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

November 19, 2025

44th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2025-Nov-19 (PDF)

L038 - Wed 19 Nov 2025 / Mer 19 nov 2025

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Wednesday 19 November 2025 Mercredi 19 novembre 2025

Orders of the Day

Plan to Protect Ontario Act (Budget Measures), 2025 (No. 2) / Loi de 2025 sur le plan pour protéger l’Ontario (mesures budgétaires) (no 2)

Wearing of pins

Members’ Statements

Seasonal events in Markham–Unionville

Education

Gene Domagala

School facilities

Sécurité du transport routier

Ontario Veterans Award for Community Service Excellence

Highway safety

Government investments

Nancy Dewar

Illuminate the Season with ARCH

Introduction of Visitors

House sittings

Question Period

Government accountability

Education

Government accountability

Government accountability

University and college funding

Government accountability

Energy policies

Immigrants’ skills

Public transit

Winter road maintenance

Windsor economy

Government accountability

Small business

Deferred Votes

Supporting Children and Students Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 sur le soutien aux enfants, aux élèves et aux étudiants

Water services

Introduction of Visitors

Introduction of Bills

Life Leases Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 sur les baux viagers

1505756 Ontario Inc. Act, 2025

Acme Restoration Inc. Act, 2025

1758195 Ontario Ltd. Act, 2025

Pembroke and Area Airport Commission Act, 2025

Petitions

Social assistance

Education funding

Orders of the Day

Plan to Protect Ontario Act (Budget Measures), 2025 (No. 2) / Loi de 2025 sur le plan pour protéger l’Ontario (mesures budgétaires) (no 2)

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Plan to Protect Ontario Act (Budget Measures), 2025 (No. 2) / Loi de 2025 sur le plan pour protéger l’Ontario (mesures budgétaires) (no 2)

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 18, 2025, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 68,

An Act to implement Budget measures and to enact and amend various statutes / Projet de loi 68, Loi visant à mettre en oeuvre les mesures budgétaires et à édicter et à modifier diverses lois.

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

MPP Wayne Gates: It’s always a pleasure to rise in the House. As you can tell, my voice is a little off today. That might be good for the Conservatives.

I want to start on what is not in the economic statement. I want to talk about affordability. I want to talk about the fact of what our kids and our grandkids are facing today. When we take a look at youth unemployment, it is close to 17%. I look across the aisle, and I look over here on this side here, with the Liberals. We all have kids. They’re all going to school and they’re getting a good education, but when they’re coming out of school, there are no jobs for them, and certainly no good-paying jobs.

What does that lead to? Living at home longer—they’re living in our basement. Then, when they finally get that opportunity to move out, they have to take a look at the cost of rents. I can talk from experience on this. I have kids who are looking—they tell me all the time they love me, but they don’t want to live with me. But when they go and look for an apartment—do you know what is it in Niagara, a one-bedroom apartment, two-bedroom apartment? It’s $2,500 a month—a month. You look here in Toronto, and we all have apartments that are paid for by the Legislature—or most of us do; I guess some do go home.

Some go home to their new babies. But at the end of the day, most have an apartment here. Those apartments are now $3,500.

I was talking to a young guy in the elevator yesterday. He goes to the University of Toronto—$3,800 a month he’s paying for an apartment. I said to him, “How do you afford it?” He said, “It’s terrible”—

Interruption.

MPP Wayne Gates: I just got a note that says I am sharing my time with the member from London North Centre, so there you go. I just wanted to get that out.

Then he gets to the second point of what kids are facing today—because the economic statement is supposed to say how great it is in the province of Ontario; it’s not the truth. It’s nowhere near the truth. It’s not great in Ontario, and it’s certainly not great for young people.

I look over here, and some probably have nieces, nephews who are going into the same situation I have with my kids. How do you afford to pay that kind of rent? I’m asking you. You can tell me when you ask me questions. Tell me how you can afford it. You can’t.

I said to him, “So what do you do?” He says, “Well, I skip meals. Some days I go to my class and I don’t eat.” I know the minister; I talk to him all the time on how important it is to have a meal before you go to school. There are a lot of kids—and you know it—who are going to school hungry today, trying to learn. Here is a guy going to university—our future—skipping meals.

And how did it all happen? It happened because of the government. I’m going to repeat what my colleague said. When I first came here—I have been here a while now, five terms I think it is now, well over 10 years. I look all across here and I don’t think there’s anybody here sitting right now that has been here longer than I have, on the Conservative side. I’m pretty sure of that. When I came here, I’ll be honest with you, I didn’t even know what an encampment was. There were not a lot of homeless people in the province of Ontario.

Today, every one of our communities—I see my good friend from Peterborough is here; I talked to him last night about his glasses. Every one of us is facing encampments in our ridings. And I’m going to be fair to the Conservatives and the Liberals; put your hands up if I’m wrong, that you are not facing it; that you don’t have homelessness in your ridings; that you don’t have seniors, after they have been renovicted because they can’t afford their rent, going to food banks in the province of Ontario, continually going to food banks.

I have seniors come to my office—and again, I’ll ask my colleagues if I’m wrong. Seniors come to our office. They tell me they’re going to food banks. They’re also telling me very clearly, those that do have a place to stay, that they’re skipping meals. They’re not having three meals a day as a senior, after, quite frankly, they’ve worked and they’ve given their life. We all know what’s going on with pensions today. We know how hard it is to make ends meet. I can talk from the workplace I came from. A lot of people know I worked at General Motors for 30 years. I was a union rep for close to that period of time.

The one thing that was nice about GM, they had a pension, but that pension does not have COLA anymore. That means they are living on their pension on what the price of everything was almost 15 years ago. So even those individuals are now coming to our office and telling me, “Gatesy, we’re struggling. We are having trouble making ends meet.” The good news is, they still have their good benefit packages, but as far as trying to pay rent, buy food, all the other necessities of life, hydro bills, everything else: “We’re struggling.”

When the minister stands up and tells how wonderful it is in the province of Ontario, I have to stand up and say that I disagree. I can give you examples. I’m challenging my colleagues on the other side, when you stand up and talk, let me know if you don’t have the same problems I’m facing and the same problems they’re facing in Welland, the same problems they’re probably facing in Toronto here, in London. We all have the problems. Ontario is not in good shape right now. And yes, you can blame Trump for the tariffs. That’s fair; that’s reasonable.

But we didn’t have tariffs when encampments started in the province of Ontario. The encampments didn’t start since we got tariffs. The encampments have been there. People going to food banks didn’t start just when we got the tariffs put on to us about a year ago from Trump. Are the tariffs hurting the province of Ontario, particularly Ontario, particularly in the auto sector, in steel, in lumber? Absolutely, but that is not what caused the problem in Ontario.

What’s happened? Again, I am going to challenge my colleagues. What’s happened? Unemployment: Today, in the province of Ontario, it’s the highest level in decades; 800,000 people. Think about that: 800,000 people are unemployed. Young people like I talked about are 17% unemployed. So when you stand up and say how great it is in Ontario, it’s not remotely accurate.

How can we fix the problem? Because it’s easy to stand up here and throw mud at the government. Quite frankly, I could do it all day. Again, I’ve been here for five terms. We’ve been asking this government to double ODSP. Not once have they said, “That’s a good idea.” How can people live in the province of Ontario on $1,200 a month? I’m asking everybody over there: Explain it to me. I can’t. When they come to my office and they say they’re on ODSP, they can’t find a place to live. They can’t pay for their groceries. They can’t take care of their kids.

Why? Why haven’t they doubled ODSP to give them at least a chance, a chance of raising their family, a chance of having a life in the province of Ontario? We are still the richest province in the country. Why aren’t we doing the right thing and doubling ODSP, increasing OW? There’s a solution.

Why don’t we bring back rent controls on new builds? If there’s a problem that caused a crisis in rents, it was that bill that was brought in by the government—I think it was in 2019—when you took rent controls off new builds, which drove rents through the roof, by the way. Why don’t you get rid of that bill? Why don’t you bring back rent control? I’m asking you, why don’t you? Hopefully, when you ask me a question, you can say why you feel it’s important to do that. You can say that there’s more rental market out there. There’s lots of rentals out there. Nobody can afford them. It makes no sense to me.

We have our housing starts. We went through about a year with the Minister of Housing at that time saying how important housing was, that we’ve got to get housing, that we’ve got to build 1.5 million houses, that we’ve got to get rid of the greenbelt. How many remember that fiasco? “We’ve got to get rid of the greenbelt.” Luckily, you backed down on that. That was a smart decision. But we’re nowhere near building the houses we need, nowhere near building affordable housing.

I have to wrap up. I forgot. I was looking at the clock thinking I had 20 minutes. I apologize. I’ve just got to say two things. My good friend Burd Sisler, after he celebrated being the oldest Canadian, ended up in the hospital. You know where he went? The Fort Erie urgent care centre that you want to close. I’m saying to you, keep the Fort Erie urgent care centre open 24/7, 365 days a year. Some 40,000 residents of Fort Erie depend on it.

I’ll turn it over to my colleague.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I recognize the member from London North Centre.

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: Speaker, I rise today to mark the passing of a local hero who touched countless lives with his kindness, powerful voice and his enduring presence as a media icon and community leader.

Bill Brady passed away this week at the age of 93. Born in Windsor, he moved to London as a young man to work in radio and became known for hosting the first telephone call-in show in Canada, which remained on air for more than two decades. His media reach expanded to local television with CFPL-TV, where he hosted the game show Act Fast, later becoming general manager, then operations president of Blackburn Radio and senior vice-president of the Blackburn Group. He was inducted into the Canadian Broadcast Hall of Fame.

Beyond media, Bill dedicated himself to public service through University Hospital and the London Health Association, Transplant International, the Robarts Research Institute, the London Centre For Juvenile Diabetes Research and the Canadian Heart Foundation. In recognition of these contributions, he received an honorary doctor of laws and was appointed a member of the Order of Canada.

Known for his voice, wit and oratory skills, Bill created the Easter “Bunny Bundle” competition, rallying schools and businesses to raise funds for vulnerable community members. His daughter Linda Barnard said, “He just wanted to help people who were less fortunate, particularly children. It broke his heart when he saw children in distress.”

Community members like Lynda Bradfield recalled the 1978 winter storm when Bill stayed on the air for 30 hours straight, connecting people with help and offering reassurance. She wrote that Bill “went on for hours on end, relentlessly trying to get help for folks stuck, stranded or missing, making each of us feel heard, cared for and hopeful.” Columnist Jane Sims noted his 67-year marriage to Mary Ann and reflected on the fitting snowfall after his passing, reminding London of the storms he once guided the city through.

Thank you, Bill, for your kindness, dedication, strong voice and stronger heart. London is better because of the hearts you touched and the example you set. May we all carry forward even a fraction of your spirit of service, compassion and belief in a better world. Rest in Peace.

Speaker, as I rise today to discuss Bill 68—and I’m reluctant to use the titles that this government provides for their bills because I don’t feel that, through the bills, they satisfy what the title actually implies. At this time in our province, we have a homelessness crisis that is unparalleled. We have never seen this type before, and at the same time, construction starts are way down for this government. People are struggling. People are not vulnerable, Speaker; they are made vulnerable. They are marginalized, and they are marginalized largely because of the policies of this government.

