food industry. But if this already important industrial sector is going to continue to grow, to flourish and to compete globally, more needs to be done in partnership by both government and industry.
In October 2013, the Premier challenged Ontario’s agri-food industry to double its growth rate and create more than 120,000 new jobs by 2020. This challenge is an opportunity to demonstrate how this sector makes an important and essential contribution to our economy and our quality of life.
Minister, can you update this House, citing your own remarks to industry leaders at the Premier’s annual agri-food summit? What is the status of the challenge?
Hon. Jeff Leal: I want to thank the member from Etobicoke North for a very thoughtful question this morning.
Just last week, the Premier and I had the opportunity to participate in the ninth Premier’s agri-food summit, along with many members from outside of the House.
Our government fully supports growth, investment and innovation opportunities in the province’s agri-food sector.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to give you a bit of an update. Since the Premier issued the challenge last year, Ontario has created 17,000 new jobs in the agri-food sector and increased our exports by $1.1 billion.
There is always more to do. Our critical path to growth requires government and industry to play a role. That’s why we’re working with our industry partners to establish a growth measurement system to help identify opportunities and measure progress through a new growth steering committee. It will bring together industry and government leaders and experts to identify opportunities to help the industry meet the growth challenge.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mr. Shafiq Qaadri: The numbers, commitment and energy all demonstrate a formidable political will.
It’s apparent that in the year since the Premier’s agri-food challenge was issued, the agri-food sector has done remarkable things.
Building on the success of last year, the new growth steering committee will assist in driving the agri-food industry’s growth and create jobs right across the province.
Nevertheless, Minister, many Ontarians across the province are concerned about red tape, what it means for Ontario farmers and how it might potentially stand in the way of meeting the Premier’s challenge. This is especially so in the light of the government’s recent decision around neonicotinoids, which are a class of neurologically active insecticides similar in chemical structure to good old nicotine.
Minister, what is our response to people who claim that government is increasing regulation at a time when we are tasked with growing the agri-food industry?
Hon. Jeff Leal: Mr. Speaker, I really want to thank the member from Etobicoke North for his great interest in the agricultural sector in the province of Ontario.
I know all of us are always very concerned about regulatory burdens and what impact they might have on Ontario farmers.
As you know, there are many people in Ontario today who are concerned about the challenge we face to reduce the use of neonics, which we announced last week.
I want to be very clear—and this is what Premier Wynne said at the agri-food summit last week: It’s not about some kind of agenda that would lead to more regulatory burden for Ontario’s farmers. We are committed to addressing the challenges of producers as we develop and implement new controls. We also remain committed to working with our farmers in Ontario with our very successful Open for Business forum, to reduce red tape in the agriculture sector.
We have had many more successes on that front, and we want to achieve more: addressing red tape, being environmental stewards and growing the industry together—very important to—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. New question.
Housing Services Corp.
Mr. Ernie Hardeman: My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.
Minister, you require all affordable housing corporations in Ontario to purchase services through the Housing Services Corp., which, of course, is your appointed corporation. The problem is that this organization funds their operating expenses, including almost $6.5 million in salaries, by charging social service housing organizations a premium on services such as natural gas and insurance.
We’ve heard from multiple municipalities that they would save money by purchasing directly—in some cases, millions of dollars that could go into affordable housing. They asked you if they could opt out. So why are you forcing them to give money to the housing corporation and not letting them buy at the best price they can get?
Hon. Ted McMeekin: I am only aware of one municipality that has asked for the option to opt out. We took a serious look at that and discovered that the economies of scale for all the other municipalities would be so discouragingly hurt by that that the decision was taken not to do that. We’ve communicated that with the municipality that made that request. That is, at the moment, our position, unless and until we get other information that may cause us to rethink it.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I appreciate the member from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek for his activities today and the fact that he’s wearing his hat. I’d like to give him permission to wear it for the whole day.
There are no deferred votes. This House stands recessed until 1 p.m.
The House recessed from 1141 to 1300.
Introduction of Visitors
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Mississippi—sorry. I was looking over there. The member from Mississauga–Streetsville.
Mr. Bob Delaney: Well, thank y’all.
Speaker, coming very—well, actually, just present in the Speaker’s gallery, I would like to draw members’ attention to two very special people: Tyler Miller, a Paralympian for the men’s wheelchair basketball league for Team Canada, and François Robert, a member of the Canadian Paralympic Committee, who are visiting the Legislature and who hope that we will all join them for their reception tonight.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Welcome. I coached the Brantford Bobcats a long time ago.
Interjections: A long time ago.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): You don’t have to be so agreeable.
Introduction of guests.
Ms. Indira Naidoo-Harris: I would like to acknowledge Rick Kennedy, the co-chair of Ontario’s Advisory Committee on HIV/AIDS, who is here with us today to mark World Aids Day. Thank you, and welcome to the Legislature.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Welcome. We’re glad you’re here.
Ms. Daiene Vernile: I too would like to say hello to Tyler Miller, who is actually from my riding, Kitchener Centre. It’s very nice connecting with you, and all the best to you at the games.
Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Speaker, I just noticed these beautiful children coming in from some school in Ontario, and I just want to welcome them to Queen’s Park. Welcome.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): We’ll call this a happy afternoon. I thank all members for their introductions and all our guests for being here.
Members’ Statements
Doctor shortage
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: Perth-Wellington needs more family doctors. The government should be well aware of that fact; for the last three years, my constituents and I have told them so.
In July, I asked the minister for information on a number of my constituents registered with the government’s Health Care Connect program and how long they are expected to wait on that list to be matched with a new doctor. The numbers are staggering, and they support the point that my constituents and I have been making for years.
