role="main" class="main-container container js-quickedit-main-content" id="main-content">

December 11, 2025

44th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2025-Dec-11 (PDF)

L051I - Thu 11 Dec 2025 / Jeu 11 déc 2025

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 11 December 2025 Jeudi 11 décembre 2025

Orders of the Day

Keeping Criminals Behind Bars Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 visant à maintenir les criminels derrière les barreaux

Members’ Statements

Holiday messages

Municipalities

Constituency staff

El-Tantawy Attia

Holiday messages

Employment

Ontario public service

Rural Ontario

Housing

Introduction of Visitors

House sittings

Question Period

Government accountability

Government accountability

Food banks / Banques alimentaires

Food banks

Domestic violence

Greenbelt

Energy policies

Public transit

Public transit

Public transit

Health care

Special-needs students

Bail reform

Tenant protection

Notice of dissatisfaction

Legislative pages

Deferred Votes

Protect Ontario by Cutting Red Tape Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 pour protéger l’Ontario en réduisant les formalités administratives

Commissioner for Democratic Rights Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 sur le commissaire aux droits démocratiques

Season’s greetings

Royal assent / Sanction royale

Consideration of Bill 74

Introduction of Visitors

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Government Agencies

Motions

House sittings

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Let us pray.

Prières.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): And now a moment of silence for inner thought and personal reflection.

Orders of the Day

Keeping Criminals Behind Bars Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 visant à maintenir les criminels derrière les barreaux

Resuming the debate adjourned on December 9, 2025, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 75,

An Act to enact the Constable Joe MacDonald Public Safety Officers’ Survivors Scholarship Fund Act, 2025 and to amend various other Acts / Projet de loi 75, Loi édictant la Loi de 2025 sur le Fonds Joe MacDonald de bourses d’études à l’intention des survivants d’agents de sécurité publique et modifiant diverses autres lois.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: It is an honour to rise in this House to speak, on behalf of the good people of Toronto Centre, on a bill that is entitled Bill 75, Keeping Criminals Behind Bars—a headline-catching title, as many of the government bills tend to be.

This morning, I’ll be sharing my time with the members from Oshawa and St. Catharines.

This bill with its catchy title is one that I’m eager to debate because the issue of community and public safety is so important—and one that every single one of us is tasked with thinking about and then giving thoughtful action to those concerns.

We want every Ontarian to feel safe in their community, and I mean every single person—from the elementary school child to the grandfather on their way to the masjid; to students at Jewish day schools; to young people on their way home from their first day of work; or a woman in her home, trapped with her abusive partner. But this also should extend to the concept of safety, the action of safety—to those who are using drugs; who are unhoused; who are transitioning out of incarceration; and people who are currently in provincial detention, oftentimes in jails.

This government has a responsibility to keep Ontarians safe, and they do this by ensuring the justice and corrections systems are properly funded and run—something the government fails to do year after year, according to the accountability officers of this province.

To truly address community safety, this government must invest in a multi-pronged approach—something that this government has failed to do, despite being in power for eight years.

Upstream community supports ensure the diversion of unsafe and criminal activity. During the IPV committee, we heard from organizations about how positive parenting programs, emotional regulation instruction in schools, and after-school programs all reduce community violence. And we have known for years that increasing OW and ODSP rates above the poverty line would massively increase well-being and decrease exploitive crime.

There are many other things that reduce criminality: getting people off the streets and out of encampments, with accessible, safe, affordable housing; adequate treatment beds for mental health and addictions, instead of the months-long wait-list that we now have—and that wait-list is even longer if you happen to be in northern Ontario or rural communities. We need more supportive housing to help people who cannot live independently, so that they can stay housed. OHIP-covered mental health supports must be expanded to ensure that that service is available to people who are in crisis, before they harm themselves or others.

I’m describing services that make up the social safety net of Ontario. And I’m just scratching the surface.

What I’m saying is that the social determinants of health are exactly the same as the social determinants of safety.

The CBC published an

article on Monday about the trauma of jails and the horrific overcrowding that is there. They interviewed a formerly incarcerated woman named Sue. She spoke about how traumatic her time in jail was, but also about the fact that it opened doors to services that then changed her life. These services allowed her to graduate from high school, receive addiction treatment, access affordable housing. However, she wondered why she had to go to jail and endure those horrific conditions in jail before she was eligible for those services.

If this government really wants to keep criminals behind bars, then they must invest in and fix the broken courts system to speed up access to trial. After all, you cannot get a guilty conviction if you cannot get someone to trial.

Fixing the courts and clearing the backlog reduces the time that people are in remand—and right now, 80% of men in detention are in remand; 85% of incarcerated women are legally innocent and held in pretrial detention—where they are traumatized in overcrowded and unsafe jails, increasing the likelihood of them creating new, unsafe situations.

Fixing the courts is what the government needs to do—if the government were serious about public safety—to create more jail space for people who truly pose threats to safety to be held in remand, instead of being out on bail without supervision or any compliance enforcement measures. Fixing the courts is how you keep people in Ontario safe, and you do this to reduce overcrowding, which is proven to create extraordinary stress and horrific violence in jails. You fix the courts to ensure there are fewer cases being thrown out due to unconstitutional delays, so that guilty violent offenders are in jail and off the streets.

The government’s tough-on-crime rhetoric is hollow after eight years in power, as its underfunding of the corrections system has caused long-term damage, high burnout and low morale among corrections staff.

The Solicitor General talked about how he was good at listening—I agree; he is—but he hasn’t been good at acting on those words that have been given to him by OPSEU and the corrections officers.

Fixing the jails will actually increase safety for everyone there, and you do this by investing in employees and not just bringing in contract guards. You fix the jails by investing in sufficient staff to meet prison needs, including for rehabilitation programs. You fix the jails with investments in adequate staff to keep contraband, including illegal drugs and weapons, out of our jails—something that has been pointed out by the media through their investigations.

Global News published an

article on Monday quoting Norman Taylor, an expert on deaths in Ontario jails. Mr. Taylor said, “It’s a broken system and the current government lacks the will even to try to repair it. We’ve got jails that are so crowded people are sleeping three to a two-bed cell, one on the floor, all their programming is cancelled, all their access to health care is limited. About the only thing that works well is contraband. Somehow that flows like gravy.”

Well, the opposition is calling on the Premier to take off his conductor hat and stop his gravy train.

He can do this by shortening hiring times. I have heard from corrections workers that hiring takes so long that many applicants have found another job by the time an offer goes out.

You do this by investing in treatment-based jail programs where incarcerated people who are truly committed to making change in their lives are given the programming to do this—they help build up the accountability, and the support is there when they are out.

We used to have programs in Ontario just like the ones that I’m describing. Before COVID-19, these programs helped serious offenders—including those who were charged with the sexual abuse of minors, serious drug charges, and assaults—find healing and change for their lives in a manner that was sustained. These programs not only reduced recidivism and therefore crowding in our jails, but more importantly, they reduced violence and the heartache of victims and their families. However, due to overcrowding across the system, these programs are no longer operational because the beds are needed for general population.

However, this is extremely short-sighted on behalf of this Conservative government, because they’re not looking at the life cycle of the system.

Their tough-on-crime talking point rings rather hollow when 22 out of the 24 facilities are over capacity. OPSEU-represented corrections officers, who have been struggled under the weight of this underfunding, have been raising the alarm to this government for years. Half of the lockdowns—which is a tool that corrections officers are forced to use increasingly, more and more, along with segregation—are because of the chronic underfunding by this government. You cannot keep Ontarians safe—including those corrections officers—when you don’t invest in the system and properly staff up. We have 10,800 inmates who are sleeping on 8,500 beds. Imagine what that looks like.

This government is talking about changing the way it treats bail—again. The challenge that we are seeing is one where the government doesn’t admit that there is a problem that they can control, while they’re always pointing the finger to the federal government. There is a responsibility that is split here, but when it comes to bail supervision, it is right here in the province of Ontario—and that means it’s this government’s responsibility.

The bail and court systems have been underfunded and uncoordinated for years, under both the previous Liberal government and this Conservative government. The legal community, including judges, has been panning the government for their failure to address the backlog, leading to the serious offences being dropped or stayed because of unconstitutional delays.

You have all heard about the Jordan rule. A significant ruling in 2016 by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Jordan required that if a case is not disposed within 18 months, for cases tried in Ontario court, or 30 months, for cases tried in Superior Court, it is presumed that the delay is unreasonable, and the crowns have to contest the presumption and prove otherwise or the charge will be stayed—legal proceedings against the accused are discontinued.

We are seeing record-high unconstitutional delays in access to trial. This government has no leg to stand on when they talk about how they are the only ones being tough on crime, when they’re being so dumb on crime.

Crown prosecutors are carrying unrealistically high caseloads—they’ve been cited: A single crown prosecutor carries 100 to 200 caseloads. They don’t have the time to properly assess risk during bail court. Everyone is rushed. When they get there, oftentimes it’s understaffed in the courts, so they can’t proceed. And this is happening more and more, with alarming frequency.

The Auditor General has indicated that an overburdened workload is a persistent challenge and often considered unmanageable, contributing to these system delays.

Currently, most of the bail granted is tied to six to seven strict conditions, according to the 2019 legal aid report, something that the associate minister denied when he spoke to the media, saying that the bail conditions are none, that everybody is just walking out—slandering what is happening in the courts and how the judges and the justices of the peace are actually giving careful deliberation.

Another serious problem with Ontario’s bail system is the government’s underfunding of community-based bail supervision and verification programs, which are very effective in providing case management and help with supports for those who need access to housing and mental health and addiction services.

The John Howard Society and the Council of Elizabeth Fry Societies of Ontario have been advocating for funding and support for the bail supervision and verification programs for years. They have warned the government that the demand for this service is greater than their capacity to deliver the service.

Residential bail bed programs reduce pretrial detention pressures and lead to more successful monitoring and individual outcomes. But there are only a handful of these type of bail beds in Ontario—when you compare it to the number of people who are homeless and being discharged from the corrections system without a pathway to housing. It’s no wonder that the system here is so circular. And you are calling your own system a catch-and-release—a system which you’ve designed, underfunded and refused to fix. And every problem I’m describing is significantly higher in rural and northern communities—something, again, that the government is refusing to acknowledge.

Sureties are not bail supervision professionals. Sureties are people such as parents, grandparents, siblings, aunts, uncles. These are the people the government has been off-loading their responsibility to, to keep communities safe. They’re doing this offloading onto private citizens. When asked whether their ability to pay will impact whether someone is released on bail, the Attorney General couldn’t provide a yes-or-no answer. This means that the Attorney General is unwilling to acknowledge if someone’s inability to pay is going to create that problem for the surety.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association had this to say: “The Ontario government’s proposal to require cash bail creates two tiers of justice: one for the rich, and the other for the rest of us. Innocent, but can’t afford to pay to be released? You are stuck in jail for years until you can clear your name in court, even if you would” and could comply “with all your bail conditions. This proposal appears to apply to everyone, including first-time offenders with no criminal record.”

The Attorney General said this about Bill 75, when asked a question about a person’s ability to pay: “I don’t know if it will have an effect on whether someone gets bail or not.” I would imagine that if you were the Attorney General, you would know the answer to such a question before tabling such legislation.