This government would pat themselves on the back for indexing ODSP to inflation, but when it is done, it actually keeps them under the poverty line. It is willingly acknowledging and admitting that people are not receiving enough on social assistance and this government is happy to keep their head below water. People can hardly afford the necessities of life. They can hardly afford rent. They can hardly afford food. People are making tough choices every single day, and this government has turned a blind eye to the crisis of their own making.

On Monday, an open letter was delivered to Queen’s Park. It was signed by over 100 organizations. It asked the government to repeal Bill 60, another piece of odious legislation that this government is using to attack renters, to benefit their wealthy corporate insider friends, to make sure that people can be squeezed for every single last dollar they have when they’re barely scraping by. The letter was signed by 132 organizations. These included student unions, shelters, legal clinics, unions, food banks. What that letter points out to this government is that it would remove discretion from adjudicators at the Landlord and Tenant Board.

Speaker, we have to acknowledge that during a time of having an unparalleled housing crisis, why on earth would the government put in place policies that would make it easier for people to become homeless? Not only are they not building the housing that people need and that people require, but they’re also jeopardizing the people who are currently housed. What is the end result of this going to be? There will be yet further people on the streets, yet further people on social assistance and people struggling to simply live their life.

What is also deeply concerning in this government is that it is very clear who they’re listening to. They’re not listening to tenants. They’re not listening to seniors. They’re not listening to people who are on social assistance. They’re not listening to the people who they were elected to serve. In fact, they’re listening to their corporate insider friends who simply want to make more money at any cost. Have we considered the moral values of this legislation? Have we considered how we need to make sure that we are looking after people?

I wish the government simply understood the very basic tenet of the golden rule: We should treat others the way we would like to be treated. And yet, now that they have this power, they’re not looking after people. I would wish that they could, for a moment, put themselves in the shoes of someone who is on the Ontario Disability Support Program and imagine what that would be like. By listening to these voices, by truly listening and listening with an open heart, we can hear that they are worried every single day. As it gets towards the end of month when rent is due, the worry gets more and more and more.

But yet this government with Bill 68 really has, in fact, delivered cuts: cuts to health care, cuts to education. There is no climate change plan within this. What is deeply disturbing is that they’re even going against their own ethos, their own mandate, their own identity, because once upon a time, Conservatives were known for being fiscally prudent, for making sure they saved for a rainy day. But instead, they’re spending like drunken sailors; they’re even worse than the Liberal government before them.

This legislation, and the sum total of so many pieces of legislation that we’ve seen from this government—they’re really looking to seize power. They’re looking to centralize power. They’re looking to control. They’re looking to seize assets through school boards, making sure that they have access to the lands that are held. We see Ontario Place—my goodness—and now the CNE. This government really does not know when to stop in its megalomania.

What this will do, with this government’s reckless spending and funnelling funds to their insider friends and donors, is that it’s going to result in a $27,000 per-person debt for the people of Ontario. What this government is doing to the people of Ontario is putting them in the hole to the tune of $27,000.

We hear a lot of words from this government, and yet their actions are not in concert with those words. We hear a lot about standing up for workers, but when there’s an opportunity, they stand down; they sit down. They sit on the sidelines, and they ignore workers. Right now, we have plants that are closing, workers who are struggling, and yet this government has seen fit to funnel the $2.5-billion Skills Development Fund to their insider friends, to their buddies—to a strip club, Speaker. This is the kind of thing that, normally, if you were to say it out loud, people would not believe you, and yet these are the headlines from this government.

As I finish, this government is all about show; it’s all about words. Recently covered by Isaac Callan and Colin D’Mello, this headline reads, “Ford Government Launches New Ontario Place Campaign, Won’t Say How Much it Cost”—what a surprise, Speaker. It’s deeply distressing.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Matthew Rae: Thank you to my two colleagues from across the way for their remarks this morning. My question is to the member from London North Centre, a question related to his remarks.

He didn’t mention anything about the crime initiatives and crime-fighting initiatives that our government has put in place over the past couple of years as well, and I know crime is affecting many of our places that we represent in this place; it affects rural Ontario and, obviously, it does affect London, which he represents a portion of.

Since launching Operation Deterrence in January 2025, our government has taken bold action to protect Ontario’s borders and communities: over 39,000 hours of ground patrols, 2,500 of aerial surveillance and more than 41,000 vehicle inspections, seizing illegal firearms, drugs and stolen vehicles.

Can the member opposite please tell me if he supports these efforts to secure our borders and keep our communities safe, yes or no?

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: I’d like to thank my colleague for the question. One thing that we stand for in the official opposition is community safety. Community safety will be realized through ensuring that people are housed with full wraparound supports, yet this government, instead of ensuring that people who are struggling are housed, would instead seek ways to punish them. We saw Bill 6 and we saw Bill 10; we saw that they are actually trying to take away these people’s human rights. Fining people who are homeless $10,000? That makes absolutely no sense.

I strongly urge this government to listen to the voices of small businesses who are seeing the unbridled chaos that this government has created by not ensuring that people have appropriate housing and mental health supports. This government can do it. There are health care providers within the Toronto area who realize that housing is health care; housing is fundamental; housing is foundational. Without it, nothing else matters.

Instead, this government would rather try to use their seats and their authority to turn a buck for their insider friends. That is unconscionable, because not only is there a human cost, but there is a financial cost to leaving people on the streets. It costs less to house people with supports.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I appreciate this opportunity to ask a question of my colleague from London North Centre.

I had a meeting the other night with tenants in my riding about the dire situation that they’re facing financially as above-guideline increases continue to erode their ability to buy groceries.

Could you speak to the impact of this bill on those tenants who are already barely getting by, combined with the impact of the anti-tenant bill, Bill 60?

Yet, through Bill 60, we see a government that is full of people who are clearly not listening to tenants, not listening to people who are at their wits’ end, worried about how they’re going to pay their bills, how they’re going to live. This government has got rid of rent control on buildings first occupied after November 2018, and they also, through Bill 60, are finding ways to even more erode the meagre tenant protections that are there.

Above-guideline rent increases are absolutely unconscionable. There is already plenty of money that corporate landlords make on rent alone; they should not need to use AGIs as a tool to cover for repairs that they already have the funding to make. I think about seniors who have lived in buildings for decades, who are deeply concerned about having to live in their cars because once this building is sold to new landlords, it looks at people not as a person but as a number on a ledger sheet.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Jonathan Tsao: Speaker, the member—both members, actually—spoke, I think, quite at length about some very fundamental issues that we’re facing as a society and the fact that this bill is really silent on a lot of them.

Another issue that this bill is silent on is climate change. So I would like to ask members opposite—well, members beside me; either one—about, if it was them, what concrete climate plan would they implement to ensure that Ontario actually meets and exceeds its emission targets and not just reinstate them.

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: I’d like to thank the member for the question. We are very proud to have the Ontario Green New Democratic Deal. It is something that is a living document, and we need to make sure that we’re responsive, that we’re listening to the science, we’re listening to all of the developments that are happening. We need to see further investments in renewables. We know that they are much faster to build and they’re easier to maintain. It’s what people want.

Unfortunately, the last Liberal government really gave a bad name to the green energy file because they awarded contracts that really benefited corporations over people. We need to make sure that people are at the heart of any green energy infrastructure as well as the benefits from it. This is something that we need to be investing in, yet this government is actually expanding their use of fossil fuels and gas-fired plants. It is deeply concerning at a time when we know there is no planet B; we cannot go backwards when it comes to the environment.

Yet this government has attacked the environment time and again, through the greenbelt, through not ensuring that the environment is a coherent mechanism. Undermining watersheds: Those things are like chains, and if you weaken one link of the chain, then it, unfortunately, impairs the entire system.

This government does not have a plan at all, and I think they’ve gotten rid of climate change targets because they don’t want to admit that there is such a thing as climate change. It’s ideological for them. It is not fiscal, it is not reasonable, it’s not humane and it has nothing to do with the environment.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Ms. Laura Smith: I want to thank the member for his remarks.

One of the things that our government is proposing is to make life more affordable, especially for the first-time homebuyer. I’m a mother; I have children. Like everybody else in this room, I think we want the best opportunity for our next generation. Our government announced that we’re eliminating the HST for first-time homebuyers on new homes valued up to $1 million. When combined with the action taken by the federal government, this is a savings of up to $130,000 per home. This will spur on growth and new builds.

Will the member support us so we can get this work done for the next generation?

MPP Wayne Gates: I think any help that we can do getting young people to buy our homes is a great idea.

But let’s talk about where we are, because you want to talk about affordability. I spent 10 minutes talking about affordability; you didn’t listen at all. People can’t afford our rents. They can’t afford to buy groceries. Make no mistake about it, you used to go to a grocery store—and you can put your hands up. You can disagree with me; I don’t have a problem with it. You’d go to a grocery store and for 100 bucks you’d come home with a couple of bags. You go to a grocery store today and you’re going home with one bag. That’s the reality of what’s going on.

What makes me upset even further, because I did a video on this last week that I’m sure you guys all watched: The Weston family are making record profits at a time that our food banks are being used more than at any time in the history of the province of Ontario. Food banks are running out of food and you’re talking about affordability? Come on. Wake up.

We have young people that can’t afford to get of their house or who are living in your basements until they’re 30, 31, 32, and they’ve done everything right. They’ve gone to university, they’ve got a job, but they can’t afford to move out because they can’t afford the rents in the province of Ontario because you took off rent controls. What the hell are we doing for our young people? So don’t stand up and tell me about affordability. Make sure that our kids can get a job and be able to raise their own family. They can’t do it in this province anymore. It’s frustrating.

I’ve got three daughters. I’m going through it every single day, and I feel terrible as a parent standing here saying my daughter can’t afford to pay her rent.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Response.

MPP Wayne Gates: That is my response. Thank you very much.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I recognize the member from Orléans.

Mr. Stephen Blais: This has certainly been an engaging debate this morning. It’s always a good opportunity to talk about affordability for families—families that can’t pay rent, families that are having trouble paying the highest hydro bills in the history of Ontario, families that can’t afford to buy a new home.

Of course, a government that promised to cap hydro rates has not done so. They’re higher now than they’ve ever been while taxpayers take money out of the tax account to subsidize this. At the same time, we have rising and record levels of unemployment—unemployment that has not been seen since the last time the NDP government formed power here in Ontario.

My question to the NDP is, if we have record unemployment that we haven’t seen since the last time they were in power, and now the Tories are in power, why should Ontarians trust any of the economic advice that you’re giving to the government?

MPP Wayne Gates: I’ve only got four seconds, but when you privatize hydro, rates are going to go up. The Conservatives did it and so did the Liberals. I’m getting—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Further debate?

Ms. Lee Fairclough: I appreciate the opportunity to rise and speak on Bill 68, budget measures, and the fall economic statement. I’m going to be sharing my time with my colleague the MPP from Toronto–St. Paul’s today.

Every time I come into the Legislature, I listen carefully to what is being proposed. I try to see the merits of what’s in front of us, to see if government has listened or reflected on the some of the outside expert advice presented to them. These last few weeks, we’ve also had the opportunity for discussion of government spending at estimates, at committee. That gives us a chance to get under the hood, get into the books, ask a few more detailed questions.

