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

September 28, 2016

41st Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2016-Sep-28 (PDF)

L009 - Wed 28 Sep 2016 / Mer 28 sep 2016

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Wednesday 28 September 2016 Mercredi 28 septembre 2016

Time allocation

Promoting Affordable Housing Act, 2016 / Loi de 2016 sur la promotion du logement abordable

Introduction of Visitors

Shimon Peres

British Home Child Day

Oral Questions

Hydro rates

Energy policies

Privatization of public assets

Privatization of public assets

Prescription drug abuse

Renewable energy

Research and innovation

Home care

Minimum wage

North American Indigenous Games

Personal support workers

Personal support workers

Condominium legislation

Public transit

Ring of Fire

Visitors

Deferred Votes

Time allocation

Members’ Statements

Propane industry

School transportation

TransCare Community Support Services

Community events

Bear control

Shimon Peres

BlackBerry

Community Health and Wellbeing Week

St. Mary’s General Hospital

Visitors

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

Seniors

Petitions

Hydro rates

Privatization of public assets

Water fluoridation

Hydro rates

Employment standards

Public transit

Hydro rates

Hospital funding

Water fluoridation

Hydro rates

Midwifery

Hydro rates

Orders of the Day

Election Finances Statute Law Amendment Act, 2016 / Loi de 2016 modifiant des lois en ce qui concerne le financement électoral

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Good morning. Please join me in prayer.

Prayers.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

Time allocation

Resuming the debate adjourned on September 27, 2016, on the motion for allocation of time on the following bill:

Bill 13,

An Act in respect of the cost of electricity / Projet de loi 13, Loi concernant le coût de l’électricité.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Further debate?

Mr. Michael Mantha: It’s always an honour to stand on behalf of the good people of Algoma–Manitoulin. On this one, Mr. Speaker, really, I don’t need any notes because it is a time allocation bill and it is on an issue that is near and dear, and frustrating a lot of people across my riding. People are finding themselves challenged, day in and day out, to make ends meet. People are finding themselves trying to express their views to the Liberal government. However, once again, what we’re dealing with here this morning is exactly what people are frustrated with: that they are not being heard.

They are not being provided with the opportunity to shout out how frustrated they are with the direction this government has taken. And, again, with this time allocation on this particular bill, it expresses the true sentiments of what a lot of people in this province here are feeling.

I want to just highlight a particular individual out of my riding of Algoma–Manitoulin. There are many individuals across Ontario who have taken up initiatives, who have taken up actions, who have gone forward and signed on to petitions, but I want to highlight one particular person: Her name is Tanya Giles. She comes from Manitoulin Island. One person decided and said, “I am going to be a difference maker. I am going to spread the message. I am going to initiate an action.

I am going to create a discussion so that individuals across Manitoulin Island will be able to express themselves so that we, together”—and just so you know, Mr. Speaker, I presented her petition in the House just the week before last. She, on her own, managed to pull together almost 1,900 signatures on Manitoulin Island in order for them to express their views of disappointment by directing this petition to the wrong-headed direction that this government is taking with the sale of Hydro One.

That is one individual who said, “I am going to stand on my feet, make my voice heard and do something for my community, my neighbours and my area.” That is commendable; it is remarkable.

The problem with that, Mr. Speaker, is too many people are in that position in order to have their voices heard and make sure that their views are being expressed here at Queen’s Park. What happens is it creates a disconnect, because a lot of them have been voicing their disapproval of the direction this government is going in, with the continued wrong-headed decision of the privatization and the sale of Hydro One.

A lot of people have been asking this government, “Get off of that direction. It is not reflecting what we want. We didn’t vote for this. We are disappointed with the direction of the Kathleen Wynne government. We don’t want this to proceed. We see what is happening to our hydro bills day in and day out, each and every month. We are struggling, and you are not listening to us. You are not hearing our cries for help.”

So we get a step in the right direction—and I will say it’s a step in the right direction—but that step was never necessary. We should never have had to take that step, which is removing the HST off of home heating, because it should have never been part of our hydro costs.