The use of sureties allows the province to create additional burdens on communities and families. They’re supposed to know where the accused is at all times. They’re supposed to ensure that you can get them to trial—to get them to work, and accompany them outside of their residence.

Imagine if your grandmother was all of a sudden responsible for knowing where you are and what you’re doing. How would that impact her? How would that impact your relationship with her?

There are so many challenges here in Bill 75, a bill that must go to committee, so we can hear from the legal observers and experts; a bill that should not be fast-tracked or time-allocated—which this government has made a horrible habit of, as we have seen them do so with 12 previous pieces of legislation, all bypassing public input.

I’m going to now speak about the animal research piece in this bill.

I am happy to hear the government is making changes to the Animals for Research Act. This is good. We’ve all heard the stories about those dogs in London being subject to very painful and invasive procedures, all in the name of research. I look forward to this bill going to committee. This bill cannot bypass committee, where we will have the time and

schedule to hear from experts and witnesses who will give us their best advice to strengthen and improve and correct this bill where necessary and needed. If this government bypasses committee and truncates our speaking time, they are going to be contributing to the unsafe conditions of Ontarians by bringing forth solutions that don’t work.

Animal Alliance of Canada, who I have been in frequent conversation with about this topic, when it comes to animals and research, have praised some of this government’s changes in the bill—I do, as well. We have to talk about things that are good. But they also raised concerns about the massive overreliance on the to-be-determined regulations. Simply, once again, this government is acting in secrecy. They’re planning to do something after this bill is passed, and we have no way of knowing what they are thinking. They already know what they want to do; they’re just not telling us. We don’t have the opportunity to debate regulations in advance of them becoming public.

So show us your cards. Tell us what you want to do with this bill, truly, in regulations, because we know, in this House—even if those who are watching this debate don’t know—that regulation is where a lot of this work and implementation takes place.

We’ve seen this government, at different times, willing to move amendments—and I would say those amendments have to be done in collaboration. Enough of this government taking it upon themselves to do everything only based on their radical ideology and unwillingness to co-operate with the opposition, the third party, and the independent members. Every single one of us has something to bring to this important conversation. I really hope that this government is going to change course in the new year and bring everyone together, because public safety is one of the most important issues that we have responsibility over in Ontario.

I can tell you right now, this bill needs a lot of work, a lot of correction, and if you’re not willing to do it, then the same dangerous offenders you talk about are going to be back on the streets despite your hollow tough-on-crime rhetoric.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): The member did indicate they were sharing their time. I recognize the member from St. Catharines.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I will be sharing my time, also, with the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane.

It’s always a pleasure to be able to rise in this House and speak on behalf of the residents of St. Catharines and—personally, with Bill 75—a lot of Ontarians.

I rise today to speak on Bill 75, the Keeping Criminals Behind Bars Act, a broad piece of legislation touching multiple areas of public safety in Ontario. As the shadow minister responsible for the Solicitor General, it is my responsibility to examine what this bill will actually mean for communities, for justice, and for public safety—not just what the government claims it will do.

A core duty of government is to protect people and maintain reliable public services. That includes our courts, our emergency services, our roads, our public spaces, and the supports that prevent harm before it occurs.

Ontarians deserve to feel safe walking home at night, driving to work, cycling with their children, or sleeping in their own homes.

But safety is never the result of a single law. True safety requires stable housing, accessible mental health services, addiction treatment, functioning courts, timely bail hearings, adequate police staffing, and community-based prevention programs. It requires a government willing to look honestly at what is failing and correct it—not just react with headlines and slogans.

Speaker, Bill 75 attempts to touch many areas: animal research, bail reform, dangerous driving penalties, coroner processes, scholarships for survivors of fallen officers, and record checks. Some of these measures have merit. But merit alone is not enough to fix the systems that the public depends on.

Speaker, the people of Ontario tell us the same things everywhere we go. They want confidence that if they report a crime, a court will actually hear the case in a very timely manner. They want to know that they can escape violence at home and get support. They want to know that their loved ones won’t overdose alone on a sidewalk. They also want to know that homelessness is not a life sentence. Above all, they want public safety that works for all Ontarians.

So when a government introduces a bill called Keeping Criminals Behind Bars, the public rightly asks, “Will it actually improve safety, or is this another attempt to distract from the systemic failures this government has ignored for years and the previous government ignored for years?”

Schedule 1 restricts the breeding of cats and dogs for research and prohibits certain invasive research practices, with exemptions.

No one wants to see animals harmed unnecessarily. Recent reports about dogs being experimented on in London disturbed the public and raised important ethical questions.

There are strong reasons to scrutinize animal research. But this legislation has significant loopholes. While it bans breeding for research within Ontario, it still allows animals to be imported from outside the province. It still allows animal care committees to approve invasive research under broad criteria. In other words, we may not be ending questionable practices—just moving them kind of out of sight and behind closed doors.

Advocacy groups like the Canadian Institute for Animal-Free Science have said this bill could be a meaningful step, but only if it closes loopholes and genuinely shifts research practices, rather than creating symbolic change without real effect.

Schedule 2 introduces upfront cash bail, a dramatic change from the current promise-to-pay model used across most of Canada.

No one disputes that dangerous individuals should not be released. Public safety depends on accurate, timely and fair bail decisions. But Ontario’s bail system is in complete crisis, and this bill does not do anything to fix the actual crisis.

Bail hearings must occur within 24 hours, under the Criminal Code. Yet, across Ontario, this legal requirement is routinely violated. People wait days, sometimes weeks for a hearing. In one case in 2021, two people waited 12 days and the proceedings were thrown out entirely. If our courts cannot meet constitutional timelines now, how can they possibly administer a new cash-based system fairly?

Here is the uncomfortable truth: If you are wealthy, even accused of a serious offence, you can pay to walk free. If you are low income, you could sit in jail for months upon months awaiting trial, regardless of risk. That is not safety. That is inequality.

Ontario already over-relies on sureties more than most provinces. And this bill expands that reliance, with wage garnishment and property seizure if a surety cannot pay. Often, sureties are parents, siblings or grandparents stepping up because they don’t want to see their loved ones jailed before trial or for a length of time.

Imagine a grandmother serving as a surety for her grandson, now at risk of losing her home. What exactly does that achieve for public safety, may I ask?

Experts have told this government what is needed:

—fix your bail courts;

—fund legal aid;

—expand community-based supervision;

—invest in housing, mental health care, and addictions supports; and

—address the root causes of crime.

Cash bail does none of these things; instead, it risks increasing remand populations, worsening overcrowding, and deepening the very problems our justice system already cannot handle.

Speaker, this government calls it the Keeping Criminals Behind Bars Act, but what it actually does is keep poor people behind bars while those with money walk free.

Cash bail doesn’t make us safer; fixing bail courts does, funding legal aid does, and making sure people get timely hearings does.

Right now, dangerous offenders can slip through the cracks while first time, low-risk individuals sit in overcrowded jails simply because their families cannot afford thousands of dollars. This is not justice. This is a two-tiered system, and Ontarians deserve much better.

I’m going to touch on

schedule 3. It codifies an existing scholarship fund to support the children of police and public safety officers who die in the line of duty. Supporting these families is an honourable goal, and I hope the government will continue to expand eligibility and invest in the well-being of those who sacrifice so much for our country.

Schedule 5 amends the Highway Traffic Act to introduce tougher penalties for dangerous driving, including indefinite licence suspensions for those convicted of dangerous driving causing death. On the surface, this sounds like progress. But these provisions mirror those in last year’s Bill 197, if we all do recall—provisions that have still not been proclaimed into force.

Government has to pay attention to the bills they pass so quickly, so that we can make sure—dangerous driving and road safety is one up front.

Speaker, how can Ontarians trust a new set of penalties when the government won’t implement the ones they’ve already passed?

At the same time, the government continues a pandemic-era policy allowing drivers charged with serious offences to plead down to lesser non-criminal offences. This policy was meant to ease court backlogs when courts were partially closed during the pandemic. The pandemic is long over, but the policy remains. The result: Drivers responsible for fatal collisions can evade criminal consequences. Meanwhile, chronic court delays are so severe that sexual assault cases and other serious cases are just being thrown out. Announcing new penalties in this context is more performance, I feel, than policy.

And the government still hasn’t proclaimed the driver’s license suspension provisions for auto-theft convictions included in Bill 197—again, tough talk, little action.

Speaker, the government keeps announcing tough penalties for dangerous driving, yet the same government refuses to proclaim the laws it already passed. Last year, they promised indefinite suspensions for impaired drivers who kill someone. Those measures still aren’t in force. They promised stronger consequences for auto theft—still not in force. And now they’re back with more headlines without any action.

Families who have lost loved ones don’t need political theatre. They need a government that actually implements its own laws.

Ontario deserves real road safety, not recycled announcements.

Speaker,

schedule 5 also expands police powers to impose immediate roadside suspensions and impoundments for suspected dangerous or careless driving. Immediate consequences can be helpful tools, but only when paired with due process and consistent enforcement.

Without broader reforms ensuring meaningful accountability for fatal serious-injury collisions, these changes risk becoming more symbolic additions to a system that already fails way too many victims.

Advocates for road safety, active transportation, and vulnerable road users have long asked for comprehensive reform. The Ontario NDP has tabled strong proposals—Bill 40, Bill 47—to ensure proportionate consequences even when charges are pled down, Yet, the government continues to opt for piecemeal, headline-driven amendments instead of a real strategy.

Schedule 5 does increase fines for driving while suspended, extends impoundments, strengthens penalties for commercial drivers, and limits in-vehicle device use. These incremental improvements are fine. However, they do not address the core problem: the justice system’s failure to deliver timely, meaningful accountability.

Schedule 7—I’ve got to touch on service animals.

Schedule 7 increases penalties for harming police service and other service animals, an important step. Service animals are vital to policing, search and rescue, and disability support. But higher fines only matter, again, if enforcement and prosecution resources exist. Without proper resourcing, even the best-intentioned penalties risk becoming empty threats.

Speaker, after reviewing Bill 75, it is quite clear that while the bill contains some positive elements—such as enhanced protections for service animals, codifying survivor scholarships, and steps towards improved animal research oversight—many of its central claims do not withstand scrutiny.

Public safety cannot be strengthened while our bail courts collapse under delays, while duty counsel is overwhelmed, while timelines are routinely breached, and while the government refuses to fund the very programs that reduce reoffending: bail verification, supervision, supportive housing, mental health care, addiction treatment, and so much more.

I want to give you an example, Speaker, from Niagara, about our bail. In Niagara, police routinely bring accused persons to the St. Catharines bail court expecting a same-day hearing. But because of chronic backlogs, duty counsel shortages, and lack of courtroom resources, many accused are told, “There is no time for your hearing today.” One Niagara resident charged with a low-level, non-violent offence waited three full days in custody before a bail hearing, despite having a stable address in Niagara, a job lined up, and a surety—which was his mother—who was ready to pick him up.

Under Bill 75, that same person would now also need cash up front to be released—something a lot of people across Ontario and Niagara are struggling with is cash at hand; everyone is seeing things rising, from the cost of living to food to your rent— something that this individual’s family simply could not afford.