According to the minister, on average, individuals from Perth–Wellington who are currently registered with Health Care Connect have been waiting on the list for 309 days. As of March 31, 2014, there was an estimate of 927 individuals from Perth–Wellington registered with Health Care Connect. Since March 2014, another doctor in Perth–Wellington has closed his practice, so that number must be even higher today.
Many of my constituents would find it inexcusable that the government is aware of these facts but has offered no effective plan to address the issue. This morning, in a letter that I hand-delivered to the minister, I expressed my dissatisfaction with the government’s action to date. I also called on him to take the necessary steps to improve the situation. I hope the minister will listen. I hope he will ensure that everyone in Perth–Wellington has access to the medical care they deserve now, not 309 days down the road.
John McGivney Children’s Centre
Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: Last week, I had the opportunity to tour the John McGivney Children’s Centre in my riding of Windsor West. Since opening its doors in 1978, the centre continues to provide rehabilitative services and resources to children and youth with special needs and is one out of only 21 children’s treatment centres in Ontario.
While the centre offers a number of excellent programs off-site and at the JMCC school, their early childhood preschool program is second to none and a true asset to our community. This unique preschool provides students with a multidisciplinary atmosphere that incorporates therapy and family goals into a learning environment. The preschool specializes in dedicated programming designed to maximize a student’s development and functional communication, literacy, numeracy and social skills.
Ensuring that children with special needs understand their self-worth and realize their potential is at the core of this model. This exceptional programming, combined with the expert faculty and staff, allows the John McGivney Children’s Centre preschool to offer youth and their families a transformative experience that they would not receive in a less specialized setting. This is an excellent program, and its value to the development of children, families and our community as a whole cannot be understated.
I would like to thank CEO Elaine Whitmore, executive assistant Karen Mongeau and Anita Hayes, manager of the preschool program, for their tireless efforts in developing and administering this program, along with everyone at the John McGivney Children’s Centre for their hard work and dedication. I’ve risen many times in this chamber to boast of the sense of community and culture of acceptance in Windsor, and it is institutions like John McGivney Children’s Centre that prove my point.
Worlds AIDS Day
Ms. Indira Naidoo-Harris: I’m pleased to rise in the House today to mark World AIDS Day. This day gives us the opportunity to celebrate how far we’ve come over the past 35 years and to reflect on the work that still must be done to put HIV/AIDS behind us forever. December 1 also marks the start of Aboriginal AIDS Awareness Week in Canada. This year’s World AIDS Day theme is “Focus, Partner, Achieve: an AIDS-Free Generation.” These words summarize the goals of our HIV/AIDS programs in Ontario.
HIV/AIDS continues to be a serious concern. It is listed by the World Health Organization as one of the top 10 leading causes of death worldwide. In Ontario alone, there were 843 newly diagnosed cases in 2012, but there is hope. Since 2004, the number of new HIV cases has been trending downward. This is due in large part to our government’s approach toward HIV/AIDS. Our strategy is focused on prevention but also on education, testing, treatment, support services, research and, most importantly, reducing the stigma towards those suffering from HIV/AIDS. Our achievements are also the result of strong partnerships and the hard work of our community partners.
I’m pleased to say that we are entering a very optimistic time in the history of our fight to end HIV/AIDS.
Majestic Women’s Institute
Ms. Lisa M. Thompson: I rise today to share in the celebration of the Majestic Women’s Institute’s 75th anniversary. On November 12, I had the pleasure of joining the celebrations in Brussels at the Melville Presbyterian Church, where I presented President Ruth Bauer a certificate of celebration in recognition of the group’s efforts since their establishment in 1939.
Women’s institutes across Ontario offer educational programming and community support for women in rural Ontario. Together, members identify needs in their community, advocate for social, environmental and economic change and work towards the personal growth of all women, for home and country. Over the last 75 years, women’s institutes have advocated for the many notable changes in their communities, ranging from the mandatory pasteurization of milk to promoting safe streets with crosswalks and flashing lights on school buses.
It’s important to recognize groups such as the women’s institute, who encourage women’s participation and leadership within their communities. As a member of the steering committee for the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians, Canadian region, I recognize the value and strength that women can contribute to society when given the opportunity.
I tip my hat again to the Majestic Women’s Institute on their 75th anniversary. It’s a very special rural women’s organization. As they live by the Mary Stewart Collect, they never forget to be kind.
Events in New Liskeard
Mr. John Vanthof: This weekend, the sound of swords and musket volleys broke the silence of the usually peaceful streets in New Liskeard. No, it was not a local uprising but rather a re-enactment of life in a New France Christmas village. The actors were local volunteers who took
part in the first annual Village Noël project in Temiskaming Shores. The main streets were cordoned off and cars were replaced with cedar kiosks with local crafts and foods. Carollers and voyageurs wandered among the fire pits. It was a beautiful scene and a worthy reminder of our French Canadian heritage.
Sadly, early Saturday morning, another sound woke residents: the wail of fire trucks and ambulances, as part of New Liskeard’s downtown core was on fire. Several people were taken to hospital. Six families lost their belongings and two businesses were destroyed. Glenn Walton Shoes was a landmark in our area. The shoe store was opened in 1953. Glenn took over in 1958 and sold the business to his daughter in 2013. Glenn and his family also lost a lifetime of memories in the fire, including his trophy fish and hunting pictures.
Tammy Penner had operated Watch Me Grow for over eight years, and she is devastated by the loss of her business. In the end, the firemen at the scene had to destroy the building to get the fire completely under control.
Because of the fire, a large portion of Village Noël was itself cordoned off. In a true show of voyageur resilience, the organizers regrouped, moved the entertainment venues and extended the hours on Sunday to accommodate the annual Santa Claus parade, which had to be moved from Saturday.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank not only the volunteers of Village Noël but the firefighters and other first responders who keep us safe and make our area such a great place to live.