This is what I am seeing and what I’ve heard: It appears that the economy is getting worse, not better. Job creation forecasts are dim. In 2024, job creation was expected to total 365,000. It was revised at the beginning of this year to 180,000. Now the fall economic statement has revised it to 171,000. The government talks incessantly about protecting Ontario, announcement after announcement, but it’s not happening and it’s not working. Unemployment is at 7.8%, the highest it’s been in years. Some 700,000 people in the province are unemployed and 200,000 of those are young people. The highest unemployment rate is among young people, at 16.3%.

We are also seeing an increased reliance on food banks, with working people needing to use most of their money to keep a roof over their head and needing to turn to food banks to be able to feed themselves and their families.

The Liberal caucus, actually, this week proposed to address this crisis in youth unemployment by investing in a youth career fund, to invest $450 million from the protecting Ontario fund in our young people to stimulate their careers. But what was the answer? It was a unanimous no.

In

section A of the fall economic statement, the first paragraph—you know, the page that has the picture of the Canada and the Ontario flags—describes that the government has put aside $30 billion for relief and support for workers and businesses. We had a detailed solution to create jobs in communities across Ontario using some of that money they’ve already set aside. It could have helped young people feel some hope—hope for their careers and for their future. But the answer was a unanimous no.

Yet every time I meet with industry leaders that are coming here to Queen’s Park and I discuss the impact of the situation in the US, I ask them about that fund, that the Premier and his team constantly boast about. The reality is, they aren’t seeing it. They aren’t getting access to it. Proposals go in and there’s no response. Farming and agricultural, including meat processing, autos, small businesses, manufacturing—the economy continues to slide. We lose more jobs, like what we’re seeing in the job loss in the Ingersoll plant. So if that’s where the money is going, why are they not seeing it out there to help those industries?

But then there are the other choices that I’m seeing in this fall economic statement. We know that 67% of the Ontario budget that the government is responsible for is actually for ensuring that the foundations are there. This is the role of the provincial government. These are the basic foundations of our economy and how we actually protect Ontarians. What are they, Speaker? Health care, education and post-secondary education. This is the primary job of the government, to make sure education, post-secondary institutions and the health care system provide the basics for our families so they can thrive and our communities and our province will prosper, giving everyone a fair chance to succeed.

People often ask me why I decided to leave my job in health care to run for office, because I actually loved working in health care. It was what I wanted to do since I was a little girl. And my simplest answer is this: I wanted to see a government that saw it as their job to help our health system and publicly funded education system to be successful—that that was their goal: to make sure it was successful. For example, the government and its members would wake up every day and they would think, “Oh, I wonder if there were fewer people that waited in emergency departments last night?

Were there fewer seniors cared for in hallways? I wonder if the teenagers that needed access to crisis service for mental health care knew where to go and get that help? And doesn’t it feel so good to see class sizes reduced and kids getting the education they need, and their teachers feeling energized instead of burned out.” They might ask, “I hope our nurses, physicians and social workers are feeling well supported today as they work to keep our population healthy. We need them. By supporting them, we’re not just enabling people’s health but enabling them to contribute to our economic prosperity.

Today is a day when people have access to the newest therapies they deserve.”

Speaker, those are the questions that I want people in this government to wake up thinking about every day. However, I don’t think those are the first thoughts of the government each day. It’s not what’s shown in their actions here.

I was also taught as a manager that when you invest in something, you manage the largest investments with the most purpose and intention to get the kind of impact that you want to see. You measure the outcomes you want so that you know whether you’re getting those results.

I need to point out the choice that’s been made here. At the highest level, the government had already planned a $2-billion reserve and another $2-billion contingency at the start of the year. Now, with the fall economic statement, we see that they’ve elected to increase the contingency fund by another $2 billion to $4 billion. That’s a choice. They could have invested it. They could invest it in so many areas that would help to keep people healthier. As families face greater uncertainty, their health declines, their mental health declines. We could invest in health care. We could invest in keeping people healthy.

The Financial Accountability Office has assessed where we are on health care, on education and post-secondary education. It’s arm’s length. It’s a third-party assessment of the decisions that have been made to invest our taxpayer money. And what do they say? Health care: the lowest per capita spending in the country, by far. The government talks about even more efficiency; well, you know what? They’ve pushed and pushed it for years. How much more can we squeeze out without cuts to service? We needed a 4% increase just to keep pace with inflation and population growth. We are seeing a 0.7% increase.

At estimates, I learned the government is choosing to spend $142 million less in long-term care this year. They haven’t been able to build the long-term-care beds they needed, so the investment will drop away.

Hospitals have accumulated close to $1 billion in deficit. This is years in the making with conscious underfunding, and there’s no intention to address it.

Education: the lowest per-capita per-student spending in the country, by far. Nope—no intention to address it.

Post-secondary education: The lowest per-capita spending in the country by far. Nope; in fact, we’re only going to spend less in that area and make things worse.

The government had the opportunity to take $2 billion and try to help these systems instead of putting it into contingency, but no—refuses.

So I have to ask, are we hoping for failure? What are they waiting for in not using that money? Between this conscious starving and bills such as Bill 33 on the table to increase control and take away local voices, it feels like a plan for control and then failure of our public systems. I can’t help but arrive at that conclusion, and I find it very disappointing.

Even in the schedules of the budget measures, we see more examples of this. Our park systems, our conservation authorities—centralize control, starve the system so they break and then call it a failure. Wouldn’t it just make more sense to see it as the job to help them be successful?

We know that countries that invest in health care, in education, have the most resilient economies. They’re set up for success by that very action. And that is the provincial government’s job: to ensure that they’re there when we need it.

But in this fall economic statement, we see some other clear choices by this government: millions invested in a feasibility study for a tunnel under the 401. I don’t know about others in the chamber, but I was reading the polls again yesterday on this, if that’s what will guide decisions. What’s unbelievable is, the vast majority of people in Ontario don’t even want it.

Even more money is planned to go out the door in the Skills Development Fund that the Auditor General has said has been managed unfairly with no transparency. Every time I read more detail about it, it blows me away.

As an example, do you know that there were 647 high-ranked proposals? All the money could have gone to high-ranked proposals that the ministry staff felt were worthy of receiving funds. But instead, they decided to allocate $742 million to proposals that were ranked low, really hand-picked by the minister himself. There were more than enough great proposals to be able to get to something much, much better.

I had planned to make some comments as well about the Conservation Authorities Act and

schedule 3 and also what is happening at Wasaga Beach, but I’ll just say this: These are, once again, plans to centralize control, underfund and reduce the insights that are coming into local planning decisions and the ability to protect our environment.

With that, I will turn it over to my colleague the MPP from Toronto–St. Paul’s. And I’ll just say this: Sadly, there were choices that could have been made here, and they weren’t. I’ll also need to step away; with all the changes in the

schedule put forward by this government, I have an important meeting for my constituency with the Ministry of Infrastructure.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I recognize the member from Toronto–St. Paul’s.

MPP Stephanie Smyth: Thank you to my colleague from Etobicoke–Lakeshore as we continue debate on Bill 68.

When Ontarians open a budget bill, they expect to see measures that respond to challenges facing their families and their communities, and they expect a plan that helps with the cost of living, with jobs, with housing, with stability. But what they don’t expect is that, hidden inside a budget bill, far from public attention, their government chose to rewrite the rules of elections in Ontario. Yet that’s exactly what is happening in Bill 68, schedules 7 and 8, which deal with elections and campaign financing.

And they are not simply administrative updates. They fundamentally alter how our democracy functions. They grant more power to the government of the day while removing safeguards that were designed to protect the public interest.

These changes do not make Ontario stronger. In fact, they make this government stronger. Elections should not be shaped around the needs of the incumbent.

The removal of fixed election dates is one of the most striking changes in this bill. Fixed dates were introduced almost 20 years ago because they serve the public, not the government. They give Elections Ontario time to plan properly. They let municipalities prepare polling locations in accessible spaces. They allow young people turning 18 to be captured in targeted registration efforts. They let new citizens know when they’re going to be voting. They help voters organize their lives so they can participate fully.

Fixed dates take away the ability of a Premier to pick a moment of political advantage and call an election when it suits them. That’s why they were adopted. What this government is doing here is taking Ontario backwards.

If this bill passes, Ontario will join exactly one other province in Canada that does not have fixed election dates, and that is Nova Scotia. Every other province and almost every municipality in this country understands the value of predictable and stable democratic timelines. Why does this government want to stand nearly alone in giving itself the ability to call an election at any moment? Why is Ontario being moved into a category of our own, a category that weakens democratic accountability?

Unpredictable elections are not an innovation. We see them in American state politics, where election timing becomes a tool not for public service but for partisan strategy. This is not a model that protects the voter; it confuses them. It limits engagement. It benefits the governing party above anyone else. Ontario should not be copying the worst instincts of American politics.

This bill does more than remove the date itself. By wiping out the fixed schedule, it also removes all the associated transparency rules that depend on that schedule. The Chief Electoral Officer will no longer be required to publish polling locations months in advance. There will no longer be a guaranteed targeted registration program to make sure that youth, new Canadians and individuals who have recently turned 18 are added to that voters list. There will no longer be a requirement to provide projected election costs ahead of time.

And government advertising rules that once applied in the months before an election simply vanish because there are no longer months before an election. There is only whatever date that the Premier chooses.

The second major democratic change in this bill is the increase in political donation limits. Under this bill, individual contribution limits jump from $3,300 to $5,000. Rather than small annual increases, those limits will now rise with inflation indefinitely. With last year’s inflation, these limits would have gone up by more than $100 every single year. That’s not an approach that benefits everyday Ontarians struggling with bills or rent. Of course, this is an approach that benefits people with thousands of dollars to spare.

I’ve yet to meet a young person in Ontario who’s asking the government, “Please raise the donation limits. Please?” I’ve yet to meet a family trying to keep up with the cost of groceries who thinks that the most urgent form of relief is to make it easier to make a donor contribution to more political parties. Yet this is where the government’s attention is.

Youth unemployment in Ontario is high and rising. We have a generation of young adults facing unstable work—as my colleague was talking about—unaffordable housing and serious barriers to getting ahead. Our province should be mobilizing every tool to support them. Instead, the government has chosen to focus on its own electoral advantage. While young people worry about their job prospects, this government is worrying about campaign limits and campaign timing for donations and elections. While families worry about whether they can afford their next rent increase, this government worries about whether donors can contribute 5,000 bucks instead of 3,300 bucks.

It’s very hard to explain to Ontarians why these changes are in a budget bill. It’s even harder to explain why they’re a priority at a moment like this. When you strip away the language and the packaging, the choices in this bill speak for themselves. Removing fixed election dates benefits the government. Raising donation limits benefits the government. Relaxing advertising rules benefits the government. None of these measures benefit the people of Ontario.

As a critic for ethics, accountability and integrity, I have to look at this bill not just for its policy content, but for what it signals about how this government views its own responsibilities. Public trust depends on a government demonstrating that it acts for people, not for itself. But this legislation concentrates power in the hands of the Premier and the governing party. It weakens that oversight, it removes standards and it sidelines Elections Ontario. It creates an uneven playing field.

When a government rewrites the rules of elections in the middle of its own mandate, it invites the public to question its motives. When it does so quietly inside a massive budget bill, it invites the public to question its integrity. Elections aren’t the property of a government; they belong to the people. They’re a shared civic space that must be predictable, stable and fair. Fixed dates make Ontario’s elections more accessible. The donation rules put in place following past scandals were designed to reduce the influence of big money. Together, these changes helped restore public confidence. This bill reverses that progress.