Here’s what that means for the average person in Niagara. A low-risk, first-time accused person sits in the Niagara Detention Centre, taking up a scarce correctional bed. His first job is lost, which increases instability and the risk of reoffending. Meanwhile, the courtroom backlog worsens because cash bail adds more administrative steps instead of reducing them. And none of this makes Niagara Falls, Welland, Port Colborne or St. Catharines any safer.

Speaker, Bill 75 doesn’t keep dangerous people behind bars; it keeps poor people behind bars. It keeps people waiting, because this government refuses to fix Ontario’s broken bail courts.

I often hear that the official opposition want a catch-and-release system. In my personal opinion, if the government wants to end catch-and-release, they should fix the bail courts. Ontario can’t properly assess risk when bail hearings don’t happen on time. Fix the system before making families pay for a government’s failure. It’s so important. It’s important for communities like Niagara. It makes justice slower, not faster, and safety worse, not better.

So make sure that this Bill 75 is keeping the dangerous people behind bars and not keeping poor people behind bars.

Speaker, within Bill 75, we cannot claim to be tough on crime while refusing to proclaim existing road safety laws, allowing serious driving offences to be pled down, and permitting court backlogs to grow so severe that serious charges are being thrown out. We have seen this across Ontario.

High-risk offenders’ charges—serious charges—are being thrown out of our criminal system. Ontarians deserve better. They deserve a justice system that works—one that is timely, fair, effective and adequately resourced. They deserve a government that does more than recycle announcements and create new slogans. They deserve a system focused on real safety, not symbolic measures.

There are positive elements, as I highlighted, in Bill 75, but there are also significant gaps. The residents, the stakeholders and the experts definitely look forward to this government travelling this to committee so that we can have a healthy debate—so that we can make sure, if you are a criminal at high risk, that you are doing the time that you need to do.

Also, we need a government that’s willing to make amendments to make this a strong, strong bill.

I look forward to continuing the debate at committee as we weigh those strengths, those shortcomings, and work together towards legislation that delivers the safety Ontario expects and deserves. We believe our streets, our communities and the places we work should be safe for all.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): The member indicated that she was sharing her time. I recognize the member for Timiskaming–Cochrane.

Mr. John Vanthof: It’s always an honour to be able to speak in the Legislature, not only on behalf of the residents of Timiskaming–Cochrane, but also on behalf of the official opposition.

I’d like to thank my colleagues the shadow ministers for the Solicitor General and the Attorney General for providing a very good overview of the details of the bill.

Although this is a place where we often disagree, I’d like to start with the things that I think we can all agree on.

The working title of this bill, Keeping Criminals Behind Bars—I think it’s not a big stretch to say that we all agree with this. Criminals should pay for their crimes; I think we can all agree with this. Do all Ontarians deserve to feel safe? I think we can all agree with this.

Certainly—I know from personal experience—people on the highway deserve to know that everyone who has an Ontario driver’s licence can actually drive the vehicle that they—and that’s something the government is responsible for, and that’s something, I think, we can all agree on.

We’re actually encouraged that the government continues to bring forward bills in their attempt to keep Ontarians safer. We may question how effective those bills are—and we will talk about that a little bit later on. But I have a good working relationship and a personal relationship with the Solicitor General and the Attorney General, and I truly believe they want to make the people in this province feel safe—I think we all do, as we’ve already stated. But there are a few things on which we disagree—and vehemently.

Talking about keeping criminals behind bars, which we all agree with—but in 2022-23, more than half of criminal charges in Ontario were either stayed, withdrawn, dismissed or discharged because of a court system in crisis. The government may disagree with that, but that’s the fact. I’m pleased—

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: He’s shaking his head.

Mr. John Vanthof: I see people on the government side saying, “That’s not the case.” Okay. I’m really happy to be proven wrong on that.

One of the best ways to keep true criminals behind bars is to have an effective court system, to have people have their day in court as quickly as possible and deal with them.

I have a correctional facility in my riding, the Monteith correctional centre. I have toured it a few times. The vast, vast, vast majority of Ontarians have never been in a correctional facility. As an MPP, we have the ability and the opportunity, and every MPP should take that opportunity, to tour a correctional facility. I had the opportunity.

I also toured the North Bay Jail, which was truly sobering.

I’m just going to back up. We all believe that the farther north you go, the worse the services and access to services become. And that’s true, in many cases—but it isn’t true with the Monteith correctional centre and the North Bay Jail.

The North Bay Jail truly shocked me. The conditions in the North Bay Jail were truly, truly shocking.

When I went to the Monteith correctional centre the next day with, actually, now the presiding officer, I’ve got to say I was relieved.

There were things in happening in the North Bay Jail that shouldn’t be happening anywhere, and it wasn’t due to the staff at all; the staff pointed it out.

At the Monteith correctional centre, both times that I toured it—and I hope that has changed now. I didn’t look it up this morning. The vast majority of people incarcerated in the Monteith correctional centre had never had their day in court and didn’t get bail either—because that’s why they were there. So this idea that bail is a revolving door and that everyone gets bail—that’s not the case. Are there things wrong in our justice system? Absolutely. But the correctional centre in my riding, the last two times I toured it—the majority of the people there had never had their day in court, ever.

The vast, vast, vast majority of those people were First Nation—vast, vast. There’s also something wrong in our system there. I am in no way at all qualified to discuss those problems. I’m sure the member from Kiiwetinoong has a much, much broader view than I do. But it struck me.

Do you know something else that happens? Someone gets charged, from the Far North, they don’t get bail, they end up in Monteith, they don’t get their day in court because it ages out, and then they just get—“Oh, goodbye,” miles from home, and they’re stranded. And they’re wondering why, in some cases, these people end up shoplifting to eat.

There are things wrong in our justice system, and I’m looking forward to working to make them better.

I think something else we can all agree on—all of us—is that police forces in this province need to have the full resources they need to do the job that they’re assigned. I think we can all agree to that.

Something else we need in this province is, we actually need to help deal with the people who police have to deal with.

At one time, I used to be, for a very short time, the critic—we were critics back then—for the Solicitor General, and I had to go speak to the Ontario Provincial Police Association. I walked from Queen’s Park to the Sheraton, where the meeting was held. In that walk, I saw eight homeless individuals—and that was a few years ago. I also saw five interactions with police, with those homeless individuals. They’re homeless. Where are they supposed to go? Having the police move them from one place to another—until we go deeper and actually try to solve the social problem of homelessness, which is getting way, way, way worse. We need to look at the root causes as well.

At no time do we want to take resources away from police forces to do the job that they signed up to do. They deal with issues and situations that we are not equipped to deal with. I often tell my local police that they have a unique job. They’re one of the few people who, sometimes, you want to see more than anyone else. But when they’re behind you for a speeding ticket, you don’t really want to see them at all—but I really want to see them pull over other people who are speeding. We want to have the strongest, most capable, well-trained police services anywhere—for our safety, for their safety.

But there are things that they can’t deal with unless we as a government, we as a province, look at the root causes of those issues.

My colleagues talked about cash bail. I’m going to tell you, I’m no expert, but cash bail is not going to solve that issue. Right now, there are so many people across this province who don’t know if they’re going to make it to their next paycheque. If they are accused of a crime and they end up in the system and it has a cash bail component—they’re going to be there. Are they the true criminals? Maybe some of them are. But are they the true criminals we are, as a government, really wanting to focus on? Fraud in this province has doubled.

I don’t think that fraudsters who take money from seniors have a problem coming up with cash bail. Drug rings, car-theft rings—I really don’t think they have a problem coming up with cash bail. So who are you actually going after with cash bail?

I don’t think it’s a secret in this Legislature that I like to tell stories. I hope that sometimes people remember the story. Do you know one of the most famous stories regarding something similar to cash bail? It’s a book, a play, a movie that I am sure we have all seen or at least know of. Do you know what it’s called? Can you guess? Les Misérables. Jean Valjean stole a loaf of bread to feed his sister’s family. The French system was much more draconian than ours. He spent 19 years in prison for stealing that one loaf of bread—19 years.

What’s being proposed here with cash bail is the equivalent of Jean Valjean—it could be a homeless person in a homeless encampment or someone who has to choose between rent and food for their kids, and they could shoplift. And I’m not condoning shoplifting, not in any way. That person will not be able to make cash bail. Those people would be Ontario’s Jean Valjeans.

Who would have thought that in 2025, right before Christmas, we would be debating whether or not to throw people in jail with no chance of freedom or even no chance of a day in court—perhaps for months, for years—for stealing a loaf of bread? Is this really what the government wants? I don’t think that is what the government wants. I don’t think they’ve thought this through.

Are there things in this bill that should be done that we agree with? Absolutely. Let’s be clear. Should we be discussing how to keep Ontarians safe and how to make them feel secure in their parks, in their homes, in going to the store? Absolutely. But I don’t think that Ontarians want to see themselves in Les Misérables—and that is where we’re going here, if you really think this through.

The government can say, “You’re making a pretty wild point”; I’m not.

Under this legislation, someone with no home, in a tent and with no help from the province because—I think something that maybe the government is going to disagree with. People without homes are in desperate situations, and in the vast majority of the cases, not of their own volition.

I heard the Solicitor General, in a speech, say that if there is not room enough, we will build more jails—that’s the solution. We need to have enough detention centres, jails, to make sure that the people who are criminals pay their price. But I’m not sure that we need to build more jails so that people without homes are housed for trying to keep themselves alive.

How about we look at programs so that we can take people without homes and work with them, so that we can all build the future that we all desire? That’s not what that part of this bill does.

I say this sincerely: I’m hoping that, when we come back, this bill is fully debated, it goes to committee and we actually work together on the things that we agree on and try to figure out the pitfalls that we see. The government has a different philosophy on a lot of things than we do; I fully accept that. But it is our job, in the official opposition, to point out things that the government may not have thought of, or they weren’t told or they weren’t—and I really don’t think that they thought of that. I hope it’s simply an omission—and not that jails are the new solution for homeless encampments.

That is not where we should be going. That’s not where any of us want to go. I’m sure that’s the case.

I’d like to close this by just saying, should convicted criminals be behind bars? Yes. Should we have a system where everyone has a right to their day in court and in a fair way? Yes.

This isn’t brought up often on our side, but I’m going to bring it up: It must be so frustrating for our police forces to do their job, apprehending people, and have them get thrown out of the system. We should be looking at that. Those are the things we need to look at. I’m glad we’re having this opportunity to be able to talk about it this morning.

Again, this bill needs to go to committee so that, hopefully, some of the things that are very, very problematic can be changed, because I don’t think that we want to be seen as the modern Les Misérables. That is where cash for bail is going, and that is something that just cannot happen in Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions?

Hon. Zee Hamid: I heard the debate from the members opposite.

I have a question for them: Are they aware—through you, Speaker—that the cash bail only becomes due once the person is actually released? No one is going to be held behind bars because they can’t afford bail.

Secondly, are they aware that for most petty crimes in this country, judges will typically set bail at a symbolic dollar? So if someone is caught stealing a loaf of bread, they might have bail set at a dollar, but they will still be released, and the bail amount only becomes due after their release.

No one is kept behind bars because they can’t afford bail. Are they aware of that?