York Memorial Collegiate Institute
Mrs. Laura Albanese: I rise today to speak about York Memorial Collegiate Institute, one of the oldest schools in Toronto, located in my riding of York South–Weston. York Memo, an institution of higher learning built in memory of the youth killed in the First World War, this year is celebrating its 85th anniversary.
The school has consistently provided the highest quality of education to each and every student who has entered its doors since the school’s inception in 1929. York Memorial has also developed one of the most impressive advancement placement programs in this province, offering more competitive AP courses than any other secondary school in Ontario. These challenging courses are recognized nationally, internationally and in many universities. In fact, four years ago York Memorial had eight national AP scholars. This was the highest number of any school in Ontario.
York Memorial Collegiate counts a number of notable alumni. One sits with us today in this Legislature, notably the member from Oakville, now Minister of Labour. The member for Scarborough–Agincourt also served there, as a public nurse.
I am very proud of this institution, Mr. Speaker. My sincerest congratulations go to the principal, Mrs. Suzanna Greenaway, the staff and all the students for celebrating this impressive milestone.
Secrétaire générale de la Francophonie / Secretary General of La Francophonie
M me Gila Martow: En mon nom et au nom de tout le caucus conservateur de l’Ontario, je tiens à exprimer mes félicitations les plus sincères à l’ancienne gouverneure générale, Michaëlle Jean, qui, comme nous le savons, vient d’être choisie comme nouvelle Secrétaire générale de la Francophonie et la première secrétaire générale féminine.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of myself and the entire PC caucus, I would like to extend heartfelt congratulations to former Governor General Michaëlle Jean, who has just been chosen la francophonie’s newest secretary general and the first female.
Paralympic athletes
Mr. Bob Delaney: Speaker, I’d like to recognize some true Canadian role models today from the Canadian Paralympic Committee who focus on creating a province and indeed a nation where every person who lives and works among us can participate in sport, whether or not he or she is living with a disability. Roughly one in seven people in the province of Ontario have a disability. That’s more than a million Ontarians; and worldwide, that’s more than a billion people who live with a disability.
Earlier, I recognized Tyler Miller in the Speaker’s gallery, who is visiting Queen’s Park today, who is here in support of the Canadian Paralympic Committee and their efforts across Canada. In 2012, Tyler successfully took
part in the Paralympic Games in London, England, where Team Canada captured a gold medal in his sport of basketball.
In addition to his success, Tyler received the 2012 Civitan Sports Award for top athlete of the year for Kitchener and Waterloo. In 2010, Tyler Miller was part of the team that played for 24 hours straight, breaking the record for the longest wheelchair basketball game ever played. Tyler will represent Team Canada at the Toronto Parapan Games in men’s wheelchair basketball.
This afternoon the Canadian Paralympic Committee is hosting a reception from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. in room 230. Let’s welcome the Canadian Paralympic Committee as they continue to grow the Paralympic movement leading up to the 2015 Pan Am Games.
Journée mondiale du SIDA
M me Marie-France Lalonde: La Journée mondiale du SIDA, qui a lieu aujourd’hui le 1 er décembre, offre une occasion importante de se souvenir de ceux et celles qui nous ont quittés, ainsi que de sensibiliser le public au SIDA et au virus du VIH. Cette année, la Journée mondiale du SIDA porte le thème « Objectif zéro ». C’est-à-dire zéro nouvelle infection au VIH, zéro discrimination, et zéro décès lié au SIDA.
La semaine passée, j’ai eu l’honneur de rencontrer Khaled Salam et Gord Asmus du comité du SIDA d’Ottawa. Le CSO est un organisme communautaire à but non lucratif offrant des services gratuits et confidentiels pour toutes les personnes vivant avec ou présentant un risque d’infection pour le VIH dans la région d’Ottawa.
À ses débuts, en 1985, le CSO était un petit groupe de personnes d’orientation homosexuelle, mais aujourd’hui il compte un grand nombre de bénévoles, de participants et de personnel. MM. Salam et Asmus m’ont présenté des données qui indiquent qu’il y a à peu près 900 nouveaux diagnostics du SIDA par année en Ontario, dont plus de 100 à Ottawa. Ils ont souligné que même en 2014 le contrôle de cette maladie exige, comme outil principal, la lutte contre la stigmatisation, la discrimination et l’homophobie. Aidons-les en nous informant davantage au sujet du SIDA et de l’infection VIH et en oubliant nos propres préjugés. Merci.
Le Président (L’hon. Dave Levac): Merci beaucoup.
Visitors
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): A point of order from the member from Northumberland–Quinte West.
Mr. Lou Rinaldi: Thank you, Speaker. I beg your indulgence. I know that it’s stepping out of bounds a little bit here, but I have two guests from the great riding of Northumberland–Quinte West: Jeff and Angela Hurst. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Reports by Committees
Standing Committee on Estimates
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Pursuant to the order of the House dated July 24, 2014, the Standing Committee on Estimates shall present one report with respect to all of the estimates and the supplementary estimates considered pursuant to standing orders 60 and 62 no later than Thursday, November 27, 2014.
The House not having received a report from the Standing Committee on Estimates for certain ministries and offices on Thursday, November 27, 2014, as required by the order of the House dated July 24, 2014, and pursuant to standing order 63(b), the estimates before the committee of the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs, the Office of Francophone Affairs, and Ministry of Consumer Services are deemed to be passed by the committee and are deemed to be reported to and received by the House.
Accordingly, the estimates 2014-15 of these ministries and offices are deemed to be passed by the Standing Committee on Estimates and are deemed to be reported to and received by the House.
Report deemed received.