Those are some of the things that individuals across my riding of Algoma–Manitoulin are extremely frustrated with. Again, this is not something that people are going to let go. It will be there now, it will be there tomorrow and it will be there in 2018 when this government comes to judgment.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paul Miller): Further debate?

Mr. Percy Hatfield: I guess when you can’t stand the heat, you get out of the kitchen, as the old saying goes, and with time allocation, you’re certainly getting out of the kitchen.

For six years, the Liberals under Premiers McGuinty and Wynne have been taking away 8% of the total of our hydro bills. Now the heat in the kitchen is getting so hot they’re making a big deal out of giving us a rebate of our own money. Premier Wynne thinks she can fool us into believing she’s doing it not for political reasons. It has nothing to do with having the pants scared off her when Conservative Raymond Cho stole what was considered a safe Liberal seat in Scarborough–Rouge River.

You see, Speaker, Toronto has been the bread and butter of the McGuinty-Wynne Liberals. That’s where the core of their supporters are, coming from the greater Toronto area. But when the chickens come home to roost and there’s a new rooster in the henhouse and he’s blue—he’s not red—well, they finally sit up and take notice.

We’ve been saying for months that the voters in Ontario are unhappy. They’re unhappy with time allocation. They’re unhappy when hydro rates are out of control; hydro bills are going up again in November. I guess the Wynne government was busy with other matters and wasn’t really listening to what was going on. She wasn’t listening to the rest of the province, as we have been. Now when the voters in her own backyard kicked her in the pants, well, all of a sudden we’re getting 8% of our own money back. I represent Windsor–Tecumseh. This 8% in the HST, the PST, was brought in by the person I replaced, Dwight Duncan, the former Liberal finance minister.

As you know, Speaker, New Democrats argued against this from day one. We said it should not have been put on hydro bills. It’s an essential commodity. In fact, I was blown away when the Minister of Agriculture stood up here in the House last week or the week before and said that philosophically, he was always opposed to it. Imagine that. He was always opposed to having the HST, the Ontario portion, charged on electricity rates, and he was a member of the cabinet. I don’t know who he was expressing his displeasure to. Whatever happened, it didn’t waft out anyplace else.

I don’t know if other cabinet ministers opposed it, if they told the Premier that. I don’t think they made it much of a public issue until now, when they realize that everybody else in Ontario is dead set against it. Now they’re saying, “I’ve always been against it myself.” I don’t know, Speaker. It comes down to believability. It comes down to principle, I guess.

They put it on as a cash grab. No way did New Democrats support it then; we don’t support it now. We knew the impact it would have on families in Ontario, on our senior citizens in Ontario and on our small business communities. Oh, we huffed and we puffed, of course, but we couldn’t blow down that big red Liberal House or the blue House up in Ottawa, for that matter, at that time. The HST on hydro bills was imposed by the Harper Conservatives and the McGuinty Liberals. Do the math. Premier Wynne was a member of that government, and the leader of the official opposition, Mr.

Brown, was a member of the Harper Conservative government at that time when they started charging the HST on Ontario’s hydro bills. We tried to tell them it was a mistake. They wouldn’t listen then; they’re not listening now.

A lot of people thought it was a terrible idea. A lot of people today say to the federal government, if they’re doing it in Ontario, take it off in Ottawa and the Canadian portion as well. It only makes sense. If it’s not good enough for the ratepayers in Ontario, it shouldn’t be good enough that we have to pay the federal portion of it either. What are we waiting for? These are their federal Liberal cousins. They said they now had a friend in Ottawa. Well, it’s time for that friend to step forward and maybe give us a high-five. It doesn’t always work with the royal family; maybe it’ll work with the Wynne Liberal government. We’ll have to see.