If a government is confident in its record, it doesn’t need to control when voters go to the polls. If a government is confident in its relationship with the public, it doesn’t need to increase donation limits to draw money in. If a government is confident in its democratic values, then it doesn’t choose this moment, with so many urgent issues that are facing real people, to put its energy into rewriting election rules.

Ontario deserves better than this. Ontarians deserve a government that’s focused on the challenges they’re facing, and not its own convenience. They deserve youth employment strategies—like we proposed but was voted down, as my colleague noted—not election timing strategies. And, moreover, they deserve affordability solutions, not fundraising solutions. They deserve transparency and not tactics.

Speaker, the people of this province trust us to safeguard the democratic institutions that belong to them. It’s our duty to push back when those institutions are weakened. These schedules don’t strengthen democracy in Ontario; they weaken it, and they do so in a way that clearly and indirectly benefits this sitting government.

For that reason and for the sake of accountability and transparency and integrity, I can’t support these provisions. Ontarians deserve elections that put them first, not the government first.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Jeff Burch: Thank you to the member from Toronto–St. Paul’s for her remarks. I appreciated them.

Our understanding of changes to the election rules is that one of the consequences will be the number of advance polls going from 10 to three. Why do you think this government is trying to suppress voting in Ontario?

MPP Stephanie Smyth: Thank you for the question.

Right, it asks those questions, doesn’t it? I mean, we would like to be able to ask the government that question. Everything about what’s happening with this—we all remember what I called the “frostbite election” in February. How many doors did we all knock on where nobody was there? People weren’t prepared; people didn’t know about the advance polling, even with a full advance polling selection. Narrowing the choice narrows the ability to vote, the ability to mobilize. So those are great transparency questions.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Ms. Stephanie Bowman: Thank you to my colleague from Toronto–St. Paul’s for her excellent remarks today on Bill 68 and, in particular, focusing on the changes to the Election Act.

You know, I can’t help but think that this PC party is more interested in winning elections than actually governing the province. We’ve got crises in health care—1,200 ER closures last year. We’ve got crises in education, where workers and students are experiencing violence. And we’ve got a government that doesn’t talk openly about what’s going on in its finances. I’ve talked a lot about that. But I remember, in 2018, they campaigned on reducing the middle-income tax bracket. They haven’t done that. In 2025, when they called this early, unnecessary, expensive election, they certainly did not campaign on changing the election rules and giving themselves an extra year in power.

So, I’d like to ask the member from Toronto–St. Paul’s why she thinks the PC Party, the government, did not campaign on changing Ontario’s election laws.

MPP Stephanie Smyth: Thank you for that great question. I think because maybe we’d have the opportunity—oh, wait. We had a very short election timeline in February to raise those questions and point at it, asking, “What is the gain when you limit the timelines and the scope for when you can vote? Why?” In the last election, it was a shortened writ. We only had so much time to get out and talk about the issues that were already on fire. But you could add this and maybe push it to the top of the agenda, and maybe they’d start to question. The bottom line is, they don’t want the questions because they don’t have a good answer.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Dave Smith: This is the fall economic statement that we’re talking about. Bill 68 is about an economic statement.

There are a couple of things I’d like to bring up that weren’t brought up in debate just a few minutes ago: the fact that our debt to GDP ratio dropped to 36.2%, the lowest rate in more than a decade; that servicing Ontario debt has dropped by $1.3 billion because we had the ability to negotiate some of those bonds and bring them in at a much lower rating; the fact that Ontario’s credit rating has been increased by two credit rating companies, and we are now at all four of the major credit rating agencies giving a strong AA rating; and our economy grew by $1.2 trillion.

Yet when you listen to the opposition, it is dire straits here in Ontario. How do you reconcile the fact that Ontario’s financial situation is in a better position than it has been in more than 10 years, the fact that credit agencies have said that we’re going to give Ontario a credit rating upgrade, which lowers our cost of servicing debt—how do you square that with what you’ve actually said?

MPP Stephanie Smyth: I guess my response is: interesting you’re not asking me about my portion of the debate, so thanks for that. I can say that, under this government, the debt load has reached half a trillion dollars, and also the debt per capita is expected to go up 15% with this government. So there’s some facts and figures for you.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

MPP Lisa Gretzky: Thank you to my colleague for your insight into the fall economic statement that’s before us.

You talked about youth unemployment, and I will say that my community of Windsor has the highest unemployment rate in the entire country, including youth unemployment. That’s not something I’m bragging about, nor should, I think, the other members from the Windsor-Essex area be completely ignoring that fact.

I’m wondering if you can tell me if there is anything that you see in the economic statement that’s going to help people in my community weather the economic instability that we’re facing across the entire province but we’re feeling much more acutely down in the Windsor-Essex area.

MPP Stephanie Smyth: Thank you to the member for your question. I know that we had our own motion just on Monday about youth unemployment and measures to reverse that. And I can tell you that, as my colleague from Etobicoke–Lakeshore mentioned—a hard no from the government. They were not interested despite the billions of dollars they put aside for relief in some ways.

In answer to youth unemployment in the Windsor area and in general across this province, we’ve yet to see a real strategy, and anything that we’ve put forward has been voted against. Look, the numbers are in crisis. I know in my own riding, when we’re talking about summer jobs for youth as well, we were talking about job fairs back in the summer—anything—and were told by the experts, “Don’t even bother. The jobs aren’t out there. Start volunteering, and then you might get some work down the road if jobs become available.”

So youth unemployment is a crisis across this province. We’re doing what we can to propose to this government active measures, and the hope—with this government, I don’t see it.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Jonathan Tsao: I want to thank my honourable colleague for raising and shining a light on this important issue about our elections. Elections are the most fundamental part of our democracy, so it says a lot when we have a government which wants to bury these changes inside a fall economic statement. So, again, thank you to my honourable colleague for raising these concerns.

I heard comments—“Well, what gives us the right to do this is the Constitution.” This is emblematic of this government: doing the bare minimum, meaning bare minimum standards. We should be trying to do more. We should be trying to do more to engage our democracy. We should be trying to do more to allow access to our democracy, not less—not the bare minimum.

And we know this Premier—what’s his motto again? “Don’t break the rules, change the rules.” Change the rules, right? That’s what they’re doing.

So I’d like to ask my honourable colleague: Why do you think the government is doing this? Why hide it in the FES? Why make these changes? Why make our democracy less accessible?

MPP Stephanie Smyth: Thank you for your question.

When I look back to what happened with the election of February 27, the snap election call, it destabilizes other parties, no question, with preparedness. And that’s always been something that is curious to me. Wouldn’t you want a really fair election? Isn’t that the goal? Do you want to call an election where, “Everybody’s unprepared, so we win?” It’s almost like starting a track and field race and you’ve got three metres ahead of everybody at the beginning.

When you’ve been sitting in government as long as this government has—they’ve had years and years ahead of us. So the question is, why don’t you want a fair race? Why do you want to take away equal advantage?

Mr. Jonathan Tsao: Fairness isn’t a priority of this government.

MPP Stephanie Smyth: Thank you. Yes, fairness is not a priority. They don’t want anybody else to take advantage. It’s a greedy power grab.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Brian Riddell: Can the member opposite explain why their party has consistently failed to support practical, targeted relief for Ontario small businesses and people, especially when they are facing unprecedented global challenges? I find it really sad that you vote no every time we try to do something positive for the people of Ontario. Why do you feel like that?

MPP Stephanie Smyth: Thank you for the question. I think we’ve tabled a small business tax credit proposal three times that has been shut down by this government.

Can we talk about the Skills Development Fund and what’s happening with that money? Billions of dollars—we don’t know how or why, but this circular economy of our money, of the taxpayer money, Madam Speaker, has been going to strip clubs. We’re looking for relief for taxpayers, but the taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars go to strip clubs or friends—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Further debate?

Mr. Deepak Anand: Madam Speaker, before I start, I want to say thank you to my mentor. I love it when they say I’m doing a good job. That means I’m putting in the effort.

But we’re talking today—

Interjections.

Mr. Deepak Anand: Yes. Oh, absolutely, I do remember seven years and four months and a few days back when I started the first time—oh, my God, it was so difficult. The first time I stood up, I spoke to the mike. It got my voice from back here—“What is this?” Over the years, we learn that this is the best thing that we have. When we say, we listen at the same time. And this is what we’re doing here on Bill 68, the Plan to Protect Ontario Act.

I’m going to say this: I’m very proud of our government. And then I’ll hear somewhere saying, “Oh, that is being biased.” No. I’m going by the data. I’m not going with the bias. I’m going with what we have done from the beginning. We have supported Ontario’s workers, job creators and communities across our beautiful province, whether it is building subways, LRTs, hospitals, schools, long-term-care beds, expanding and building new highways. What are we doing? We’re building our beautiful province.

Mississauga has got their fair share. We can’t thank God, we can’t thank the Premier enough for that. We’ve got the hospital, which is doing great. We have our Hazel McCallion LRT line. And we just expanded the 401—can’t say thanks enough.

Madam Speaker, these are the foundations that the next generation needs in order to succeed and have good lives. It’s not just for today. We want to make sure—say, as an example, when I talk about the family at my home, as a parent, it is my responsibility to create wealth not only for me but for my generations to come—my kids, my grandkids. Why? Say, as an example, it’s a tough time for them. They can use a piece of these savings, the creation of this wealth, to survive, to weather that storm—or if they’re in a good time, they can use this wealth to excel in life.

That is exactly what we’re doing by building this infrastructure. Yes, there’s a little bit of pain today, because whenever we’re building anything—an example, Goreway bridge. It took 18 months to build Goreway bridge. For those 18 months, I do remember a lot of people in Malton complained. “Oh, my goodness, I have to go through Airport Road. It takes me an extra 12 minutes.”

Actually, Ranno Di was telling me last week that in order for her to go to temple, now it only takes six minutes, where it used to take 18 minutes. So I told her that’s wonderful. But I’m worried about her poor husband—because they’re 12 minutes both ways now, with him, with her in the house. But that’s extra time; they can have a good time together. That is short-term pain but long-term gain.

That is what we’re doing—we’re making sure that we are transforming our province.

Look at the data. In 2018, 7.2 million people were working in Ontario. Look at the data today: There are 8.254 million people employed. That’s more than a million additional people contributing to our economy. It’s no coincidence—it’s the hard work; it is the policy.

In 2018, the revenue for the government was $154 billion; today, it is $226 billion. If you look at the Liberal math, it would have been—“Oh, they must have increased the fees. They must have increased the taxes.” No. Can you imagine—0% increase in fees, 0% increase in taxes. We were in fact lowering the taxes, lowering the fees, while making sure everybody came together, worked hard and built a better, stronger Ontario, gave back more. And we have investments of over $230 billion today by this government, and not even a single increase in the taxes and the fees.

Interjection.

Mr. Deepak Anand: Thank you. That definitely calls for applause for the people of Ontario, who worked hard and contributed.

We are cutting red tape, unleashing our economy, building infrastructure, creating jobs, supporting families, while keeping the costs down.

One thing I have been saying is that when there is a tough time, it is a test time. Think about when there is a storm coming up and you want to be ready. These are the times when we want to make sure we are prepared.

We are supporting those who are going to be most affected—and the storm in this case is the tariffs. As you know, tariffs and economic uncertainty are causing a lot of anxiety. It is more important than ever before that the government steps up with a plan to protect Ontario, protect its people.