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: The cash-for-bail system is actually going to do what we have talked about, which is, it is going to keep people behind bars because they don’t have the ability to pay to be released. This—

Interjections.

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: I am answering the question. You’ve had your chance to ask your question. You have not been truthful when speaking to the media, when it comes to bail, and I’ve heard you—

Interjections.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: Point of order.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Stop the clock.

I recognize the member on a point of order—calmly.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: The member from Toronto Centre has used unparliamentary language and ought to be required to withdraw.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I have heard the member’s point of order. I’m going to—

Interjection.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I appreciate the member’s point of order.

The member from Toronto Centre will withdraw.

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: Withdrawn.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Members have the opportunity to stand in their place and ask questions during questions and responses, and I would encourage them to do so.

I return to the member for Toronto Centre to finish their response.

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: Thank you very much, Speaker.

The record will show that the official opposition raised the concern that the bail courts are broken and that we are seeing an extended, long delay when it comes to those who are charged with crimes getting their day in bail court.

The crown prosecutors are overworked, overburdened, and they’re not able to properly assess risk. This is really the chronic problem that the government needs to address and solve and which they have refused to look at.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

M me France Gélinas: I too had the opportunity to visit the Sudbury Jail. It is a dump. It’s over 100 years old and has never been brought up to date. You go into the kitchen area—I have never seen that many rats in my life. You go into where the inmates are kept, and it is small. It just reeks. I had a chance to visit the nurses there—and same thing: It is overfull. It hasn’t been maintained. It hasn’t been renovated.

The people of Sudbury are thinking, is this a way for this government to bring in private, for-profit jails? The jail is too full. There will be more people going to jail—“Let’s ask the private sector to make money off of those people.” What do you think?

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: Thank you very much to the member for that question.

Observers of the legal system and the corrections system have identified that the pathway to housing more people in jails—as the government has alluded to in their comments, especially when it responds to how they plan to build more—is leading to a path of contracting out the construction of those jails and the private jail system that we see to have burgeoned out into the US.

This is where this government is taking us with this type of legislation, and it will come to fruition based on the fact that they are going to contract out the construction and the management of jails to for-profit super-jail centres, as we’ve seen in the US.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

Ms. Lee Fairclough: Thank you to the members for your debate on this bill. I share a lot of the same concerns—particularly for the length of time people are being held, currently, in our correctional facilities.

I have the Toronto South Detention Centre in my riding, and I recently had a very thorough visit there. In any of the medium- and lower-security areas, everybody is sleeping three to a cell, that is designed for two. Worrying to me are the common spaces within there, which basically have 15 more people than they should, every single day. Again, the staff are doing an amazing job with the situation. What I hear consistently about is the length of time to get their day in court and the length of time people are staying there. It’s supposed to be two years, but it’s four, five, six years that people are waiting.

I wondered if anybody wanted to comment further on that issue with this bill.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: I want to thank my colleague for the question.

Bail hearings are actually supposed to occur within 24 hours, under the Criminal Code. And yet, across Ontario, it seems like people are languishing in jails for well over—as I stated about the individual from Welland who was in the correctional service in Thorold for well over three weeks, for a small crime. People are waiting days and sometimes months, as you said, in deplorable conditions.

I think it’s up to this government to make sure that when they’re looking at the correctional services across Ontario and the jails that we have—minimal to medium to high security—we should be focusing in on making it not just another institution to hold people with mental health issues or other issues. They should be looking at putting monies in and looking after our correctional officers, who are often in danger, as well, in these overcrowded jails.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

MPP Catherine McKenney: Thank you to my colleagues for that debate in response to this bill.

I always look at prevention and what that means and how that can contribute to keeping our communities safe—just simply freeing up court systems, freeing up policing for other matters.

In the city that I represent, the area that I represent, we were able to scrape off a few hundred thousand dollars to provide what is called ANCHOR—alternative neighbourhood crisis response. It means that we send out nurses and community social workers, rather than police, when it’s a neighbourhood crisis and not a crime occurring. That, in one year, was able to divert 4,000 calls from our police service.

I just want to ask the member from Toronto Centre if they see anything in this bill that would indicate that we are looking at prevention so that we can actually keep our communities safe?

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: This is a very important question, and it’s one that I think all police associations are facing right now. They’re being asked to do more and more with less and less, and they’re being asked to do everyone’s job—whether it’s a public health nurse or a mental health crisis counsellor; they are having to become court support, social workers—which is simply unfair. It’s downloading on them responsibilities that this government needs to do—which is invest in the social safety net. Of course, it’s going to cost less if we invest in upstream diversion programs, and we want to be able to prevent violence before it happens, and this bill does nothing to do that.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

Mr. Matthew Rae: I thank my colleagues across the way for their comments this morning on a very important bill. I know the members opposite mentioned some things they like in the bill.

In Bill 75, we are proposing an exploring option to make parts of the Ontario Sex Offender and Trafficker Registry publicly available, giving communities the information they need to stay safe. I was just wondering if the members opposite would be supporting this bill because of that important piece in this legislation.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: We can complain that we all want to be tough on crime; we want to make sure that we keep dangerous people behind bars and make sure that we are not housing—that within our correctional services, we don’t house people with mental health and addiction supports. We want to make sure that our streets are safe, our men and women in uniform are safe. We want to make sure that public safety is an investment that this government should actually look at—an investment that really supports programs that do not keep innocent people behind bars, but do keep the people who deserve to pay for the crime.

I also feel that there are good pieces of this bill, as I stated; It is important that we highlight those. But it’s also important that we take this bill—

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Seeing the time on the clock, it is now time for members’ statements.

Members’ Statements

Holiday messages

M me Dawn Gallagher Murphy: With the Christmas holidays quickly approaching, my motto has been “Buy Local, Support Local.”

Last weekend, I attended the Grandparent Connection 10th Annual Old Fashioned Christmas Craft Show in Newmarket. What a treat. My first stop was Candy by Carol. Unforgettable buttercrunch—how could I resist? The two Newmarket sisters were giving out samples of their mother’s decadent buttercrunch. Wow, what a taste. And then, hearing their story of how they make it every Christmas to sell at the market in honour of their mother—well, I was hooked, eight packages later. This is a perfect example of buying local and supporting Ontario businesses.

On November 22, I had the great privilege to attend the live production of A Christmas Carol at the NewRoads Performing Art Centre, to announce a $53,900 OTF capital grant for Marquee Theatrical Productions Inc., a grant that supported the investment in technical equipment—in fact, it was the incredible set design that was used for this production. Well, there was definitely no “Bah, humbug” in Newmarket, as arts, culture and heritage are alive and well.

My heartfelt Christmas blessing I would like to offer—Tiny Tim’s line, “God bless us, everyone.”

Municipalities

Ms. Catherine Fife: Waterloo region is facing a shocking reality: Our aging water infrastructure has become such a barrier that all new housing development has been forced to pause.

Ontario is in a housing crisis. We have 1,400 encampments. Removing rent control has further destabilized housing security. We all know a strong economy requires a stable housing supply—this government has done the opposite.

You can’t address the housing crisis without adequate water infrastructure, and I hope we can agree that these key investments cannot be funded off the local tax base.

We rely on the Waterloo moraine and aquifer in Waterloo region. We’re unique. We must plan carefully. But this government gave all seven municipalities responsibility for planning, causing chaos.

Municipalities are the engines of our economy. They create the conditions for jobs and innovation. They build communities where Ontarians can thrive. But they need a partner who won’t cut them down at the knees.

When necessary repairs and upgrades stall the homes we desperately need, it is a clear sign that provincial leadership is failing or missing entirely.

What is happening in Waterloo is a lesson in what happens when provincial governments override local experts.

We must support municipalities in their growth, respect local planning, and prioritize sustainable development.

Constituency staff

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: Being an MPP is a lot of work, but thankfully we have terrific teams by our side.

In my office, magnificent Marietta Fox coordinates everything. I think she actually spends more time in the inbox than her own home. She loves people, cannot say no, and creatively conjures up entertaining, inviting and inclusive events for beautiful Beaches–East Yorkers.

Awesome Alex McMullan is a super-savvy sleuth who can solve even the most complex cases. His political acumen is off the charts. If I go anywhere without him, constituents are deeply disappointed. Maybe he will even run against me next time.

Conscientious Colleen Staples could never let anyone down, ever. Kindness and compassion run through her veins, making her the perfect advocate for residents seeking help. She has a super-strong work ethic and environmental wherewithal to passionately lead all our climate action.

Magical Mikaela Taylor can masterfully whip up well-researched speeches, bills and more at the speed of light. She hosts stakeholder meetings and visitors in a competent and collegial manner, making everyone feel welcomed, listened to and appreciated.

I honestly feel like I won the lottery with this clever team.

Thank you from the bottom of my heart.

El-Tantawy Attia

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: Today I rise to honour the remarkable life and legacy of Dr. El-Tantawy Attia, a man whose contributions shaped both the civic and professional landscape of our province.

Dr. Attia arrived in Ontario as an Egyptian young student at McMaster University, pursuing a PhD in nuclear engineering. He went on to build a distinguished career with Ontario Hydro and Ontario Power Generation, contributing to the nuclear expertise that continues to power our province to this day. But his legacy extends far beyond his engineering career.

Beyond his professional achievements, Dr. Attia was a foundational figure in the early development of the Muslim community in our province. He served on the board of Toronto’s first mosque, Jami Mosque in High Park, and supported the organization of the first Eid prayers held on the CNE grounds. He was a key contributor to the establishment of Masjid Toronto, the mosque just steps from this Legislature—an iconic space that Premiers and members of this assembly have visited.

Dr. El-Tantawy Attia’s civic service extended beyond his contribution to the Muslim community. In 2008, Ontario’s Minister of Health appointed Dr. Attia to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, where he served on the board and its committees for 15 years, a reflection of the trust in his leadership and—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Members’ statements?

Holiday messages

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: Meegwetch, Speaker. Soon it will be Christmas, and kids across Kiiwetinoong will be waiting at home for Santa to come and visit.

For grown-ups, the holidays are a time to gather, to feast, to open presents with each other, and to give thanks.

This Christmas finds many of us facing hurt and loss, especially families who have lost relatives too soon and also very suddenly.

Please know that we are thinking of you, and we hope you find comfort in the feeling of the holidays.

For the rest of us, this is a time to be thankful for our families. It is important to make time to visit each other.

Whether you are Christian or not, there is one belief from the Christmas story that we can learn from: “Peace on earth.”

However you may celebrate Christmas or the other holidays this time of year, we wish you a peaceful and safe holiday season. Happy holidays from all of us here at Queen’s Park. ᒥᓄᒪᑯᔐᑭᔑᑲ is how we say it. Basically, we describe it as “good feasting day.”

May peace prevail on earth. Meegwetch.

Employment

Mr. Andrew Dowie: In this season of hope and holiday cheer, I’m proud to rise and share great news from Windsor-Essex. Our region has reached 246,300 people employed—the highest level ever recorded. Unemployment has fallen to 8.1%, from 9.6% just last month. Really, this progress reflects the resilience of our community and the leadership of Premier Doug Ford and our government. Yes, challenges remain—like youth unemployment and seasonal work—but the momentum is strong and the future is bright.