Introduction of Bills
Utility Task and All-Terrain Vehicles Act, 2014 / Loi de 2014 sur les autoquads et les véhicules polyvalents
Mr. Norm Miller moved first reading of the following bill:
Bill 51,
An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act with respect to utility task and all-terrain vehicles / Projet de loi 51, Loi modifiant le Code de la route en ce qui concerne les autoquads et les véhicules polyvalents.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
First reading agreed to.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member for a short statement.
Mr. Norm Miller: The Utility Task and All-Terrain Vehicles Act, 2014, amends the Highway Traffic Act to provide that no person shall drive an off-road vehicle on a highway except in accordance with the stated exceptions. One of the exceptions is that a utility task vehicle may be driven on any highway on which an all-terrain vehicle may be driven, and that any regulations or bylaws applicable to all-terrain vehicles also apply to utility task vehicles. A utility task vehicle is defined as an off-road vehicle meeting certain specifications, including the specification that the vehicle is designed to carry a driver and one or more passengers, so it applies to side-by-side ATVs.
Protection of Public Participation Act, 2014 / Loi de 2014 sur la protection du droit à la participation aux affaires publiques
Mme Meilleur moved first reading of the following bill:
Bill 52,
An Act to amend the Courts of Justice Act, the Libel and Slander Act and the Statutory Powers Procedure Act in order to protect expression on matters of public interest / Projet de loi 52, Loi modifiant la
Loi sur les tribunaux judiciaires, la
Loi sur la diffamation et la
Loi sur l’exercice des compétences légales afin de protéger l’expression sur les affaires d’intérêt public.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
First reading agreed to.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member for a short statement.
Hon. Madeleine Meilleur: I rise in the House today to reintroduce legislation originally brought forward by my predecessor the Honourable John Gerretsen in 2013.
As members will recall, the proposed Protection of Public Participation Act seeks to balance the protection of public participation and freedom of expression and the protection of reputation and economic interests.
Je suis fière du projet de loi que nous présentons aujourd’hui, and I call upon all the members to support this bill.
Motions
House sittings
Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Good afternoon. I move that, pursuant to standing order 6(c)(i), the House shall meet to 9:30 p.m. on Monday, December 1, 2014, for the purpose of considering government business.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The government House leader moves that, pursuant to standing order 6(c)(i), the House shall meet to 9:30 p.m. on Monday, December 1, 2014, for the purpose of considering government business. Do we agree? I heard a no.
All those in favour, say “aye.”
All those opposed, say “nay.”
In my opinion, the ayes have it.
Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.
The division bells rang from 1323 to 1328.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Would all members please take their seats.
Mr. Naqvi moved that, pursuant to standing 6(c)(i), the House shall move to 9:30 p.m. on Monday, December 1, 2014, for the purpose of considering government business.
All those in favour, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.
Ayes
Albanese, Laura
Anderson, Granville
Baker, Yvan
Ballard, Chris
Berardinetti, Lorenzo
Bradley, James J.
Chan, Michael
Chiarelli, Bob
Colle, Mike
Coteau, Michael
Crack, Grant
Del Duca, Steven
Delaney, Bob
Dhillon, Vic
Dickson, Joe
Dong, Han
Duguid, Brad
Flynn, Kevin Daniel
Fraser, John
Hoggarth, Ann
Hoskins, Eric
Hunter, Mitzie
Kiwala, Sophie
Kwinter, Monte
Lalonde, Marie-France
Leal, Jeff
MacCharles, Tracy
Malhi, Harinder
Mangat, Amrit
Martins, Cristina
Mauro, Bill
McGarry, Kathryn
McMahon, Eleanor
McMeekin, Ted
Meilleur, Madeleine
Milczyn, Peter Z.
Murray, Glen R.
Naidoo-Harris, Indira
Naqvi, Yasir
Orazietti, David
Potts, Arthur
Qaadri, Shafiq
Rinaldi, Lou
Sandals, Liz
Sergio, Mario
Takhar, Harinder S.
Vernile, Daiene
Wong, Soo
Wynne, Kathleen O.
Zimmer, David
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): All those opposed, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.
Nays
Arnott, Ted
Bailey, Robert
Barrett, Toby
Dunlop, Garfield
Gélinas, France
Gretzky, Lisa
Hardeman, Ernie
Hillier, Randy
Jones, Sylvia
MacLeod, Lisa
Mantha, Michael
Miller, Norm
Munro, Julia
Natyshak, Taras
Nicholls, Rick
Pettapiece, Randy
Smith, Todd
Tabuns, Peter
Taylor, Monique
Thompson, Lisa M.
Vanthof, John
Walker, Bill
Yakabuski, John
The Clerk of the Assembly (Ms. Deborah Deller): The ayes are 50; the nays are 23.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I declare the motion carried.
Motion agreed to.
Petitions
Alzheimer’s disease
Mr. Bill Walker: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias are progressive, degenerative diseases of the brain that cause thinking, memory and physical functioning to become seriously impaired;
“Whereas there is no known cause or cure for this devastating illness; and
“Whereas Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias also take their toll on hundreds of thousands of families and care partners; and
“Whereas Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias affect more than 200,000 Ontarians today, with an annual total economic burden rising to $15.7 billion by 2020; and
“Whereas the cost related to the health care system is in the billions and only going to increase, at a time when our health care system is already facing enormous financial challenges; and
“Whereas there is work under way to address the need, but no coordinated or comprehensive approach to tackling the issues; and
“Whereas there is an urgent need to plan and raise awareness and understanding about Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias for the sake of improving the quality of life of the people it touches;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“To approve the development of a comprehensive Ontario dementia plan that would include the development of strategies in primary health care, in health promotion and prevention of illness, in community development, in building community capacity and care partner engagement, in caregiver support and investments in research.”