In the 2025 fall economic statement, we are making sure that there is tariff support. Look at how we’re doing it. We’re providing approximately $9 billion in liquidity relief by deferring select provincial administrative taxes.

Job creators are worried: “We don’t know if our revenue is going to stay the same. Our expenses are already going to be too much. How do we make sure that we stay afloat?” Simple: This government is there to support them. “We’ll help you to increase the revenue, but at the same time, we want to make sure we give you a hand to reduce your expenses so that you can stay afloat longer.”

WSIB rebates—issuing an additional $2-billion rebate for safe employers to help keep workers on the job.

It’s a vicious cycle: Revenue goes down. Expenses stay the same. Job creators have no choice: They have to find ways to reduce the costs or close the shop. Well, this government is making sure we are helping you to reduce the costs so that you don’t have to close the shop. We’re making sure we’re not just helping the job creators; we’re helping the communities at large—to give an example, permanently cutting gasoline and fuel tax.

We heard it a lot of times about the stickers. In a home, if there are four vehicles—$120 times four is $480. Yes, I do hear it sometimes from the other side, “Oh, what a big deal it is—$480.” Ask some of those families. Ask those families who are struggling because of the increase in the interest rate. Their mortgage rate has gone up; the cash flow stayed the same. That $480 is a huge help for them because it’s helping them.

Another thing which we are doing is providing an additional $5 billion to invest in priority projects that drive growth and economic resilience, enhancing the Ontario Made Manufacturing Investment Tax Credit to $1.3 billion over three years, and an additional $600 million to provide Invest Ontario with greater stability in executing its mandate of job creation and investment attraction. These are some of the things we are doing.

As we are doing this, I want to share with you something which I do remember when we were growing up. We used to hear this song called Another Day in Paradise. I wonder: What is paradise? Paradise, technically speaking, is where there is abundance. You need $100; if you have more than $100, you don’t have to think. That, to me, is paradise.

What I am saying here is, if you really look across the world, look at places like the Middle East when there was no oil and the difference today, when we have oil. We’re saying God has gifted us abundance—abundance in the form of the Ring of Fire.

Today we need the critical minerals. By developing the Ring of Fire, we are able to create wealth, create that abundance, something that we can use to support the investments that are needed today to support the families in Ontario.

We talk about many things, but it’s not just saying it. When we say in order to have that $22 billion so that we can generate for the province of Ontario to support the investments, to support these people so that we have that abundance and so that we can continue to live in paradise, we are making sure we are doing it through this fall economic statement by investing $500 million in the Critical Minerals Processing Fund to support projects that grow our critical mineral processing capacity.

Also, to promote growth in the industry, we are looking to cut review times in half. Think about it. We need those critical minerals today. We need this support today. We need to invest today, and it takes 15 years. We can’t go in 15 years from now, look back and say, “Yes, we could have done this. We could have invested 15 years back. We could have asked for these investments just because the project took 15 years.” Those investments have gone to Australia or other places in the world. Thank you to the Minister of Energy for his innovative reforms like the one project, one process framework.

We are committed to historic investment in health care, transit, roads, highways, local communities, and it is very important to make sure we bring those investments. We need to work to make sure that we support the Ring of Fire project today, not in 15 years.

Madam Speaker, I’m going to look at the time before I move on. I don’t have much time left before the break, so I am just going to go straight to talk about our government.

We will never stop fighting for the people of Ontario. Together, we’ll protect this province and build a future we can all be proud of.

Our economic outlook and fiscal review, along with Bill 68, is essential to that plan. If passed, it will allow us to keep investing in people, businesses and communities that drive Ontario forward.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

Wearing of pins

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): The Minister of Long-Term Care is seeking unanimous consent.

Hon. Natalia Kusendova-Bashta: Point of order, Madam Speaker. Good morning.

If you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for members to wear forget-me-not pins today in the House in recognition of Alzheimer’s disease.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): The Minister of Long-Term Care is seeking unanimous consent for members to wear pins in the House today in recognition of Alzheimer’s disease. Agreed? Agreed.

Members’ Statements

Seasonal events in Markham–Unionville

Mr. Billy Pang: Earlier this month, I had the pleasure of hosting my first-ever autumn dim sum and concert event at a local restaurant in Markham–Unionville. About 250 residents joined together for an afternoon of delicious dim sum, warm tea and live music performed by some of our talented local award-winning musicians—and yes, I even sang a couple of songs myself. The event was a wonderful celebration of my riding’s beautiful and diverse community, bringing together our neighbours, families and friends to share in the joy of the autumn season.

Speaker, we were so honoured to welcome members of the York Regional Police, including Inspector Weick, who shared some of the YRP’s recent achievements in keeping our community safe, from new technologies like CCTV and licence-plate-scanning systems that help prevent crime, to their continued call for strong bail reform from the federal government to address violent and repeat offenders.

I want to sincerely thank everyone who attended and contributed to making this event such a success. Markham–Unionville continues to grow and thrive because of the spirit of togetherness of all the residents who call our great community home.

Education

Ms. Peggy Sattler: Speaker, parents in London and across Ontario are very worried today because of this government’s latest attack on our public education system with Bill 33. I want to thank the thousands of Londoners who have sent emails or made phone calls urging government MPPs to vote no to Bill 33 when it comes for the final vote.

Parents and the Thames Valley District School Board know that putting a school board under supervision does nothing to improve teaching and learning in our classrooms. What it does is hand over control of our schools to an unaccountable, unelected supervisor with no background in education or knowledge of the community. It shuts out families and students. It silences the voices of parents desperately seeking help for their children with special needs. It sidelines democratically elected local trustees, whose role is to advocate for parents and the community, and it replaces them with an additional layer of bureaucracy.

The reality is, Speaker, that Bill 33 will do nothing to support students or families. It will do nothing to reduce class sizes or put more EAs into schools. Instead of ramming through bad legislation—instead of shutting down debate, skipping committee and denying the public the voice to be heard—we should be listening to parents and communities and investing in our schools.

It’s time to put an end to the political games. Vote no to Bill 33.

Gene Domagala

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: Today, I’d like to talk about a great Beacher. There’s this gregarious guy in beautiful Beaches–East York named Gene Domagala. When you meet him, you will think he is part elf, part walking encyclopedia, part geographer, part saint, full-on historian and incredible connector of people and ideas. He does everything all of the time and knows everyone under the sun. We call him “the mayor of the Beach,” because he is a legend city-wide and locally.

You will find this gem at a seniors’ home, delivering letters, in a park organizing an event, at a church unloading groceries for a luncheon or on the street leading one of his historical walks. I have no idea when Gene sleeps. If he ever gives you a ride, you will be sitting with toys for holiday hampers, books for libraries, winter coats for Out of the Cold programs, and dozens of deliciously smelling baguettes and hot cross buns he has wrangled from Cobs bakery. You will wonder if you are actually in a fairytale.

Gene turned 85 years old last Friday, and you would never know it. He looks like a 40-year-old Fonzie and acts even younger. This kind soul spends every minute of the day making the world a better place.

We love you, Gene Domagala.

School facilities

Mr. Steve Pinsonneault: Madam Speaker, I rise today with tremendous pride to share long-awaited and very welcoming news for my riding of Lambton–Kent–Middlesex and, specifically, the families of Forest and the surrounding area.

For years, the proposal for a K-to-12 public school in Forest remained stalled for a variety of reasons. Despite strong community support, the project faced several complex factors that slowed its progress. From the moment I was elected, I made it my mission to see this project over the finish line.

Madam Speaker, I’m very pleased to share that Lambton Kent District School Board has now received approval to issue the tender for the brand new Blue Coast District School in the Forest area, a K-to-12 public school. This is a major milestone for our community. Supported by a $74.1-million investment from our government, including $34.3 million in new funding, the project will create 1,186 new student spaces and 49 licensed child care spaces. The new school will offer a modern, inclusive and inspiring learning environment that brings students of all grades under one roof. That means more capacity, more opportunity and more support for families across the region.

Projects of this scale do not happen overnight. I want to extend my sincere thanks to everyone involved, from government partners to the Lambton Kent District School Board and all those who contributed their time, expertise—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Mushkegowuk–James Bay.

Sécurité du transport routier

M. Guy Bourgouin: Une autre saison hivernale commence, et après seulement une première chute de neige, le nord de l’Ontario a déjà vécu le même scénario que d’année en année : fermetures multiples des routes 11 et 17, des accidents et des camionneurs de transport dans le clos tout le long du corridor du Nord.

Quelques semaines passées, j’ai présenté le projet de loi 49—un projet de loi qui proposait des solutions concrètes pour améliorer la sécurité de nos routes du Nord. Il visait la formation de conducteurs, la supervision de délivrance des permis, l’augmentation du personnel d’inspection et l’entretien hivernal. Ce projet de loi aurait été un vrai pas en avant pour rendre nos routes plus sécuritaires.

Ce qui est encore plus préoccupant, c’est qu’aucun député progressiste-conservateur du Nord n’a proposé un projet de loi pour améliorer la sécurité routière—aucun.

Malgré qu’ils représentent les communautés ayant les routes les plus dangereuses de la province.

Madame la Présidente, ça fait des années que nous expliquons tout cela. Les maires du Nord, les premiers répondants, les conseils scolaires, les camionneurs, les syndicats et les familles tirent la sonnette d’alarme. Mais hiver après hiver, ce gouvernement refuse d’agir.

Soyons clairs : nous n’arrêterons pas. Je vais continuer de déposer des projets de loi, de proposer des solutions et d’exercer ces pressions jusqu’à ce que le gouvernement ne comprenne enfin ce que tous les gens du Nord savent déjà—que la sécurité routière n’est pas un luxe; c’est essentiel pour la vie.

Il est temps que le gouvernement prenne la vie des gens du Nord au sérieux.

Ontario Veterans Award for Community Service Excellence

Mr. Matthew Rae: I rise today to recognize and celebrate the recipients of the Ontario Veterans Award for Community Excellence in my riding of Perth–Wellington. This is the first year Royal Canadian Legions across Ontario could nominate worthy veterans and Legion members for this prestigious award. This award honours individuals for exceptional and ongoing service to their communities, such as work to help veterans reintegrate into civilian life, supporting those dealing with ongoing mental or physical injuries, or other broader community-building initiatives.

In Perth–Wellington, I was pleased to recognize and congratulate the following individuals: Thomas Jenkins of St. Marys, Marg Heinmiller of Palmerston, Gordon Miller of Milverton, Gerry Rattray of Listowel, George Gae of Harriston and Ken Thompson of Mount Forest.

In particular, I want to highlight Marg and Gordon on receiving this award. They’re both in their 100th year of life, and they’re also both World War II veterans. Marg and Gordon transitioned from service to our country to a lifetime of service in their communities. We can never repay them for their service and all the work they have done to build Ontario and Canada.

Congratulations to all the Ontario Veterans Award for Community Service Excellence recipients across Perth–Wellington. And Speaker, we will remember them.

Highway safety

Mr. John Vanthof: Last week, Crawford Nickel deposit was named a project of national significance. That’s great news for our area. But there’s one thing about the Crawford Nickel project: Do you know how you have to get there? You get there on Highway 11. Highway 11 from North Bay to Cochrane was closed 30 times from January to September. We’ve got—

Interjections.