A turning point came when Ontario secured the largest automotive investment in our history: a $5-billion partnership between LG Energy Solution and Stellantis to build a world-class EV battery gigafactory in Windsor, creating 2,500 direct jobs and thousands more across the supply chain.

Ontario also delivered critical support to retool the Stellantis Windsor assembly plant, securing auto manufacturing for years to come and restoring hundreds of good-paying jobs for local families.

Through the southwestern Ontario development program, we’ve invested nearly $125 million to strengthen employers like DS Actimo, Kautex Textron, and Integrity Tool and Mold, while welcoming over $330 million in new investments from Bobaek America and Minth Group, bringing more than 1,000 jobs to our region.

With the Skills Development Fund, we’re partnering with IBEW, carpenters’ and ironworkers union locals to ensure workers of all ages gain the skills that they need.

Stability for families, opportunity for young people, optimism for our community, especially during this special time of the year—this is terrific.

Together, we’re building the future right here at home.

Ontario public service

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Speaker, the Premier’s order to all civil servants to return to the workplace at the beginning of January and effectively abandon remote work is being done in a way that’s destructive to morale and certainly lacks any forward planning. Frankly, if the Premier had wanted to address the issue with our provincial workforce, he should have sat down with them to negotiate a plan that would minimize disruption and maximize both employee morale and a smooth transition.

From talking to workers and reading recent reports on the matter, it’s clear that there will be substantial problems. It’s not clear that the office space is there. It is clear that workers who organized their lives around the current work arrangements will face upheaval.

Speaker, my sense is there are two things driving this unilateral move: One, it’s a cheap way to drive out workers while not saying that you’re engaged in layoffs; the other is to make sure that corporate landlords will have fatter bottom lines. That is his standard operating procedure. And he made that clear in his comments quoted in the Star the other day.

For someone who talks at length about traffic congestion, he’s about to make it worse for all of us.

For someone who says that he defends workers, he’s about to make the lives of many workers much more difficult and drive them out of the workforce.

He should pull back, sit down with the workers and hammer out a plan that works for everyone.

Rural Ontario

MPP Billy Denault: I come from rural Ontario, from the riding of Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke.

Not many may know of the substantial contributions rural Ontarian communities make towards the province and its thriving economy, driving key sectors like manufacturing, natural resources, forestry, tourism and agriculture. In 2024 alone, these communities contributed over $116.5 billion to Ontario’s gross domestic product—a clear reflection of their strength and importance.

Our government recognizes this contribution and the vital role rural Ontarian communities play, hence why we established the Ministry of Rural Affairs in 2024—a dedicated effort to address the unique needs of rural Ontario and to help build communities that are sustainable, resilient, trusted, innovative and thriving.

Ontario is diverse—from urban, suburban, rural and northern—but together, every community plays a vital role in shaping a stronger, more prosperous province for all.

That is why last month I introduced a motion calling on the government to establish a yearly celebratory recognition—rural Ontario week. A full week of truly recognizing and celebrating our rural communities is something I know will mean dearly to rural Ontarians. I look forward to speaking more on this when we return from winter adjournment, and I’m hopeful that this House will support it.

Housing

Mr. Anthony Leardi: Madam Speaker, I have more great news from Essex county, this time from the town of Amherstburg.

The government of Ontario has a multi-million dollar program called the Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund. It helps build water infrastructure like sewer lines and waterlines. The government of Ontario is offering this fund to municipalities across the province.

This time, the town of Amherstburg applied for and was successful in receiving a grant in the amount of $9 million. This historic grant will help the town of Amherstburg prevent flooding and build waterlines and sewer lines that are the basis for building homes like single-family homes, like semi-detached homes, like multi-residential homes—a home for every budget and a home for every taste. If you want to live in the town of Amherstburg, you will find a home that’s right for you.

I want to congratulate the town of Amherstburg and Mayor Michael Prue for working with us to get this historic grant for Amherstburg.

I want to thank the Minister of Infrastructure—and the leadership of Premier Doug Ford—for this fantastic program. We are building homes in Amherstburg, in Ontario.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): How is it possible that we’re heckling in members’ statements? How does that even happen?

They asked me who the worst heckler was, and I kept my mouth shut too.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Joining us today in the Speaker’s gallery, we have His Excellency John Concannon, ambassador of Ireland to Canada; Claire Fitzgibbon, consul general of Ireland in Toronto; and Cahal Sweeney, vice consul. Please join me in warmly welcoming our visitors to the Ontario Legislature.

Hon. Graydon Smith: It’s always a pleasure to have my lovely wife, Melissa, here—who is also of Irish descent, so she’s in good company today, in the Speaker’s box.

Welcome to Queen’s Park, my love.

Hon. Stan Cho: I’m so honoured to have some amazing Korean Canadian police leaders from the Toronto Police Service with us: Inspector Rob Choe; Detective Sergeant Sin Kim; Staff Sergeant Danny Lee; and Sergeants Tim Lee, Dave Oh, and Michael Choe.

As well, from York Regional Police, Constable Eric Lee, my good buddy—and we’re honoured to have his inspector, Chad Lee-Wing.

You make us proud.

Thank you so much for being at the Legislature this morning.

Ms. Lee Fairclough: I’m happy to welcome a wonderful community volunteer from my riding today: Shannon McKarney.

Enjoy Queen’s Park.

MPP Mohamed Firin: I would like welcome Ahmad Attia and Nour Mikkawi to Queen’s Park today.

Mr. Aris Babikian: I would like to welcome a good friend of mine and an outstanding member of the Armenian community and church: Mr. Ohan Ohanessian, who received his Queen Elizabeth II volunteer medal last Friday from the Lieutenant Governor. Welcome to your House.

Mr. Deepak Anand: I’d like to welcome Giovanna Ippolito from Pacer Air Freight. Your dedication to supporting complex, high-value logistics is inspiring. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: I would like to welcome, from Mississauga–Erin Mills, my riding, my dear friend Ahmad Attia, the son of Dr. Tantawy Attia.

Hon. George Pirie: Here’s a shout-out to Tania and Connor, my staff here in Toronto. It’s their last day; they’re leaving.

Thank you for your service.

Ms. Jess Dixon: Not present in the House today, but I did want to welcome to the world—I became an auntie last night to Ziyad Marzouk Church, who arrived at 3:30 in the morning, two and a half weeks early, which was very concerning, as a Dixon, because we have a tradition of never, ever being on time or early for anything. He did greatly inconvenience his mother by arriving two and a half weeks early, right after she’d had a Chinese take-away.

Ziyad, welcome to the world. I’m so excited for Alex and Aysha. And I can’t wait to meet you.

Ms. Chandra Pasma: My husband, Matt Helleman, is a very faithful watcher of question period, and I never get to say hi to him.

So hi, Matt, and merry Christmas.

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: I’d also like to extend a very warm welcome to the Irish ambassador, as well as the consul general of Ireland, Claire Fitzgibbon, and the deputy consul.

Welcome to Queen’s Park. I hope you enjoy your visit.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): We’ll be bringing them back; believe me.

House sittings

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the government House leader on a point of order.

Hon. Steve Clark: Point of order: I’d just like to announce to members of the House that this evening’s night sitting has been cancelled.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Always full of bad news—always.

Question Period

Government accountability

Ms. Marit Stiles: Every day, for seven weeks, I’ve asked the Premier to answer questions about yet another scandal, yet another police investigation involving his government.

All year, we watched the Premier go from scandal to scandal, defending ministers’ use of taxpayer funds for their personal piggy bank.

Folks are making New Year’s resolutions at this time of year. So I’m wondering if the Premier will make a New Year’s resolution to finally hold his ministers accountable for decisions that lead to police investigations.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Education.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Madam Speaker, as you know, the government is always working with our officials to ensure that we get to the bottom of any challenge that we face.

At the same time, as we draw to a close this current session of Parliament, it’s also a good time to reflect on all of the amazing things that have happened across the province of Ontario. A lot of the ministers, the members opposite—I will include them—there have been new long-term-care homes opened; amazing investments in hospitals across the province of Ontario; of course, new transit and transportation that is being built all across the province of Ontario. We’ve seen some promising, encouraging numbers in jobs.

So while we face a lot of challenges in the province of Ontario, given the fact that there is a very damaging trade war being waged against us south of the border, there is a lot to be thankful for in the province of Ontario. And by working together, we’ll build an even bigger, better, stronger province.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Marit Stiles: I don’t think that was really an answer to the question.

We’ve seen the greenbelt grab, the science centre mess, the secretive and costly Ontario Place deal, the infamous Skills Development Fund scandal. For Conservative insiders, this is just the grift that keeps on giving.

So how many more scandals and backroom deals are we going to see next year?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Minister of Labour.

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, we look forward to the year ahead.

I want to wish everybody in this place a very merry Christmas and a happy new year. I hope they get to spend time with their family and friends.

We look forward to a strong 2026, a 2026 where we unlock the potential of the Ring of Fire and continue to make progress, where we make progress on new energy infrastructure that will power an Ontario that’s able to continue to attract foreign direct investment—of course, that has grown, under the leadership of this Premier. That’s helping to create good-paying jobs for Ontarians in every corner of this province.

We’ll continue to take measures to put more money back in Ontarians’ pockets. We’ll continue to take measures to reduce red tape and provide meaningful opportunities for a next generation to find meaningful employment in an Ontario that stands strong on the national stage; an Ontario that is self-reliant and self-sufficient—and a Canadian workforce that nation-builds to ensure Canada is the best place to live, work and raise a family.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Final supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: I think the minister should, over the holidays, go visit a soup kitchen or a food bank and see all of the people who are actually juggling multiple jobs and still end up there, or the 700,000-plus people in Ontario who cannot find a job.

Families are the ones who are paying the price for this government’s failures over and over again. That’s what this is about.

Every dollar that’s going to Conservative insiders is taken away from workers, from public services.

The Premier may not be familiar with the stress and the anxiety that people out there are feeling right now, especially around the holidays. I know that he had a different experience: Everything was handed to him; he grew up with a silver spoon. But things are really, really tough out there.

When is the Premier going to stop putting his friends and insiders ahead of hard-working Ontarians?

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, I think it would be a good New Year’s resolution for the Leader of the Opposition to get out and see some of the incredible training taking place at some of the training centres around Ontario—not just show up at their Christmas party, but actually go and visit the training that’s empowering a next generation to get the skill sets to land jobs in an Ontario that is actually building public transit; an Ontario that’s building a new Ontario Science Centre; an Ontario that’s building highways, hospitals, roads and bridges. That’s what we’re doing—empowering a next generation with the skills that they need.

We’ve heard stories in this place—but I met the folks at Oaks last night, and I reflect on Lewis’s story and so many who have been given a second chance, who have turned obstacles into opportunity. That’s what we’re doing by supporting training in this province. We’re very proud of it. And we look forward to 2026.

Government accountability

Ms. Marit Stiles: I’ve also been meeting with skilled trade workers and PSWs and lots of workers across the province—even just last night. Let me tell you what they told me. They said, “Don’t let them get away with it.”

This is the last day for the Premier to come clean with Ontarians before he jets off on some holiday break.

More than half of the recipients of Skills Development Fund money scored poorly, and the lowest-scoring applicants raked in more funding than the highest-scoring ones. Ministry staff raised really serious flags about some of those folks, but the minister ignored their advice. He seemed absolutely dead set on giving funds to companies like Keel Digital Solutions, a company where he has close personal ties.