I fully support, will affix my name and send it with page Steven.
Ontario Drug Benefit Program
Mr. Peter Tabuns: “Whereas Health Canada has approved the use of Soliris for patients with atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS), an ultra-rare, chronic and life-threatening genetic condition that progressively damages vital organs, leading to heart attack, stroke and kidney failure; and
“Whereas Soliris, the first and only pharmaceutical treatment in Canada for the treatment of aHUS, has allowed patients to discontinue plasma and dialysis therapies, and has been shown to improve kidney function and enable successful kidney transplant; and
“Whereas the lack of public funding for Soliris is especially burdensome on the families of Ontario children and adults battling this catastrophic disease;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“Instruct the Ontario government to immediately provide Soliris as a choice to patients with atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome and their health care providers in Ontario through public funding.”
I have signed this petition, and I give it to page Ethan for the Clerk.
Child care
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas the Liberal government introduced Bill 10—Child Care Modernization Act on July 10, 2014;
“Whereas the passage of the bill will result in the elimination of 140,000 child care spaces in Ontario and increase child care costs by 30-40%, especially in rural and suburban areas;
“Whereas Bill 10 could force licensed daycare providers to close, impacting religious day schools, private schools and Montessori schools as well;
“Whereas the Liberal government has asked for quick passage of the bill but has not properly considered these repercussions for all Ontario parents;
“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“That the Liberal government conduct province-wide consultation during the 2014-2015 legislative winter recess at which time the Minister of Education will travel across the province to Hamilton, Guelph, Ottawa, Kitchener, London, Windsor, Sudbury and Toronto to consult with parents and child care workers to understand how the bill will negatively affect Ontario children, parents and child care workers.”
I agree with this petition and send it with page Hannah.
Hospital parking fees
Miss Monique Taylor: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas all individuals should have equal access to health care services regardless of their ability to pay; and
“Whereas patients requiring health care services often have to drive to a hospital to receive these services; and
“Whereas hospitals are increasingly using parking charges as an avenue for revenue generation thereby impacting some patients’ access based on their ability to pay; and
“Whereas the Liberal Party promised during the 2014 election campaign to cap hospital parking fees;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to demand that the government of Ontario follow through on their commitment to cap parking fees at Ontario’s hospitals at a level that ensures equitable access to health care.”
I couldn’t agree with this more. I’m going to give it to page Moiz to bring to the Clerk.
Credit unions
Mrs. Cristina Martins: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas Credit Unions of Ontario support our 1.3 million members across Ontario through loans to small businesses to start up, grow and create jobs, help families to buy homes and assist their communities with charitable investments and volunteering; and
“Whereas Credit Unions of Ontario want a level playing field so they can provide the same service to our members as other financial institutions and promote economic growth without relying on taxpayers’ resources;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“Support the strength and growth of credit unions to support the strength and growth of Ontario’s economy and create jobs in three ways:
“—maintain current credit union provincial tax rates;
“—show confidence in Ontario credit unions by increasing credit union-funded deposit insurance limits to a minimum of $250,000;
“—allow credit unions to diversify by allowing Ontario credit unions to own 100% of subsidiaries.”
I couldn’t agree more with this petition. I’m going to affix my name and send it to the table with page Hannah.
Rural and northern Ontario transportation
Mr. Bill Walker: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario”—this is kind of a shout-out to our old colleague Johnny O’Toole. He used to do these fairly regularly, and I wanted to get it on the record for Johnny.
“Whereas the loss of transportation service will further destabilize rural economies and impede on residents’ ability to get to school, work, doctor or hospital appointments, or any other service unavailable locally;
“Whereas the prosperity, productivity and participation of all segments of society depends on a viable, accessible transportation network;
“Whereas Greyhound Canada plans to cut bus service and Via Rail plans to cut train service in rural Ontario;
“Whereas there is no secondary carrier serving rural Ontario’s students, workers, volunteers, tourists, business travellers and any resident without a driver’s licence;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“To immediately strike an all-party committee at Queen’s Park to study transportation needs in rural and northern Ontario.”
I fully support this, will affix my name and send it with page Kate.
Lyme disease
Mr. Michael Mantha: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas Ontario does not have a strategy on Lyme disease; and
“Whereas the Public Health Agency of Canada is developing an Action Plan on Lyme Disease; and
“Whereas Toronto Public Health says that transmission of the disease requires the tick to be attached for 24 hours, so early intervention and diagnosis is of primary importance; and
“Whereas a motion was introduced to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario encouraging the government to adopt a strategy on Lyme disease, while taking into account the impact the disease has upon individuals and families in Ontario;
I wholeheartedly support this petition and present it to page Maja to bring it down to the table and the Clerks.
Legal aid
Mr. Bob Delaney: Speaker, I have a petition sent to me by a number of my constituents, actually, in Meadowvale and also in Erin Mills. It reads as follows:
“Whereas Mississauga Community Legal Services provides free legal services to legal aid clients within a community of nearly 800,000 population; and
“Whereas legal services in communities like Toronto and Hamilton serve, per capita, fewer people living in poverty, are better staffed and better funded; and
“Whereas Mississauga and Brampton have made progress in having Ontario provide funding for human services on a fair and equitable, population-based model;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“That the Ministry of the Attorney General revise the current distribution of allocated funds … and adopt a population-based model, factoring in population growth rates to ensure Ontario funds are allocated in an efficient, fair and effective manner.”
I’m pleased to sign and support this petition, and send it down with page Noah.