Mr. John Vanthof: It was closed yesterday as well.

We’ve got the Minister of Northern Development in Timmins, we’ve got the Minister of Economic Development in North Bay, and somehow, we can’t get that

section of highway fixed or keep it open.

And it’s not just Crawford; there’s so many mining developments there. There’s Agnico Eagle, Detour Lake, Alamos Gold. It is the engine of Ontario. The Trans-Canada Highway to get to that area of national significance needs to be a highway of national standards. It needs to be fixed, to be brought up to the 21st century so we can help drive this province.

Government investments

Mr. Robert Bailey: It’s an honour to rise in the Legislature today to share more great news about how the government of Ontario is investing in the future of my riding, Sarnia–Lambton. Madam Speaker, the Southwestern Ontario Development Fund is an important funding program that provides support for projects and investments to businesses, municipalities and not-for-profit organizations for economic development in southwestern Ontario.

I was very pleased to recently share with the mayor of Sarnia that the Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade, on behalf of the government of Ontario, is investing up to $1.5 million from the Southwestern Ontario Development Fund in the ongoing development of the successful Sarnia Business and Research Park. This investment will help the city of Sarnia to complete the installation of servicing infrastructure for approximately 20 acres of city-owned business park.

This includes completing earthworks, installing underground services such as water, sewer, natural gas and electricity, as well as installing a new access road to the property. Upon completion, the shovel-ready property will be primed for future development, supporting future job and residential growth on the east side of the city of Sarnia.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the government of Ontario and the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade for their important investment in the future of Sarnia–Lambton.

Nancy Dewar

MPP Paul Vickers: Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize one of my hardest-working constituents, Mrs. Nancy Dewar. Nancy, who is with us in the gallery today, is Ontario’s recipient of the 2025 Council of the Federation Literacy Award, recognizing adult learners.

The first word in the phrase “adult learning” is “adult,” and this is not a fluke. While pursuing their educational dreams, they must also manage adult responsibilities such as family lives, their jobs and the other joys of adulthood.

Nancy’s journey is no exception. After years of running her own business, Nancy dealt with health setbacks that included a battle with cancer. But that didn’t stop her. In fact, it ignited a passion. Wanting to become a nurse, Nancy enrolled in the academic upgrade course at Georgian College in Owen Sound, and then, just this spring, she graduated from the RPN program. While returning to school was challenging at first, it was a challenge she embraced. Nancy made the most of her college journey, even finding time to don the grizzly bear costume as the school’s mascot at events.

Today, Nancy serves our community through her home care business, serving many families in in my riding.

I want to congratulate you, Nancy, and thank you for being an inspiration to adult students in this great province. Welcome to your House.

Illuminate the Season with ARCH

MPP Chris Scott: I rise as the proud member of provincial Parliament for Sault Ste. Marie to shine a light on an event that truly reflects the heart of our community. This week, ARCH Hospice will host its fifth annual Illuminate the Season, a celebration that brings holiday cheer, music, lights and togetherness to our city, at the Machine Shop. From skating with Santa to the Cocoa 5K and Marshmallow Mile, there’s truly something for every age and every family.

I want to take a moment to recognize the remarkable work of ARCH Hospice and their team who, through this event, not only create joy and festive memories but also raise crucial support for our local hospice care. Their commitment ensures that individuals and families across the Algoma district receive compassionate end-of-life care at no cost. That is a gift that extends far beyond the holiday season.

The generosity of local businesses, volunteers and community members who contribute to the silent auction, craft displays and memorial tree shows the strength, kindness and heart of Sault Ste. Marie.

As we look forward to gathering from November 20 to November 23, I encourage all members of our community to participate, celebrate and support this incredible cause. Together, we can illuminate our city not only with lights but with compassion, kindness and the warmth of community spirit.

Thank you to ARCH Hospice for all the work you do.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I’d like to begin by introducing two people who are here visiting from the Hamilton Police Association—I can’t find them, but I know they are here: Jaimi Bannon and Hope Paiva.

Mr. Robert Bailey: I’d like to introduce, from the police service of Sarnia–Lambton, Detective Constable Mark Bennett and Detective Constable Ben Lane, here today from the city of Sarnia. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I’m honoured to introduce the Dante Alighieri Society of Toronto, which is uniting Italian Canadian organizations to strengthen Italian-language education, and supporting growing cultural and economic ties between Ontario and Italy.

As well, I’d like to welcome my two assistants, Joanna Maio and Codruta Rosca, to Queen’s Park today.

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: I’d like to introduce sensational Steve Shier and jazzy Josh Teresinski, police officers from Sault Ste. Marie. They’re here with the association today. They just met with me—and Margie Carlson from the AICO. Welcome to your House.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: Speaker, I have a number of constituents here today.

First of all, I’d like to welcome all Police Association of Ontario members—a special shout-out to Ray Gordon, the new president in Guelph; Jim Turow, fleet manager; and Matt Jotham, past president, treasurer, now PAO board member.

I’d also like to welcome Kim Passmore of Guelph, from the Appraisal Institute of Canada.

Hon. Kevin Holland: Visiting us today from Kakabeka Falls is my good friend Erin Arps. Welcome.

Mr. Tyler Allsopp: I’d like to welcome all the members of the Belleville Police Association: Greg Asimis, Valerie Brady, Anne Brennan-Walsh, Kosta Brindakis, Pat Comeau and Lindsay Elliott. Welcome to your House.

Hon. Rob Flack: I’d like to welcome the St. Thomas Police Association’s Paul Tunks and the London Police Association folks here today: Gary, Gareth, Walter, Oswald and Kyle. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: I want to welcome the Cedar Hollow Public School—Thames Valley District School Board—grade 5 class and their teacher, Sara, virtually, to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

I hope you had a wonderful tour and you learned lots.

MPP Lisa Gretzky: I’d like to welcome special guests to the House today. From the Alzheimer Society of Windsor and Essex County: Sally Bennett Olczak, the CEO; Karen Hall; Lise Dube; Jack Vanderpark; and Pauline Boyle.

I’d also like to welcome members of OSSTF District 9: Erin Roy, president; Andy Adzic, chief negotiator for teachers; and Christine Musson, communications and political action chair.

Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Lee Fairclough: I’d also like to welcome the members who are here with the Alzheimer Society today, including the Ontario CEO, Cathy Barrick, and the Toronto CEO, Dave Spedding. Welcome to your House.

MPP Bill Rosenberg: I’d like to recognize, in the gallery, the Elliot Lake municipal contingent. They have Mayor Andrew Wannan; Deputy Mayor Charles Flintoff; director of finance, Andrew Ault; director of economic development, Steve Antunes; and public affairs, Dion Ahwai.

MPP George Darouze: It’s a great pleasure to welcome councillor David Brown, or farmer Brown, as I like to call him, from the city of Ottawa council to Queen’s Park today.

I’d also like to welcome Carleton constituents Gino Melito and Richard Gardner, both members of my riding association.

Also, from the Police Association of Ontario: Matt Cox, Leslie McCarthy and their colleagues.

Welcome to your House.

Hon. Sam Oosterhoff: We have a number of folks who are here from the Niagara police association today: Adam Kitson, Kristen Hansen, Robin Bleich, Sandy Mackay, Sarah Diamond and Scott Kraushar. Thank you so much for being here. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Natalia Kusendova-Bashta: Today, we are wearing pins to remember those who no longer can. I would like to welcome the CEO of the Alzheimer Society of Ontario, Cathy Barrick, and all of the representatives from the Alzheimer Society of Ontario.

Mr. Will Bouma: I’d like to welcome to the House Brantford Police Association members Jeremy Morton and David Minutillo, and, watching from home, Carol Ann Sloat. Have a great day.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I’d like to welcome to Queen’s Park the Ontario Association of Medical Radiation Sciences. Welcome.

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: I’d like to welcome David Opiola today and members of Catholic educators that are here.

Ms. Sandy Shaw: I’d like to welcome, from the Hamilton Police Association, Jaimi Bannon, Wes Wilson, Derek Donn and Hope Paiva. I’m looking forward to meeting with you this afternoon.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): We have time for one more: London North Centre.

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: It gives me great pleasure to welcome members of the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario: Mark MacLeod, Nathan Core, Kim Douglas, Lori Ridley, Jennifer Hillner, Sue Varley, Marnie Meloche, Scott Hardie, Dale Napier and Rob Hammond. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

House sittings

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

Hon. Steve Clark: Thanks, Speaker. Point of order: I’d just like to announce to the House that the night sitting scheduled for this evening has been cancelled.

Question Period

Government accountability

Ms. Marit Stiles: Good morning, everybody, and good morning, Speaker. I want to say how moved I am to see so many people here in the gallery today defending democracy.

Yesterday, the minister changed his tune and started blaming civil servants for his own mess with the Skills Development Fund. Up until now, he has stood in this chamber and he has justified hand-picking low-scoring applicants to that fund because they met his government’s so-called priorities.

Let me just say this: It was not civil servants that were sitting in rink-side seats at a Leafs game with executives or sipping champagne in Paris with lobbyists who cashed in or raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars in political donations. It was this Minister of Labour.

To the Premier: Why is this Minister of Labour blaming civil servants when he clearly made the decision to reward Keel Digital Solutions?

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

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, that’s incorrect. Our ministry officials play a critical role in safeguarding the integrity of the Skills Development Fund. Together, we’ve built strong backstops. Being responsible for applicant approvals, which I am, is not in contradiction with having important stopgaps in place. It highlights the robust internal risk assessment processes we have for this program.

When that member talks about these projects, what she’s saying is projects that are supporting our first responders with better training, better mental health support; projects supporting the Carpenters’ Regional Council and the joint application they submitted for all of their locals across Ontario that are helping a next generation of skilled tradesmen and women.

It’s not surprising they don’t support them because they don’t support building. They don’t support building the critical infrastructure that we’re building. Whether it’s new nuclear, whether it’s highways, roads and bridges, they vote against every measure.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Back to the Premier: This minister went on live radio and he bragged about hand-picking Keel Digital Solutions and their like. The Toronto Star, they got their hands on the government’s scorecards, and they have confirmed it: Low-scoring applications like Keel received bigger payouts than the higher-scoring applications.

The Auditor General confirmed that civil servants were overruled routinely by this minister and his political staff. Is the minister blaming civil servants simply because the company is now under police investigation?

Hon. David Piccini: As I said, being responsible for applicant approvals, which I am, and having a stopgap procedure in place are not in contradiction to one another, but rather speaks to the important processes we have in place.

What that member is against is supporting first responders with better training through our Skills Development Fund. What she’s against, and what she’s highlighted, is the Carpenters’ Regional Council. Or let’s talk about the operating engineers, another project highlighted in that article. Operating engineers for the cranes in the skyline—we wouldn’t have any cranes if it was up to them. They don’t want to build. They’re against Highway 413 and they’re against the Bradford Bypass.

Just this week, I was at Union Station, where we saw cranes in the air making improvements to our Metrolinx fleet. They’re against those measures. They don’t support our public transit expansion.

But they have an opportunity to support us with the fall economic statement, to invest in infrastructure and invest in better training. I hope they’ll take that chance.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: First he’s hiding behind unions, dragging their names through the mud; now he’s hiding behind workers in the civil service. The one thing this minister will not do is take responsibility for the mess that he has created. I have been asking these questions for five weeks now, and the Premier doesn’t even do us one and get up and answer a question.