Will the Premier admit that his minister interfered in the Skills Development Fund to make sure that his friends and his donors got a piece of the pie?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Minister of Labour.

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, I’ll tell you some of the stories I’ve heard—and I actually reference the real people; I don’t just nebulously say I’ve heard stories. I reference the real people whose stories we’ve heard.

I think to Ty Downey and SEIU and the important Skills Development Fund investments that have helped reduce dependency on agency staff in our long-term-care homes. I’ve visited those long-term-care homes. And it’s not without challenges—they point to public policy things; they point to things they want our government to do. But they know they’ve got a government who will show up, who will listen, and who will take strides each and every day to make life better for the people of Ontario. That’s what we’re doing.

Or the training halls: I mentioned Oaks—again, Mark Tenaglia and Joe Williams do an incredible job. Lewis, who I met on a Bridgecon site, has turned obstacles into opportunity.

These are the real people we’re meeting, the real lives we’re changing, and we’re proud of it.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Families out there are struggling to afford rent, to afford groceries just on any day, let alone on the holidays—the very basics. I listen every day to families who are looking for child care for their kids so they can go back to work, or affordable homes—anywhere affordable to live.

But with this government, there are always tens of millions of dollars to spare for the Premier’s dentist or his campaign manager or his favourite nightclub owner or his donors or for insiders in the Conservative Party. Every day, with this government, feels like Christmas morning.

Does the Premier expect us to ignore that the minister hand-picked Conservative insiders to receive government funds?

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, that’s simply incorrect. Every dollar goes to training. It’s in the guidelines of the publicly accessible fund. And it’s changing lives. It’s helping people train.

We’ve made steps over each round, as I’ve said, to improve the program.

It’s supporting people in training in the hospitality sector, which was ravaged during the pandemic, or supporting in the skilled trades.

We’ve seen an increase in youth registering in apprenticeships—factually, an increase. We’ve seen an increase in the number of women registering in apprenticeships—because you can’t build a stronger Ontario by leaving 50% of the workforce behind.

But you actually have to have a plan to build. The Leader of the Opposition doesn’t have that plan. She opposes each and every measure to build a stronger Ontario. That’s why unions and that’s why working-class people of Ontario have abandoned her and abandoned her party.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Marit Stiles: A plan? A jobs plan? All across this province, workers are being laid off, struggling to find opportunities, and this government hasn’t offered up anything. We have been waiting for seven weeks, asking for a jobs plan.

Thousands of workers have been laid off in Brampton, in Ear Falls, in Ingersoll, in Sault Ste. Marie, in Oshawa, and in Terrace Bay. The Premier has created a jobs disaster in this province.

Instead of connecting people to a good job with a decent salary, the Minister of Labour is too busy handing out training funds to his friends and his donors. That’s a fact.

Speaker, the people of Ontario could really use a Christmas miracle. So will this Premier put an end to the grift and fire that minister?

Hon. David Piccini: Let’s talk about a plan—a plan to unlock the critical minerals in the Ring of Fire; a plan to mine, mining they oppose; a plan to build new energy infrastructure in every corner of this province, that’s refurbishing nuclear plants, that’s building small modular reactors, building new nuclear; and a plan to build public transit in this province. We’ve seen record investments in every corner of Ontario—a plan to build new hospitals.

They couldn’t get the job done in communities like mine when they had the balance of power for years—or how about the 600 schools closed by members opposite, that we’re now building? That’s a plan. That’s a plan that’s empowering a record number of youth in the skilled trades. It’s a plan that’s bringing more teachers into the sector. It’s a plan that’s bringing more health care professionals into Ontario’s health care sector. That’s a plan for a stronger Ontario that we fight for each and every day.

Food banks / Banques alimentaires

Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Premier.

Yesterday, I asked the Premier if we could take all that surplus American booze and sell it off and give it to our food banks—all that booze that’s bought and paid for that’s collecting dust? We ain’t getting a refund for it; it’s not happening. So we can sell it off and do good, like Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and PEI.

It’s Christmas, folks, and we don’t always agree, as we can see in here. But there’s a chance for us to do something good right now, for all of us to agree—all of us. But the irony of it is, it’s not all of us who can make it happen. It’s one of us—and that one of us is the Premier. He can make it happen.

So I’m going to ask the Premier again this morning: Will you sell off that surplus American alcohol that’s collecting dust and use it to make sure that children and their families won’t go hungry this Christmas?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Peterborough–Kawartha.

Mr. Dave Smith: Donald Trump took aim at Ontario’s economy with those unjustified tariffs, and our government has removed US-made alcohol as a response to that. It’s because we stand with the workers in Colborne, in Carlisle, and in Carrying Place who make Ontario cider. We don’t stand with those workers in Catskill, New York. We stand with the people who work in craft breweries in Bowmanville and Brockville. But we do not stand with the craft brewers in Boston, Massachusetts. We stand with the workers, the grape growers and the wine producers in Niagara. We do not stand for the people in Napa Valley, California.

This government will stand and protect the workers of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Ottawa–Vanier.

M me Lucille Collard: À Ottawa, les banques alimentaires font face à une hausse de 101 % des visites depuis 2019, dont 37 % sont des enfants. Les banques alimentaires sont essentielles, mais elles manquent cruellement d’un soutien et depuis trop longtemps.

Pendant ce temps, le gouvernement laisse 80 millions de dollars d’alcool américain dormir dans des entrepôts, dont 2 millions de dollars seront périmés d’ici la fin du mois—une totale perte.

Nos banques alimentaires jouent un rôle vital dans nos communautés. Elles constituent un véritable filet de sûreté pour les milliers de familles et elles ont aujourd’hui, plus que jamais, besoin d’un financement adéquat de la part de ce gouvernement.

Les Ontariens ont besoin d’aide maintenant. Est-ce que le gouvernement va vendre ce stock excédentaire et utiliser les produits pour soutenir nos banques alimentaires?

Mr. Dave Smith: I understand that sometimes the opposition comes up with ideas that they think are going to help people in Ontario, when actually, what they’re talking about is something that’s going to cause more problems for the people of Ontario.

We know that the Trump tariffs have taken direct aim at the economy in Ontario.

This government, this Premier, will stand with the workers of Ontario—we’re not going to abandon those, because we know that we’ve seen an increase of VQA sales of 79%. That is workers in Niagara Falls, in Prince Edward county, who have jobs today, who have the ability to buy the things they need to buy for their families, because we are standing behind and supporting the workers of Ontario.

We’ll continue to stand behind all of those people in Ontario who deserve that support from us.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Final supplementary?

Mrs. Karen McCrimmon: I have two food banks in my riding: the Kanata Food Cupboard and the West Carleton Food Access Centre—amazing people doing amazing things for their neighbours. They’re supported by volunteers in the broader community. This year, food bank usage is up 25% in my riding.

My question to the Premier: If Manitoba, Nova Scotia, PEI, Newfoundland and Labrador can do it, why can we not sell our surplus American liquor that we’ve already paid for and put that money to good use to help people this holiday season?

Mr. Dave Smith: The reality is, there are more wineries in Niagara Falls than Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and PEI combined—and those are Ontario workers.

What the Liberals are suggesting is that our government turn its back on the hard-working people in this province and say to them, “I’m sorry, at the time of year when there is more alcohol—more of your product—being sold, we think it should be taken off the shelf. We think that the American products should be put instead.”

What they don’t understand, is that every bottle of Julio Gallo sold at Christmas means a bottle of VQA Ontario is not; every bottle of Samuel Adams sold means a bottle of Canadian Ontario craft beer remains on the shelf—and every single one of those workers in that industry in Ontario would be harmed because of it.

We will stand with the workers of Ontario.

Food banks

Mr. Adil Shamji: In and around Don Valley East, there are 25 food banks—25. Each week, the lines at these food banks grow longer, breaking records that were really only set the week before. That’s 25 food banks, amongst hundreds across our province, where one in three visitors are going for the first time, one in three are children, and one in four could not earn enough to make ends meet, even if they already had a job. There were 8.7 million food bank visits last year, of which 30% were from children.

The Premier says he wants to stand up for workers. Stand up for these people. Our province sits on $80 million of liquor, some of which is set to expire. It’s already bought and paid for.

Will the Premier sell this unused inventory so that we can take all of that revenue and use it to support food banks, so families in my riding don’t go hungry this Christmas?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Member for Peterborough–Kawartha.

Mr. Dave Smith: What we’re doing is we’re supporting the people of Ontario—those hard-working individuals who are trying to make sure that they can make ends meet. What the Liberals are suggesting is that we tell them that we’re going to turn our backs on all of those individuals who work in that industry. We’re going to tell them that we don’t want to sell their product—because we know that for every bottle of California wine sold, a bottle of Ontario wine is not; we know that for every New York state cider sold, an Ontario cider is not, and it remains on the shelf.

We want to make sure that the people who are working in Ontario continue to work in Ontario.

We will continue to support all of those jobs because it’s the right thing to do.

We will stand with the workers in Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Orléans.

Mr. Stephen Blais: As we approach Christmas, food insecurity in Ottawa is reaching levels we’ve never seen. The Ottawa Hunger Report shows nearly 600,000 food bank visits last year, an all-time high.

In Orléans, one of the most affluent parts of the province, the situation is just as alarming. The Orléans-Cumberland Community Resource Centre’s food bank now serves more than 1,200 people every month, half of which are children. That is a 34% increase in the last two years.

While families and children are relying on food banks at record levels, this government is sitting on tens of millions of dollars in US liquor, $2 million of which is about to be poured down the drain.

Madam Speaker, families are going hungry. This government is letting liquor go bad. So will the government sell that US alcohol that is surplus, that has already been paid for, and use the proceeds to help food banks and help families this Christmas?

Mr. Dave Smith: I appreciate the question.

I’ll keep coming back to this: Our government is exploring every opportunity that we have to support the workers of Ontario. We want to make sure that what we do lifts those people up.

We know that if you take an American product and support American industry—even if it is good-hearted on their part—what you’re doing is, you’re harming Ontario workers.

We’re not going to turn our back on the people of this province who are working hard to pay their bills. We’re not going to turn our back and take away their opportunities. We’re not going to say that Americans deserve more than Ontarians do. That is not the approach that we’re going to take.

We will explore whatever opportunity we have to make sure that the people of this province get what they need and our workers are supported.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Toronto–St. Paul’s.

MPP Stephanie Smyth: Madam Speaker, I’m overwhelmed by the poppycock I’m hearing over there. We are trying to help families going hungry in this province.

Do you know what? Three food banks in Toronto–St. Paul’s: Churches on-the-Hill, Hillcrest Community Food Bank, Avenue Road Food Bank—a 20% increase in demand. These are people who are bringing their families, people who are working. These are people who are lining up every day for help.

This is to the Premier: Am I hearing properly that this government would rather pour $80 million down the drain than give that to food banks and people going hungry in this province?

Mr. Dave Smith: Let’s talk about reality here. Spirits do not go bad. So if the member opposite wants to talk poppycock—she should stop talking about the numbers that she’s giving.