Hydro rates
Mr. Bill Walker: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas the Green Energy Act has driven up the cost of electricity in Ontario due to unrealistic subsidies for certain energy sources, including the world’s highest subsidies for solar power; and
“Whereas this cost is passed on to ratepayers through the global adjustment, which can account for almost half of a ratepayer’s hydro bill; and
“Whereas the high cost of energy is severely impacting the quality of life of Ontario’s residents, especially fixed-income seniors; and
“Whereas it is imperative to remedy Liberal mismanagement in the energy sector by implementing immediate reforms detailed in the Ontario PC white paper Paths to Prosperity—Affordable Energy;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“To immediately repeal the Green Energy Act, 2009, and all other statutes that artificially inflate the cost of electricity with the aim of bringing down electricity rates and abolishing expensive surcharges such as the global adjustment and debt retirement charges.”
I fully support it, will affix my signature and send it with page Ethan.
Correctional facilities
Miss Monique Taylor: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas Ontario’s youth justice facilities are run by two completely different sets of policy guidelines depending on whether they are part of the Ontario public service (OPS) and funded directly by the provincial government, or the broader public service (BPS) and funded indirectly; and
“Whereas OPS and BPS facilities serve the very same youth, and both receive their funding from the Ministry of Children and Youth Services; and
“Whereas unlike in similar OPS facilities, there is no provincial mandate for youth corrections community agencies to provide WSIB coverage, meaning many agencies have inadequate private insurance coverage; and
“Whereas youth corrections community agencies are struggling with chronic underfunding;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“We strongly urge the provision of a provincial mandate for all youth corrections agencies to provide WSIB coverage to their staff. We further urge the assembly to improve systemic inequities by ensuring that all youth corrections facilities receive proper funding.”
I couldn’t agree with this more. I’m going to sign my name to it and give it to page Hannah to bring to the Clerks’ table.
Credit unions
Ms. Daiene Vernile: Mr. Speaker, this concerns Credit Unions of Ontario.
“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas Credit Unions of Ontario support our 1.3 million members across Ontario through loans to small businesses to start up, grow and create jobs, help families to buy homes and assist their communities with charitable investments and volunteering; and
“Whereas Credit Unions of Ontario want a level playing field so they can provide the same service to our members as other financial institutions and promote economic growth without relying on taxpayers’ resources;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“Support the strength and growth of credit unions to support the … growth of Ontario’s economy and create jobs in three ways:
“—maintain current credit union provincial tax rates;
“—show confidence in Ontario credit unions by increasing credit union-funded deposit insurance limits to a minimum of $250,000;
“—allow credit unions to diversify by allowing Ontario credit unions to own 100% of subsidiaries.”
I put my name to this and support it, and will give it to page Albany.
Wind turbines
Mr. Bill Walker: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas residents of Ontario, mayors and councillors from more than 80 municipalities and Ontario’s largest farm organizations and rural stakeholders, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture and the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario, seek an immediate moratorium on wind development projects awaiting approval until an independent and comprehensive health study has determined that turbine noise is safe to human health; and
“Whereas the provincial Liberal government’s study back in 2011 failed to conclude anything more than it needed to continue to study the turbine sound impacts; and
“Whereas the federal government is launching, through Health Canada, the first comprehensive study of health impacts of wind turbines;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“That the Liberal government follow the federal lead, accept the objective of the federal wind study, agree and accept that until the study is finished it will not approve any new wind turbine projects in Ontario, effective immediately.”
I support this petition, will affix my name send it with page Ella.
Off-road vehicles
Mr. Michael Mantha: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas a motion was introduced at the Legislative Assembly of Ontario which reads ‘that in the opinion of the House, the operation of off-road vehicles on highways under regulation 316/03 be changed to include side-by-side off-road vehicles, four-seat side-by-side vehicles, and two-up vehicles in order for them to be driven on highways under the same conditions as other off-road/all-terrain vehicles’;
“Whereas this motion was passed on November 7, 2013, to amend the Highway Traffic Act 316/03;
“Whereas the economic benefits will have positive impacts on ATV clubs, ATV manufacturers, dealers and rental shops, and will boost revenues to communities promoting this outdoor activity;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“We call on the Ministry of Transportation to implement this regulation immediately.”
I wholeheartedly agree with this petition and present it to page Elijah to bring it down to the Clerks.
Legal aid
Ms. Indira Naidoo-Harris: I have here with me a petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly:
“Whereas Mississauga Community Legal Services provides free legal services to legal aid clients within a community of nearly 800,000 population; and
“Whereas legal services in communities like Toronto and Hamilton serve, per capita, fewer people living in poverty, are better staffed and better funded; and
“Whereas Mississauga and Brampton have made progress in having Ontario provide funding for human services on a fair and equitable, population-based model;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“That the Ministry of the Attorney General revise the current distribution of allocated funds in the 2012-13 budget, and adopt a population-based model, factoring in population growth rates to ensure Ontario funds are allocated in an efficient, fair and effective manner.”
I agree with this petition. I will be putting my signature on it and handing it to page Steven.
Orders of the Day
Child Care Modernization Act, 2014 / Loi de 2014 sur la modernisation des services de garde d’enfants
Mrs. Sandals moved third reading of the following bill:
Bill 10,
An Act to enact the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014, to repeal the Day Nurseries Act, to amend the Early Childhood Educators Act, 2007, the Education Act and the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities Act and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts / Projet de loi 10, Loi édictant la Loi de 2014 sur la garde d’enfants et la petite enfance, abrogeant la
Loi sur les garderies, modifiant la Loi de 2007 sur les éducatrices et les éducateurs de la petite enfance, la
Loi sur l’éducation et la
Loi sur le ministère de la Formation et des Collèges et Universités et apportant des modifications corrélatives et connexes à d’autres lois.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): I recognize the Minister of Education.
Hon. Liz Sandals: I seek unanimous consent that the rotation for debate on third reading of Bill 10 be such that the third party speak first, the government second and the official opposition third.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Education is seeking unanimous consent of the House to change the rotation for speaking, such that the third party speaks first, the government speaks second and the official opposition speaks third. Agreed? Agreed.