Speaker, bills are being rammed through this Legislature. It is the donors and the lobbyists that are connected to this government; it is the strip clubs and the numbered companies, it is the endless grift of an anti-democratic and, yes, corrupt government—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order. Order.

I will ask the member to withdraw.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, I will not.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I am warning the member.

The member has been named. You will have to leave the chamber.

Ms. Stiles was escorted from the chamber.

Education

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Yesterday, student trustees elected by their peers to represent them were very clear: Students do not want Bill 33 to pass. They do not want to have their voices and perspectives shut out of decisions about their education. They do not want government appointees who ignore them. What they want is investments to support programs, provide mental health supports and ensure schools are safe.

Will the Premier listen to Ontario students and vote no on Bill 33?

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

Hon. Paul Calandra: When I speak to students, what they tell me is that they want the highest quality of education possible and they want the opportunity to succeed. What they don’t want is a system that puts them at conflict with their teachers, that puts parents at conflict with their teachers. What they don’t want is trustees who go out into the community and sow dissension in favour of their own pet projects.

Madam Speaker, I am hopeful and I am very confident that in a very short while, Bill 33 will pass this Legislature and we will have the opportunity to once again put the Ontario education system on the right path, building on the successes of previous ministers to ensure that not only are our students succeeding, but our teachers have the resources that they need to give our students the ultimate opportunity to succeed, not only for today, but for tomorrow.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Ottawa West–Nepean.

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Well, if this government won’t show students some respect, perhaps they’ll respect parents, because they’ve also been very clear: In just 19 hours and despite this government’s attempt to sneak Bill 33 into law without parents having any chance to say what they think about it, more than 55,000 people across the province sent government MPPs emails asking them not to support this bill. Parents don’t want to lose their right to have a say. They don’t want decisions to be made in the dark behind closed doors. They don’t want hand-picked Conservative insiders who are paid $350,000 a year to ignore them.

Will the Premier listen to parents and vote no on Bill 33?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Guilty, Madam Speaker: I sneakily introduced this seven months ago and put it on the order paper. I sneakily went across the entire province and met with hundreds of parents and hundreds of teachers. I sneakily went and met with school board chairs; I met with the police associations.

I’m telling you what we’re going to do. What the NDP are doing and what the Liberals are doing is, they are supporting a system that was created in the one-room-schoolhouse era. You know what has to happen? We have to reinvigorate our school system, building on the successes of previous ministers to bring our curriculum back in order.

In a very short period of time, members will be able to get up in this House and vote in favour of Bill 33. What that will allow us to do is put school boards back on track when they go off the rails. What the NDP and the Liberals want me to do is allow a board to collapse before I step in, to the benefit of parents. I won’t do that. I’m going to step in earlier. We’ll put boards back on track and put students, parents and teachers first.

No matter how much they whine and complain, we’ll get it done for the students—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Ottawa West–Nepean.

Ms. Chandra Pasma: If this government isn’t going to show students some respect, if they’re not going to show parents some respect, perhaps they will show workers some respect, Speaker. Because yesterday, teachers and education workers were also here with a clear message for this government: Bill 33 is not the solution to the challenges teachers and education workers are facing; it’s a distraction from the real issues. This government’s $6-billion funding cut to education means that workers are paying out of pocket for basic supplies in crowded classrooms in unsafe schools.

The minister’s appointees have also made it very clear that they do not think collective bargaining agreements need to be respected, despite the fact that collective bargaining is a charter-protected right.

Will the Premier respect the people who work in our schools every single day and vote no on Bill 33?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Madam Speaker, listen, I am going to not only hope that all my colleagues vote in favour of Bill 33, I know full well that the parents, teachers and students across this province are excited by what Bill 33 allows us to do.

Not only does it allow us to bring our police back into the schools to ensure that our schools can be safer—let’s talk about her own community. She talks about the supervised boards; we have a supervisor who’s bringing the board back on track. She talks about trustees. What she doesn’t talk about is the fact that trustees in Ottawa in the Ottawa-Carleton board—their budget is $1.4 million.

Their expenses alone were over $440,000, and when they had an opportunity last May to do something about it, they hid the report from the people and said, “We don’t want to talk about it, because if people find out how much we’re spending, they will be angry with us. So let’s continue to spend and let the chaos continue.”

What we did is put them back on track, and we did that for parents, students and teachers—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Question?

Government accountability

Mr. John Fraser: I was at my apartment last night and I was thinking about Christmas. I remember a Christmas when I was about seven years old and I got into my mom’s chocolate chips that she had bought for baking cookies. I ate a lot—I ate a lot, guys—and then I tried to blame it on my sister. I said it was Missy. But my mom was smart; she didn’t buy it. But kids learn. You learn that you take responsibility, and you don’t try to blame others. Apparently, the minister didn’t have the same Christmas experience that I had, and he tried to blame the deputy yesterday for the rot that is the Skills Development Fund.

My question to the minister is, why didn’t he learn that lesson and why is he still in his job?

Hon. David Piccini: That’s incorrect. What I illustrated yesterday and what I will again illustrate today is that being responsible for application approvals, which I am, and having a stopgap and procedures in place, working with our valued ministry officials, is not in contradiction. It’s something we do together to continue to strengthen the integrity of this program, something I’ve outlined.

Speaker, this program is supporting our first responders with better training. This program is supporting men and women in our construction sector on the front lines of building. It’s supporting breaking down barriers for newcomers to receive training to enter the workforce, and we’re proud of it.

I spoke about the carpenters’ project. I spoke about operating engineers in my previous answer. I’ll also speak about the incredible training I saw with LIUNA Local 183. I met Lewis, who’s a graduate of Oaks Revitalization. Thanks to those skills, he’s now paying taxes, a proud member of 183 and he’s working on the Bridgecon project on Rosedale Valley Road. That’s what we’re doing, Speaker. We’re actually building real things—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the leader of the third party.

Mr. John Fraser: Let’s think about this. The civil servants scored the project low because the company is going to buy the software from itself, which is, if any of you don’t know, called an in-and-out. That’s what we call that: That’s an in-and-out. And so they said, “Don’t do it,” but the minister decided to override it—not the deputy, not anybody else, maybe the Premier, but it was the minister. I don’t know why he’s forgotten that he did that because his friend was lobbying for the company where he overrode the advice of the public servants.

There’s something called ministerial responsibility, Minister. Why aren’t you taking that now?

Hon. David Piccini: I absolutely accept that, Speaker. I said being responsible for applicant approvals is something I am. But also, having stopgap procedures and robust procedures in place, working with ministry officials, isn’t in contradiction. They work complementary. That’s the value of this program.

We’re continuing to improve it. We’re making investments—investments in building a stronger Ontario, in nation-building at a time when we’re seeing uncertain economic headwinds, when workers want to know that we’re going to be able to build the critical infrastructure we need.

SMRs alone—I mean, we heard in the fall economic statement that SMRs alone, 18,000 workers. They don’t have a plan for those workers. We do. We’re expanding training across Ontario, investing in unionized training halls, non-unionized training, investing in our colleges, expanding our construction spots so that young men and women in Ontario can have a future, can join an apprenticeship, can build Ontario—an Ontario that they didn’t build. They didn’t build any long-term-care homes. They didn’t build hospitals. In fact, they closed schools in communities like mine. We’re building—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the leader of the third party for final supplementary.

Mr. John Fraser: First of all, you don’t have a youth jobs plan, so I don’t think I’d be touting that you’re really working hard. You’re too busy on skills development and rewarding friends and insiders.

The deputy could have stood on the tracks, but he wasn’t going to stop the Premier’s gravy train—the gravy train that rewards insiders, lobbyists like Kory Teneycke, Nico Fidani-Diker or Michael Diamond. We could list more and more and more; you’re so connected. Each time this minister overrode a low-scoring proposal, he was adding another car to the gravy train.

I’ll ask the minister again: Does he understand what ministerial responsibility is, what that means? And why the heck is he still sitting in that seat as that minister?

Hon. David Piccini: Absolutely, Speaker. It means sitting around a cabinet table and talking about SMRs, talking about new nuclear and making sure I have a plan to train the workers to achieve that: the carpenters, the labourers, the steamfitters, the pipefitters, the operating engineers. That’s what my role is, and I’ve highlighted the steps we’ve taken with this program to strengthen its integrity.

I take ministerial responsibility and having important stopgaps in place, working with ministry officials, is not a contradiction. It speaks to the strength of this program. Adding financial audits—something I did, integrating it into our employment management system so we can track long-term outcomes for the men and women building the SMRs, for the men and women building new nuclear, for the men and women on the front lines of our northern strategy to unlock critical minerals.

He mocked it, Speaker. He invoked his wife—all sorts of things to do anything but actually talk about the strategy for the north that’s unleashing prosperity, that’s going to drive a stronger Ontario that can stand on the world stage and be self-sufficient. That’s the Ontario we’re building, Speaker.

Government accountability

Mr. John Fraser: I know we’re not sitting tonight, because it’s the Premier’s skills development gala, which I guess is in Etobicoke at $15,000 a table. That will get you some rubber chicken, a good speech, we’ll say, and then you will get passage on the Premier’s gravy train, that $2.5-billion gravy train. Destination: the Premier’s special $2.5-billion friends and family resort.

Besides the rubber chicken and the good speech—or maybe it will be a great speech—is it true, Minister, that there are actually skills development applications at each place setting?

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, we come to this place to talk about policy, to debate ideas to make a stronger Ontario, programs we’re implementing to increase our youth registration in apprenticeships. And I’m pleased to say, Speaker, it’s working. It’s working for the young men and women entering our trades to build a stronger Ontario. It’s working, our plan to lower taxes to attract investments.

We’re not immune from economic headwinds; we’re not. But what the folks of this province can count on is that we’ve got a Premier who will stand up for first responders, who will get tough on crime, respect law and order; a Premier who is going to build Ontario, unlock our critical minerals, build new nuclear.

They didn’t have a hydro plan. It was just increase the rates on granny and on mom and dad. That was their energy plan. We’re building new nuclear. We’re building new SMRs. In fact, we’re selling those SMRs to the world, all the while ensuring Ontario is an attractive destination for foreign investment. That’s going to create jobs. That’s our plan—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the leader of the third party.

Mr. John Fraser: I think it’s fair to stand up when the government is shovelling millions and millions out the door to friends and insiders and lobbyists and donors with no strings attached. I think that’s a fair question, Minister.

A report in the Toronto Star said that the lowest-scoring applications got the highest payouts. Well, Premier, this isn’t the skills development golf tournament. You don’t get more because you scored less. That’s not the way that life works. So obviously there’s some unwritten category that we don’t see the scoring on—or maybe we do. We just have to check the donor list; that’s the place where we have to look.

Minister, life just doesn’t work that way. The rot that is this $2.5-billion Premier’s club is something that you have responsibility for, Minister. Take responsibility.

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, it’s incorrect. There are transfer payment agreements full of all of these accountability measures.

Let’s talk about some of the projects he’s referencing. He doesn’t want to actually name them, Speaker. He doesn’t want to name operating engineers; he doesn’t want to name carpenters, their project that’s supporting their locals all over Ontario. He doesn’t want to name them because he doesn’t support building. He had an opportunity to put cranes in the air, an opportunity to train the next generation of crane operators, heavy-equipment operators. They didn’t take up the mantle because they didn’t build. They didn’t build a stronger Ontario. They watched while apprenticeships declined. They pulled trades out of our high schools.