What we are doing as a government is we’re standing behind the hard-working people in Niagara Falls, the hard-working people in Prince Edward county, the hard-working people in Bruce county and in every district across this province, to make sure that those individuals who are seeing a benefit because we’ve taken US alcohol off the shelves continue to have that benefit—because there is nothing better for them than knowing that they have the security of their job.

Madam Speaker, we will continue to support the workers in Ontario. We’ll continue to make sure that we’re doing things to lift people up in this province. And we will make no apologies for saying that American-produced product is not something that we’re going to put on the shelf.

Domestic violence

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: My question is to the Premier.

After months of waiting, the government’s controversial intimate partner violence report was released this week.

I didn’t want to say what I’m now forced to say. If committee members and staff were allowed to speak, they would confirm that I did everything in my power to prevent this outcome, because survivors deserve better.

The government’s IPV report is riddled with citations that do not exist. If this was a university assignment, the government would face academic discipline based on how high their report scores with AI detection models—this government can bully and say otherwise, but survivors know what it feels like to be gaslit.

Will the Premier come clean and admit to AI’s role in writing this report or will he continue to gaslight survivors?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Associate Minister of Women’s Social and Economic Opportunity.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: Madam Speaker, it is completely disgraceful that the members opposite would resort to such ridiculous and factless, baseless accusations during the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence. It is a time that demands seriousness, integrity, and a renewed commitment by all of us to end violence against women. We take violence against women very seriously, and the incredible work done by the member from Kitchener South–Hespeler is a testament to that.

The NDP put out a press release claiming that our report was written by AI. Well, guess what, Speaker? The same tool that they use says that their press releases were written by AI.

This entire charade by the NDP is a disgrace and it shows everyone in the province their true colours. While every other party in the House has been working together to publish this report, the NDP chose to walk away.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order. Order. The member for King–Vaughan will come to order.

I recognize the member for Windsor West.

MPP Lisa Gretzky: This Conservative government has something in common with AI large language models: It can’t tell fact from fiction. Their own IPV report proves it. It claims that the coroner’s inquest into the death of Windsor nurse Lori Dupont was completed in 2002, yet Lori was tragically murdered in 2005, and the inquest finished in 2007. It says a Globe and Mail editorial on the cellphone ban was published six months before the ban even existed. And it even cites the Child Development Institute but links to the website example.org.

These aren’t simple human errors. They are AI hallucinations, signed off by a government selling off the stories of victims without their consent. And the report’s next step is to figure out what the next step is.

Why does this government keep disrespecting women and girls by failing to take IPV and GBV seriously and refusing to implement any of the years-long recommendations right now to save lives?

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: The member from Windsor West did not show up to committee once, did not participate once; walked out of the committee when they had the opportunity to review the report. They walked out. Women and people who are victims put their stories out for everybody in this House to hear, and those stories are reflected in the report. While everyone in this House had the opportunity to vet it and participate, they walked out on those women of Ontario. Our government would never do that.

We will work to make sure that we have the resources in place and the supports in place to help women—and you can see that through Ontario-STANDS, in the $1.4-billion investment we’ve made. You can see that in the organizations that we are investing in to help women rebuild their lives.

These are real people, and they are reflected in the real—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Question?

Greenbelt

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: This government is infamous for delays—the Eglinton LRT; the extended producer responsibility requirements; this House’s excessive summer break; currently, their proposed endless winter break; and now, the overdue greenbelt review.

My question to the Premier: Can he please provide Ontarians with a timeline as to when he will start and when he will complete the mandatory 10-year greenbelt review, which is due in 2025?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Rob Flack: First of all, I think everyone knows we had a winter election—as of that, we are taking time to get the framework put in place so we can do a proper review.

Again, that being said, the greenbelt is enshrined in legislation for generations to come. I repeat: The greenbelt is enshrined in legislation for generations to come. The decision was made. The decision is final.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Beaches–East York.

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: None of us wanted that ridiculous snap winter election, but here we are.

Speaker, my question to the Premier: Can he tell the good people of Ontario when he will reinstate the Greenbelt Council, how the appointment process will evolve, and what their mandate will be?

Hon. Rob Flack: Madam Speaker, I would say that the February election worked out pretty well for this side of the House, don’t you think?

I will say the framework is in place. We’re putting it in place again. The greenbelt is enshrined in legislation for generations to come. The decision was made. The decision is final.

Energy policies

Mrs. Daisy Wai: My question is for the Minister of Energy and Mines.

Ontario is experiencing historic growth. More businesses are choosing our province, and we continue to lead North America in attracting major job-creating investments in advanced manufacturing. But with the new opportunities come increased demands for energy. Families and workers want to know that Ontario will have the power needed to support this prosperity. They want confidence that small businesses and growing industries can rely on clean, affordable and dependable electricity every single day.

Speaker, can the minister please explain how our government is ensuring that Ontario’s energy system continues to meet the needs of a growing province for decades to come?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Mississauga–Lakeshore.

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I want to thank the member from Richmond Hill for that question.

Earlier this week, we passed Bill 40, an important piece of legislation to ensure reliable energy growth in this province.

Ontario is growing at a pace that we have not seen in generations. More families are calling this province home, and more businesses are picking Ontario over any other jurisdiction in North America.

Speaker, this kind of growth requires power—not just any power, but clean, reliable and affordable power.

This is exactly what Bill 40 delivers. This legislation provides a clear mandate to our independent energy planners: keeping our system reliable as demand surges; protecting affordability for households and small businesses; maintaining our position as a clean energy leader; and, for the first time, ensuring the system actively supports economic growth when planning for energy.

Speaker, while the opposition talks down Ontario’s economy, we are building it, and we won’t stop doing that.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Richmond Hill.

Mrs. Daisy Wai: I want to thank the parliamentary assistant for that answer.

Ontario is leading the continent in clean energy expansion, from new nuclear generation and refurbished facilities to groundbreaking investments in energy storage and grid modernization. These initiatives not only secure the reliable power that families depend on, but they also help ensure that major employers continue choosing Ontario as the best place to grow and innovate.

Speaker, I’ve heard that my constituents in Richmond Hill are proud to see the work our government is doing, but they also want confidence that our government is keeping affordability front and centre.

Can the parliamentary assistant elaborate on how Bill 40 will protect affordability for families and small businesses?

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: For years, Ontario paid the price for Liberal decisions that plunged our energy system into chaos—contracts that were too expensive, generation that we did not need, and soaring hydro bills that hurt families and drove jobs out of this province. We will never go back to that.

Bill 40 ensures that every major planning decision is grounded in what matters most for the people of this province. Ontario already benefits from one of the cleanest and most affordable electricity systems in Canada, and Bill 40 protects this advantage.

When we attract new businesses, invest in job creation projects and open new mines, we are reducing pressure on household bills by bringing more investment into the system—more jobs, more customers, and lower costs per family.

Speaker, our government is delivering on a system that is clean, reliable and affordable, not just for today, but for the future of this province.

Public transit

Ms. Jennifer K. French: My question is to the Premier.

The Ontario NDP has been calling for a public inquiry into Metrolinx and the Eglinton Crosstown LRT since 2022. After years of Metrolinx delays, blown budgets and secrecy, this government still refuses to call a public inquiry so that we can learn what went wrong before we repeat it on the Lakeshore East line or anywhere else. People in Oshawa and Durham deserve better GO service and not their own Eglinton Crosstown disaster.

Right now, the only people getting a smooth ride are the lawyers, with multi-million dollar lawsuits piling up while riders are stuck in traffic and communities are left in limbo.

Public money should be going towards building transit and running trains—not paying for Metrolinx’s legal defence.

My question is this: Will the Premier finally stand with riders instead of Metrolinx insiders and commit to a full public inquiry into Metrolinx’s mismanagement?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: We’ve had a record year at Metrolinx. Just in October of this year, over 75 million users were on the GO network, between UP Express and our GO Transit services. We’ve increased services across all of our lines, including the member’s, at Lakeshore East—over 638 trips a week. Just last year, we increased—by over 300 trips on a weekly basis, across our network. And we marked a historic achievement by ensuring that we have weekend service to the Kitchener GO line, all the way to Kitchener. We have been making record progress on GO Transit.

Since 2022—let’s review the NDP record. They voted against every one of our expansions of GO Transit into areas like Bowmanville and others. They voted against programs like One Fare that would save the same members that that member is talking about $1,600 a year as they transfer onto the TTC or other participating transit networks.

We’re going to continue to invest in public transit, despite the opposition of the NDP and Liberals.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Scarborough Southwest.

Ms. Doly Begum: The minister knows very well that Metrolinx is not accountable—and it isn’t just about one project; it’s about the overall secrecy and their sheer arrogance across Metrolinx. They ignore and disrespect the public and, frankly, this government. They waste billions of tax dollars on every single project that either collapses or drags on for way too long. They hide major issues, triple the cost, all under this government’s watch—a government that not only stays silent, but goes on to shamelessly defend Metrolinx’s executives who are making fortunes on the backs of hard-working Ontarians.

In fact, this morning, when we asked the government agencies committee to call Metrolinx for a hearing, their government members voted our motion down.

So I ask again to the minister and to this government: Why won’t they call a public hearing or call Metrolinx for a public inquiry so people can get the answers they deserve?

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: Riders are seeing historic expansions in service levels across our entire GO network. If you look at our lines, we have increased service every single month, and we’ve set a record, as I said, in the month of October, with the highest usage of GO Transit and UP Express in history.

That’s because we’ve been investing in our transit system—$70 billion over the next 10 years. That’s the largest expansion anywhere in North America—the Ontario Line; the Scarborough subway extension, which happens to be in that member’s riding, which she has not supported in the House when she has had the chance.

Whether it’s the inauguration of the Finch West LRT that happened this past week, that is going to bring over 220,000 people within a transit line in northwest Toronto, or whether it’s our projects that we are launching across the province—whether it be the Hamilton LRT, the Mississauga-Brampton LRT, the Ontario LRT, or projects that are happening in every corner of this province—we’re investing in public transit, but we’re also making it more accessible. That’s why last week, we announced the two-year extension of the One Fare—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Question?

Public transit

MPP Andrea Hazell: Madam Speaker, my question is to the Premier.

After years of delays and billions of taxpayer dollars spent on the Finch West LRT, we are facing a project that has totally failed to deliver on its promise of rapid transit. Let me say it again: rapid transit. This service is now slower than the buses it was meant to replace—shame.

Rapid transit is supposed to be fast, safe and reliable, to encourage ridership. The Finch West LRT is neither fast nor reliable, and we’re still waiting to make sure it meets all safety standards. This is equally true for the Eglinton Crosstown LRT, which has become a symbol of inefficiency, incompetence, and a complete failure to taxpayers in Ontario.

My question to the Premier: How much longer will Ontarians have to suffer the consequences of your continued failed leadership? Will you take accountability and fix the mess?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

Interjections.

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: I don’t know if I can be as exciting as that, but I’ll try.

Madam Speaker, since 2002, we inaugurated the first rapid transit line in the history of—in Toronto for the first time.

Let’s look at the record of the previous Liberal government: From 2003 to 2018, not a single transit line was inaugurated in the city of Toronto.

But guess what? When we got elected, we made a commitment. We made a promise to get shovels in the ground, to get LRTs built and subways built across the city. And that’s exactly what we’re doing.