I recognize the member for Toronto–Danforth.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: Thank you, Speaker. I want to start off by thanking the Minister of Education and the opposition critic for education for their courtesy in allowing me to speak first. I have limited time here, Speaker. I’m supposed to be going down to chair a committee very shortly, but I appreciate this opportunity, even in a truncated way, to make some commentary on this bill.
This bill is a response to a concern about legislation that is well over 40 years old and also a response to the deaths of a number of children in unlicensed care that have occurred here in Ontario over the last few years.
We support the introduction of stronger standards for all child care providers. That is a positive development.
However, we are very concerned with what was left undone with this bill. An increase of inspection staff from 54 to 60 for services that look after hundreds of thousands of children does not strike us as an adequate response, an adequate investment in investigation and in enforcement. The absence of investment in new public and non-profit child care—in fact, the loss of child care centres in places like Sarnia—strikes us as retrograde. The most effective method of ensuring safe, high-quality, affordable child care is investment in non-profit and public child care.
This bill is not being advanced as part of a larger program of investing in and reshaping the child care movement. That is a substantial omission.
No bill alone is enough to ensure that child care is safe, affordable, available and of high quality. As I said at the beginning, we need an investment in implementation of a larger program of non-profit care. This bill doesn’t do that.
The bill also leaves the power to set ratios of providers to children in centres, except for the limitations on home-based care addressed in the bill. However, the ratios previously set in legislation for centre-based care are now entirely in the hands of cabinet. An amendment to have any change in those ratios subject to public hearings and a vote in a legislative committee was rejected by the Liberal government.
Speaker, when the government introduced the change in ratios earlier this year, there was substantial concern in the child care community, in the education community and amongst parents. I understand the need, as time goes by, to reassess the appropriateness of any given ratio of caregivers to children. But in the end, this is a central concern. It bears directly on the quality of the care that is offered and, as such, is something most properly set in an open and public vote that takes place here in the Legislature.
If it’s not to be in the legislation, then it should have been put forward in a forum that would allow debate and amendment in a committee of this Legislature, in full public view.
Speaker, this bill is an incomplete response to the child care crisis, but beyond that, I believe that the limitation of democratic rights in the passage of this bill was startling. Time was set in committee that would have allowed six hours or more for debate and votes on the substance of the bill. However, actual debate was only allowed in the first hour of committee time.
A critical part of any democratic process is debate. Governments propose, opposition parties propose, and in the course of debating a bill in committee, the public gets a fuller sense of what is meant by this or that action, and the potential is there, the ability is there to take apart proposals, to make it clearer to the public what is really happening here. If you want to have a democratic society in which legislators can be held to account, you also have to have a society in which legislators are required to defend the positions they take and the proposals they put forward.
But when the committee is reduced to silence, when that one hour was up, the hour within which questions could be asked or arguments made, and we went solely to voting for or against amendments, then the responsibility for the government to defend its position was removed. The public was shortchanged.
Speaker, people in this province expect opposition parties to work with the government when it’s doing something that advances the interests of the public. They expect opposition parties to oppose the government when they believe what the government is doing is contrary to public interest.
I believe this bill should be adopted, but I have to say, the throttling of democracy through time allocation was a huge mistake on the part of the government, and although I think it’s pretty much inside baseball—throughout most of Ontario, people didn’t pay much attention to how much time was allocated for this debate—in the long run, people will notice that debate is cut off and they will notice that government is less open, less accountable.
It’s on that note that I’ll wrap up my remarks. I would hope the government would change its ways when it comes to allowing democratic debate in this Legislature.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Further debate?
Hon. Liz Sandals: Speaker, I stand in the House today with great pride in support of the Child Care Modernization Act. Before I begin, I want to thank everyone for their hard work on this piece of legislation. I’d like to thank my parliamentary assistant, the member from Glengarry–Prescott–Russell, and I’d also like to thank the members of the social policy committee. I would also like to thank everyone who participated in public hearings for your valuable input.
As you know, in July this year we reintroduced Bill 10 because this groundbreaking legislation has always been a top priority for our government. We want to build a child care system that is high-quality, seamless and more accessible for the province’s families, and we are committed to transforming Ontario’s child care and early years programs and services to give children in this great province the best possible start in life. That is why I’m so proud to rise in this House today to discuss this important legislation.
Bill 10, if passed, will modernize our child care and early years system and replace the outdated legislation governing child care in this province. It will make our system more responsive to parents’ and children’s needs and better reflect the realities of our modern world. It will ensure Ontario families have access to safe and high-quality care to give children the precious head start they need for lifelong success and, if passed, it will also strengthen oversight in the child care sector.
This is truly a transformative piece of legislation that will position Ontario as a leader in child care and early years programs and services. One way Bill 10 will modernize our early years system is by eliminating the patchwork of rules and regulations that govern child care. It will do this by repealing and replacing the Day Nurseries Act, the outdated legislation responsible for child care in Ontario. The DNA was originally legislated in the 1940s and hasn’t changed fundamentally since the 1980s.
Bill 10 will also amend the Education Act, the Early Childhood Educators Act and the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities Act. Since the safety of our children is of paramount importance, this legislation will give the government a range of new enforcement tools to protect Ontario’s children and safeguard their well-being. Parents need to know that their children are in a safe, nurturing environment, and they need to know the government can step in if their children’s safety is at risk.
This proposed legislation also reflects valuable input from our stakeholders and from the public. In 2012, we received over 400 submissions from municipalities, licensed and unlicensed child care providers, First Nations, child care advocates, other child care and early years partners and, of course, parents. We also held public hearings at the Standing Committee on Social Policy, and after listening to comments from impacted stakeholders in the public hearings, our government has made several amendments to Bill 10, the Child Care Modernization Act.