We’re bringing it back. We’re bringing back trades classes in our high schools. We’re investing in new machinery. We’re supporting new training in every corner of this province that’s giving people real, hands-on experience to join a trade, a career for life. Speaker, we’re proud of that, because those are the key building blocks to building a stronger Ontario.

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

Mr. John Fraser: I think we’re at the point right now that if the minister said it’s 3 o’clock, we’d all be checking our watch. Because it’s unbelievable that the minister can say that when he gave money to a company that was already in forensic audit—so did the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, and so did the Minister of Health. What the heck is going on over there?

We weren’t born yesterday, and this $2.5-billion Premier’s club that has its special rewards program known as the Skills Development Fund—the members, you’ll see them all there tonight: the donors, the insiders, the lobbyists, like Nico Fidani-Diker, Amin Massoudi, Michael Diamond. And he won’t be giving the speech tonight, but the shadow Premier, the man behind the curtain, Kory Teneycke—maybe he’s the mastermind behind all this—will be there.

How does this government actually justify the people who scored the lowest doing the absolute best? Give us a good reason.

Hon. David Piccini: I sit around a cabinet table, and I look to a Minister of Infrastructure making a $200-billion commitment. I look to a Minister of Energy building SMRs and new nuclear. My job is to make sure we’re supporting programs that ensure the next generation of men and women who can work on the front lines.

The other day I was at OPG. I got the privilege to join a graduation ceremony for millwrights. Introduction to millwrighting—their pathways program is doing incredible work getting a next generation of young millwrights. I met a young lad from Port Hope, from Cobourg, from Hiawatha First Nation in my own community; they’re excited to be on the front line.

We stand with these workers, and these workers stand with us. They stood with us in the last election because they know when it comes to building a stronger Ontario—massive nation-building projects that will put their members to work—they can count on this Premier and this government.

University and college funding

Will the Premier listen to post-secondary students and vote no to Bill 33?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Minister of Colleges and Universities.

Hon. Nolan Quinn: Under the leadership of Premier Ford, our government has taken another step to promote fairness, transparency and integrity across the province’s post-secondary sector.

That’s why, if Bill 33 is passed, we’re going to require colleges and universities to make fees transparent to students and their families, so they understand detailed breakdowns on how the tuition fees are being used. As well, we’re going to make sure that merit-based admissions are clearly articulated to all students. On top of that, we want to make sure that research security plans are clear and secure moving forward.

But as we always have, we’re going to consult with the sector once, and if, Bill 33 is passed to ensure that the regulations are implemented in a way that does not disrupt the delivery of Ontario’s world-class education and supports that students rely upon.

Speaker, unlike the previous Liberal government, we will always stand up for the students and the hard-working families—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Member for London West.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: The minister should be aware that student fees are already transparent, and that students are already admitted on the basis of merit.

Meanwhile, our post-secondary sector is in crisis: Hundreds of programs have been cut, and entire campuses are closing. Almost 10,000 jobs have been lost at Ontario colleges. Services are being reduced in academic counselling, career services and work-integrated learning. Some 80,000 domestic students won’t be able to get a seat at an Ontario university because the government isn’t providing the funding. Meanwhile, youth unemployment is at record highs and post-secondary students are struggling to pay tuition, rent and groceries.

Why is this government pushing ahead with bad legislation that is only going to make it harder for young people to succeed in this province?

Hon. Nolan Quinn: Through you, Speaker, I’m not too sure why that member has an issue with transparency. I’ve heard from students; I’ve heard from families. They want transparency, and they really want to understand where their ancillary fees are going.

That member mentioned 80,000—let’s mention the 100,000 new, funded seats that we brought online through budget 2025. That member voted against that budget.

Speaker, $750 million went to 20,000 newly funded STEM seats, on top of $75 million for construction-related seats; 7,800 new seats for construction and another 2,200 new seats for nursing—a $56-million investment, on top of the 2,600 new seats that we have for teachers.

Speaker, we’re going to continue being there for the sector, but we’ll continue bringing new seats online, like the 100,000 newly funded seats we just brought through budget 2025.

I wish that member would support our budget, support our legislation, because we’re going to, ultimately, continue to be there for the sector and understand where the fees are being used.

Government accountability

Mrs. Karen McCrimmon: This past constituency week I had the pleasure of speaking with students, and it reminded me that people learn at different speeds and in different ways. So I’m going to help the government, and I’m going to make a few things perfectly clear for them. Training workers is good. Manipulating funding to reward donors and friends: bad. Having a clear process and priorities: good. A minister interfering to favour low-scoring applications: bad. More women in construction trades: good. Giving millions of dollars to a strip club owner: bad.

Speaker, I would like to ask the Associate Minister of Women’s Social and Economic Opportunity what kind of economic opportunity does she expect women to find in a strip club?

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

Hon. David Piccini: Let’s talk about opportunity, good opportunity for young men and women of this province. People do learn at different paces, different rates etc. It’s something they failed to recognize when they held the balance of power in this place. They closed schools in every corner of this province. They shut down trades programming that empowered the very women she claims to want to support.

But the reality of the matter is, we’re breaking down those barriers for young men and women to enter rewarding careers. Whether it’s in hospitality; a workers’ training centre, where we went just the other day with Unite Here, a majority of women who we’re supporting with training through the Skills Development Fund; or whether it’s young women registering for apprenticeships. The fact of the matter is, stats matter, and our stats are up for young women registering as apprentices. They watched while those numbers dwindled under their leadership.

Under Premier Ford, we’re expanding those opportunities, creating meaningful opportunities for young men and women—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Kanata–Carleton.

Mrs. Karen McCrimmon: It looks like the minister knows that this is indefensible. My question once again to the Associate Minister of Women’s Social and Economic Opportunity: How is giving tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to a strip club owner the best we can do for young women in this province?

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

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: It’s very troubling, as a woman who has agency over her own body, to hear the Liberals come across and say that. It’s really troubling. Sex work is work, and we shouldn’t be discriminating against women and the work they have to do or choose to do in order to stay safe.

Our government is investing heavily to ensure that women have the supports and the resources to ensure that they can get work in Ontario. We just announced over $8 million to women-serving organizations that are training women in the trades. Through the Skills Development Fund, our government funds over 58 organizations that are helping women get into jobs that pay well. We are making extreme changes because we know that when women are financially independent, women are safer. Women are a major, major impact to our economy. So I—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: I think it’s very disappointing that the members opposite are—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: —the work that we’re doing to make sure women have opportunities and resources, something that the Liberals did not do when they were in government.

Energy policies

Mr. Stéphane Sarrazin: My question is for the Minister of Energy and Mines. People across Ontario are worried about growing economic threats. They see rising tensions, they see tariff risks, and they see the danger that Donald Trump’s decisions could pose on our workers and industries.

Speaker, our government is taking real steps to protect Ontario. We are building new reactors, we are training more workers, we are growing our clean energy leadership so we can stand strong no matter what happens outside of our borders. These are nation-building projects that protect jobs and keep our province secure.

Speaker, can the Minister explain how advancing Ontario’s energy leadership is helping protect workers and keeping our economy strong?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Before I recognize the Minister, can we keep the sidebar conversations down a little bit? Just lower the volume. Thank you.

I recognize the Minister of Energy.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: I want to thank the member from Glengarry–Prescott–Russell for the question and appreciate fully that we’ve been doubling down on our nuclear advantage in Ontario.

It started a few weeks ago in Nova Scotia, when the Premier of Nova Scotia signed a deal with Ontario to collaborate in the development of our small modular reactor. The next day, we were in New Brunswick, where Ontario secured a $60-million deal to help improve the nuclear assets of that province, improving the productivity of the Point Lepreau nuclear facility.

The next week we were in Belgium, where we secured a new export opportunity with that government, turning back to nuclear power and signing on with our SMR for potential deployment in that nation and with that ally. That builds on our relationships and our contracts in place with Poland and Estonia: 24 SMRs secured to date. I know the Minister of Long-Term Care is excited about the Polish advancement.

But let us be clear. We’re investing in clean tech, we’re supporting the supply chain benefits, we’re creating jobs and we’re standing up for Canadian workers.

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

Mr. Stéphane Sarrazin: Thank you to the minister for his response.

Families remember the state our energy system was left in after years of Liberal mismanagement. Bills went up, investment went down and the system was pushed to the breaking point because of a failure of leadership.

Our government is rebuilding what they broke. We are lowering costs, we are improving efficiency and we are making smart choices that keep energy affordable while building the strong, reliable system people need. Families want to know that the lights will stay on and their energy costs will remain stable as demand grows.

Can the minister explain how our government is keeping energy affordable while strengthening the reliable system Ontario families depend on?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: This morning, I joined the member from Eglinton–Lawrence, the parliamentary assistant, and the associate minister to launch and expand Ontario’s energy savings program. This is the largest energy efficiency program in Canadian history, the first phase of which has now already overly achieved our metric of success. We’ve removed 200 megawatts from the grid, the equivalent of removing a town of 200,000 people.

We have now, today, announced we’re going to be expanding this program to save more money for Ontario families and ratepayers. This program is going to help reduce costs and introduce new rebates for refrigerators, freezers and laundry machines, the appliances everyday families need as we think about the holidays.

Our government is committed to reducing bills, reducing the peak demand on the grid and ultimately reducing emissions. And I think we’ve achieved the win-win-win outcome here that’s going to save families money. They can check out saveonenergy.ca today and save money that they deserve.

Immigrants’ skills

MPP Alexa Gilmour: Speaker, through you to the Minister of Labour and Immigration: The minister’s mass rejection of all skilled trade OINP workers has left hundreds of workers and their families in crisis. More than 200 of them are here today in the galleries and outside—people who followed every rule, paid every fee, built their lives on Ontario’s word.

And some of them have learned, if you can believe this, through freedom-of-information requests that the minister’s senior staff already verified their documents, interviewed them and approved them for nomination before your minister rejected them anyway.

To the minister: Will this minister look them in the eyes and explain why their lives have been upended despite doing everything right?

Hon. David Piccini: We need an immigration system with integrity that supports young men and women who want to build a future here. And I recognize that when we had our allocation cut by 50% by the federal government, we had already invited folks to apply. And then when officials looked—and we look as a team at the program—in our skilled trade stream, fewer than one in two were actually continuing within that career, so we offered the opportunity for those registered in active apprenticeships to apply. They were processed and were moved through.

For those who’ve been rejected, Speaker, they also have the employer job offer stream that they can apply through. They’re still in the Ontario Immigrant Nominee Program and they’re able to apply through other streams, like Employer Job Offer.

Citizenship is a privilege; citizenship is not a right. This side of the House will continue to fight for a robust system with integrity, advocate for expanded allocation and autonomy from the federal government and find meaningful pathways for people who want to contribute to our economic success.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member from Parkdale–High Park.

MPP Alexa Gilmour: These individuals already have jobs and employers who are counting on them. These workers are scared. Their employers are scared. Their families are scared. And now they are facing racist backlash online and in person because of the minister’s blanket statement. It is unjust, and it is profoundly un-Canadian.

To the minister: Will you commit to reinstate their applications, securing extensions to their work permits and give each worker the fair, individual assessment they deserve and were promised?

Hon. David Piccini: When officials see inaccurate payrolls, sudden promotions or job