We’re bringing 230,000 people within walking distance of that transit line, and that’s what we were so proud to—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Scarborough–Guildwood.

MPP Andrea Hazell: Madam Speaker, hot off the press are ongoing articles with concerning headlines. “Line 6 is so slow”—it’s just only faster than people walking. “Treat it like the rapid transit it is and not a sightseeing legacy of a trolley train.”

Another quote: “Riders are right to expect better.... If our LRTs move too slowly, riders will stay in their cars,” worsening congestion. “This is unacceptable.” Do you know who said that? The chairman of the TTC.

Madam Speaker, the dysfunctional relationship between Metrolinx, TTC, Toronto, and the Minister of Transportation is evident in their recent meeting. They cannot even decide on an agreement—shame, shame, shame.

So I ask the Premier, can you explain why you continue to fail the people of Ontario? When will you do the right thing and deliver on your promises—not just to your donors, your friends, and your insiders?

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: I urge that member to reach out to the chair of the TTC, who she referenced, and ask them to implement the signal priority on the Finch West LRT line, which we are more than happy to work with them to do.

It should also be noted that it was the TTC that asked for the speed reductions through the 18 intersections—to a 25-kilometre limit.

We’ll work with the TTC and do whatever is needed, but that member should also speak to them and encourage them to implement the signal priority, encourage them to modernize and make more efficient the LRVs that are working through that line.

Madam Speaker, building transit is something we take very seriously and we’re going to continue to improve upon every single day.

The people of northwest Toronto are happy that they have a transit line that is now operational.

After years and years—decades—of being ignored by the previous Liberal government, who built absolutely nothing for those residents and for the city of Toronto, we’re getting shovels in the ground and we’re getting transit built.

Public transit

MPP Mohamed Firin: Speaker, my question is for the honourable and wonderful Minister of Transportation.

Families in my community of York South–Weston are feeling the pinch of rising costs. They want to see more common-sense solutions that will keep costs down and make their lives easier.

With many residents in my riding and across the GTHA relying on public transit to get to work, school and appointments, it’s important that we find ways to make transit more affordable.

Thanks to our government’s One Fare program, riders have been saving hundreds of dollars every year. By eliminating double fares, our government is ensuring that people are keeping more money in their pockets.

Speaker, can the minister explain how our government will continue to make transit more affordable and convenient for communities?

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: Thank you to that member for raising this very important point.

Under the Premier’s leadership, our government is delivering on our promise to protect Ontario and the people of this province.

By expanding the One Fare program for an additional two years, we’re continuing to save transit riders across the province over $1,600 a year and making travel across the GTHA more affordable and more accessible. One Fare allows riders to pay only once when transferring between regional transit organizations, whether it be the TTC, GO Transit, Brampton Transit, Durham transit, MiWay, Peel TransHelp, York Region Transit, and other participating transit agencies. Since its launch, we have executed over 62 million transfers, which has saved over $200 million to transit users across the province.

Madam Speaker, this is about putting more money back into the pockets of hard-working Ontarians and ensuring that we have fair, accessible transit services across the province.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Supplementary?

MPP Mohamed Firin: Thank you to the minister for that response.

Residents in my community of York South–Weston are excited about the savings that One Fare offers. They tell me how this program has reduced their monthly expenses and made travel more convenient.

The extension of One Fare is a key component of our government’s plan to strengthen our regional transit system. It complements the historic investments our government is making in new transit lines and GO expansion.

Speaker, can the minister share more details on how One Fare and other major transit projects will transform travel across the region and support Ontario’s economy?

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: Thank you very much to the member again.

Our government’s vision is clear: We are building a world-class transit system that will transform, integrate transit networks across communities, help reduce congestion, and drive economic growth across our province. Expanding One Fare is a key part of that for the next two years. It will ensure that riders can travel seamlessly through the GTHA and save $1,600 a year—back into their pocket, to spend on things that matter.

But affordability is just one piece of the plan.

We are embarking upon the largest transit expansion in North American history—the Ontario Line; the Scarborough subway extension; the Yonge North subway extension; the Finch West LRT, which we just inaugurated this weekend; the Eglinton Crosstown West extension; the Hazel McCallion Line; and the Hamilton LRT. These are transformational projects that will transform the way we move around this province, around our cities, and how we integrate and connect everyone across this province into one system.

Health care

Ms. Peggy Sattler: My question is to the Premier.

Last week, the Auditor General confirmed that two million Ontarians do not have access to primary care. This is not only bad for those people, but it’s also a problem for municipalities, because access to primary care is critical to attract new business, create jobs, and grow the economy.

And what we are seeing is that more and more municipalities are feeling pressured into using property tax revenues to recruit physicians. They’re offering $100,000 signing bonuses and other cash incentives, at a cost of $6.3 million per year.

My question: Why is this Premier downloading health care costs, which is a provincial responsibility, onto municipal taxpayers?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Minister of Health.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: The member opposite raises a very important point, and that is, why are we investing in primary care $2.1 billion? We have seen, in 2024, 78 new or expanded primary care teams all across Ontario and in 2025, 80 new primary care expansion teams across Ontario.

As we expand access for our primary care—and I have to say, Ontario actually leads Canada in attachments; we are at 90%, but we intend to make sure that every Ontarian who wants to have access to a primary care practitioner has that opportunity. How do we do that? I’ll share more in the supplementary, but it obviously includes ensuring expanded medical practices across Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for London West.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: Speaker, forcing municipalities to enter into bidding wars to recruit new physicians is not strategic and it’s not equitable. It creates a Hunger Games, a race to the bottom. It means that access to primary care is determined by how much a municipality is able and willing to pay, not by which municipalities have the greatest need.

Speaker, will this government immediately adopt the recommendations of the Auditor General and take responsibility for implementing a coordinated provincial approach to the recruitment and retention of primary care providers?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: In fact, Speaker, we already do that, of course, with our primary care expansion teams.

Practice Ready Ontario is a program that didn’t exist two years ago. We now have physicians from other parts of the world who want to come to Canada and have the opportunity, through Practice Ready Ontario, to practise in smaller, often more northern and rural communities.

In our first tranche we have actually seen almost a hundred new physicians in Ontario practising and getting to their full licences sooner. We have seen, through expansion in every single medical school, more seats available, more residency positions available.

Of course, I can’t not talk about the new medical school in Brampton that has already started and has learners and post-secondary students in those classrooms getting ready to be part of our Ontario workforce.

Special-needs students

Mr. Stephen Blais: Madam Speaker, last year a beautiful young girl in Ottawa named Juliet, who has Down syndrome, thrived in French immersion. With proper EA support, she succeeded academically. She earned awards. She showed exactly what true inclusion looks like when children are given the chance to achieve their best.

This year, it’s completely different. Because of funding shortfalls, her school can only provide 30 minutes of support a day. And without that support, her teacher now gives her colouring pages, not math, so that she has something to do while the other children learn.

Her father said it in a way that none of us should forget: “She went from thriving to being just a bum in a seat.” That’s not inclusion. That’s not dignity. That’s not the education Ontario promises every child.

Madam Speaker, when will the Premier provide the funding needed to ensure students like Juliet receive real, meaningful support to flourish, not colouring sheets just to keep them busy?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Minister of Education.

Hon. Paul Calandra: I appreciate the question because it’s exactly what we’ve been talking about now for weeks. We want an education system that focuses on students, parents and teachers and provides the necessary resources. That is, in part, why in his area we fired the school trustees: because they were spending too much time fighting each other and not enough time focusing on what’s important, student achievement.

As I’ve said on numerous occasions, it doesn’t matter that we’re funding education to the highest level. It doesn’t matter that we’ve hired thousands of teachers and EAs and support. What matters is the results that we’re getting out of our education system.

And it is exactly why we brought in Bill 33. Unfortunately, an arrogant and out-of-touch Liberal party voted against that bill. It allows me to step in on behalf of parents, students and teachers to ensure that all kids have access to the highest level of education. It shouldn’t matter who you are or what your level is, everybody deserves the right to have an education system that is focused on them. For far too long, that was not the case in the province of Ontario, and that’s where we’re going to double down to make sure we maximize resources for students, parents and teachers.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Orléans.

Mr. Stephen Blais: We need to be honest about the situation in Ottawa because Juliet’s parents don’t need spin, and Juliet won’t benefit from a blame game.

Two of this government’s most senior political operatives—the deputy chief of staff to the Premier, and the chief of staff to the Minister of Public and Business Service Delivery—are both trustees on the Ottawa Catholic School Board, the school board Juliet attends. If the Premier insists on blaming the board, or the minister does, they are in fact blaming their own senior political operatives. Even with that level of political influence on the Ottawa board, they cannot provide the funding for special education that children like Juliet need and deserve.

Madam Speaker, how can the Premier, or his minister, look parents in the eye and pretend that this is acceptable? Will he finally admit that the system is chronically underfunded, and is leaving children with disabilities to effectively be bums in seats instead of students in a classroom?

Hon. Paul Calandra: The member should know—when I was in his community just last Friday, when we announced significant resources for all of the boards there to build on to additional schools and to expand others—that what we are focused on is ensuring that there are maximized resources for classroom education. I actually have said on a number of occasions that what I want is for parents to hold me accountable: hold the Minister of Education accountable for showing leadership back in the Ministry of Education.

Interjection.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Now, if an arrogant, out-of-touch Liberal from Ottawa would stop yacking, as he is right now—he should be embarrassed, right? He should be embarrassed because the leader of the Liberal Party failed students. He made schools unsafe. It was him who took police out of our schools to make them unsafe. It was he who closed down 600 schools across the province of Ontario.

When health care was suffering in Ottawa, what did he do? He closed hospitals, fired nurses and couldn’t get the job done. Arrogant, out of touch, ineffective is the history of the Liberal Party of Ontario. We’ll bring it all back—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Question?

Bail reform

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: Speaker, my question is for the Associate Solicitor General for Auto Theft and Bail Reform.

Speaker, people are tired of seeing the same pattern repeat itself: a violent offender commits a crime, is released on bail and then reoffends within hours and within days. This broken bail system is leaving families anxious, communities on edge and police officers increasingly frustrated. Ontarians deserve better.

Under the Premier’s leadership, our government has been consistent, urging the federal government to strengthen the bail rules and make meaningful improvements to the Criminal Code.

Speaker, can the Associate Solicitor General tell the House what steps he is taking to get real bail reform across the line and make our streets safer?

Hon. Zee Hamid: I thank the excellent member from Markham–Thornhill for the question. To be blunt, people across Ontario are sick and tired of seeing the same repeat offenders get a pass from our justice system. They’ve had enough. They want change, and they want it now.

Speaker, the federal law needs to meet the standard Canadians expect. That means cracking down on crime and keeping—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I apologize to the associate minister.

We have three minutes and 27 seconds—three minutes and 27 seconds before we start throwing people out at the end of the year.

I apologize. I will acknowledge the associate minister once again.

Hon. Zee Hamid: Thank you, Speaker. As I was saying, the federal law needs to meet the standard Canadians expect. That means cracking down on crimes and keeping violent, repeat offenders where they belong, behind bars. While Bill C-14 is a good first step, we all know a lot