Under Bill 10, licensed and unlicensed home providers would be required to count their own children under age six as part of the total number of children allowed.
Our government heard from unlicensed child care providers who were concerned about how this would affect them and the children in their care. That’s why we’ve made an amendment for a provider to exclude counting their own children who are four and five years old if the provider’s children are enrolled in full-day kindergarten and if they care for fewer than two children under two and meet the other prescribed criteria. This change provides home-based child care providers with flexibility, and it acknowledges the full implementation of FDK.
We also heard concerns about joining licensed agencies, so another amendment allows the government to regulate the fees of licensed child care agencies. This directly addresses the concerns that independent child care providers who choose to be licensed would be subject to very high agency fees.
Under Bill 10, the ministry could also regulate how agencies operate. This could mean different service models, so licensed child care providers could, for example, pick and choose and only pay for agency services and supports they actually need.
We also heard concerns about providers turning away children and families who they’ve known and cared for in their neighbourhoods. An amendment has been made to clarify that the five-child maximum supports quality care but does not restrict providers from caring for different children at different times. This relates to concerns raised by providers who offer service 24 hours a day or seven days a week. Providers will be able to offer care to families with different work arrangements, such as evening and weekend shifts, or to families who need overnight care, provided that a maximum of five children are being cared for at any given time.
Another amendment allows existing unlicensed child care arrangements to continue until January 1, 2016—another full year—or another date prescribed by regulation if the proclamation is later than that. This would allow children in a legal unlicensed setting to stay with their current provider for at least one year, should the bill pass. This change addresses concerns that parents and children would be abruptly turned away by caregivers and left scrambling for child care with little or no notice.
That’s why, if passed, we want to ensure that changes to the child care sector can happen incrementally and gradually, to support a smooth transition and reduce disruptions for Ontario families.
Some important amendments were also made in response to the Ombudsman’s recent report on unlicensed child care, and to more effectively support enforcement and compliance under the proposed act. This includes closing loopholes allowing illegal child care providers to call themselves camps and avoid enforcement and prosecution, and also strengthening the ability to collect video and photographic evidence to support more effective enforcement of the act.
All along, our government has remained committed to ensuring that families have access to safe, modern child care. As part of this commitment, our government supported a number of amendments to reinforce and strengthen the enforcement measures in this bill. Our government acknowledges that several constructive motions were presented by the third party’s critic, the member from Toronto–Danforth, and I want to thank him for his input. We accepted these changes in order to strengthen the bill even further. This includes clarifying that the role of the minister includes enforcement of the proposed legislation.
However, Speaker, our government also rejected a number of proposed amendments from the official opposition. These would have restricted and weakened the available range of enforcement tools. We believe that robust enforcement measures are necessary to protect the province’s children and to safeguard their well-being.
Therefore, when we look at Ontario’s child care and early years system, we can honestly say it has served us well and we have made some truly great strides with our ambitious plans for modernizing the system.
Although we made changes to strengthen the bill, I feel it is important to stress that further details for a number of matters need to be established by regulation. For example, licensing standards, including age groupings and staff-to-child ratios in centre-based care; setting the administrative penalty for violations under the act and/or its regulations; and additional details clarifying what programs and services are exempt from child care or are not required to be licensed must all be specified by regulation.
We will work closely with all partners in the child care sector on the development of these regulations, and they will all be posted for public comment. Further, if Bill 10 passes, changes to the child care sector will be implemented in an incremental and gradual process, to support a smooth transition and reduce disruptions to services for families.
Our system is governed by a mix of rules and regulations, and it no longer reflects the realities of our modern world. That is why I’m encouraging all members of this House to rise in support of Bill 10 and improve the lives of children across this great province. With this bill, Ontario will be a leader, and we will solve the problems caused by the outdated legislation governing this sector. That’s why it’s critical that we pass this bill, so I am looking to all members in this House for their firm support on this important legislation. By passing Bill 10, everyone in this House will deliver on benefits that contribute to our future prosperity.
We all want to make Ontario a better place. That is why, in the spirit of true partnership and bipartisan goodwill, I urge all members to stand up and think about our children. Ontario needs a child care and early years system that gives children the best possible start in life, a system that puts each and every one of our youngest and brightest on a firm path to lifelong success. I’m confident that the Child Care Modernization Act will help us do just that.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Further debate?
Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I’m pleased to rise today and speak on behalf of the Progressive Conservative caucus on Bill 10. I can tell you right up front, Mr. Speaker, in spite of what the minister said, that there is absolutely no way that the Progressive Conservative caucus can support this bill. There are so many things wrong with the bill, and what’s more important: I hear the minister talking about slow transition and consultation, and then I think that we put this bill through the Legislature basically at rocket speed.
I became the critic of education back in June, and I immediately started to get letters of concern from people all across the province, particularly the independent child care providers who have been completely left out of the consultation—completely. I immediately came to my House leader, the member from Leeds–Grenville, and gave him a letter to take to the House leaders’ meeting. I felt that this bill was so important, because it includes communities from right across our province. Whether it’s aboriginal daycare, francophone daycare, rural or urban, it included children from all across the province of Ontario, and I felt that there should be travel on this bill.
What we got was just the opposite. We got a time allocation motion to limit debate to six hours in the House for second reading. That led to a total of 10 hours of hearings, two hours of clause-by-clause—although there were actually 12 or 14 hours allocated, but because of the motions, there was absolutely no debate on the 93 motions. We had no opportunity to even speak on anything that came up in the committee, even to make a comment on it. It was yes or no, so we asked for recorded votes. You may recall that we voted against all of the motions on it,