I have to say that the political leadership we’re seeing on this bill leaves one to question what’s really going on. I think they’re trying to duck and cover on this, cover their—well, I’ll leave it up to you, Speaker, to determine what parts of their political philosophy or anatomy they’re trying to cover with this bill. Behind the headlines, behind the motivation, there is a bottom line: It’s the sudden realization that they’re in political trouble. What’s the least they can do now? That’s right: This is the very least they can do now, as they try to duck and cover.

If they really meant it—as the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs has said that politically, philosophically, he has always been opposed to it—they shouldn’t have charged it in the first place. They should be calling Ottawa and telling the Prime Minister their new views on this.

Of course, the political difference is, on this side of the House, where we’ve always opposed it, we’ve stood in place and said, loud and clear, “Don’t do it.”

It was wrong to charge Ontario residents 8% on their hydro bills, just as it’s wrong now to bring in time allocation on this bill to shut down debate as we bring forth the views of people across this province. It was wrong in 2010 to charge it. It was wrong in 2011. It was wrong in 2012. It was wrong in 2013. It was wrong in 2014. It was wrong in 2015. And it’s wrong today. It’s unnecessary to wait till 2017 for the rebate. Do it now. Take it off. Just stop it. Do the right thing. If it’s wrong, it’s not right. And if it’s not right, don’t do it.

Don’t keep charging struggling families in Ontario a tax that you now say is no longer necessary. Don’t charge them and give them a rebate. Kill that tax. Tell the Liberal Prime Minister in Ottawa to kill that tax. Stop this time allocation. Let the people on this side of the House stand up and have their say on what you’ve been doing wrong over there. And you’ve been doing it wrong ever since you brought in this sales tax on an essential commodity.

There’s another by-election coming up in Niagara West–Glanbrook. You’re not going to win there if you don’t kill that tax today. You haven’t got a chance there if you don’t kill that tax today. So when are you going to learn your lesson?

There was a story in yesterday’s Windsor Star about hydro rates. One of Windsor’s most prominent business owners is quoted in the story by Grace Macaluso. Terry Rafih is the CEO of the Rafih Auto Group. He sits on the board of our regional economic development commission. And this goes to time allocation, Speaker. He says he opened his hydro bill last month and he almost choked—almost choked, Speaker. His quote is: “I saw this bill for $21,000 for one month.” That’s $21,000 for 31 days. He almost choked when he read the bill. Next to his labour costs, hydro and natural gas are his second-highest costs, and he says they’re out of control. Thank you, Terry Rafih.

We know they’re out of control. I had an email just this week, Speaker, from a mushroom farmer in my area. He brings in mushrooms; he ships most of them across the border; a lot of them are organic. Denis Vidmar is his name. He brings in thousands of fresh mushrooms six days a week; most are grown organically, and he ships them across the border to Whole Foods stores in the American Midwest. He’s on Rhodes Drive in Windsor. He opened a warehouse last year. His hydro bills last year were $500 a month—$500. This year: doubled, Speaker.

How do you come up with a business plan and create jobs in Ontario when your hydro bills are doubling year after year after year? This just doesn’t make sense. He wants me to tell him why. My only response is: Ask the Liberals; they’re the ones calling the shots.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paul Miller): Further debate?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I’m happy to rise to participate in this debate and talk specifically about Bill 13, the Ontario Rebate for Electricity Consumers Act, 2016, that would, if passed, put in place an 8% rebate on electricity bills for eligible customers. This legislative framework would put in place the requirement for this rebate to be provided by January 1, 2017, but not the mechanism needed to deliver the program.

With a January 1, 2017, implementation target date, there is a pressing need to provide local distribution companies—your local utilities—and other entities responsible for delivering the rebate to consumers with the details on implementation in order to make the necessary adjustments to their billing and customer information systems. To ensure that all local distribution companies have the time and information required to deliver on the government’s intended rebate of the provincial portion of the HST directly on customer bills in January, there is a pressing need to expedite the legislative approvals.

Updates to the LDC billing systems are time-intensive and, of course, operationally complex. The LDCs are requesting the opportunity to consult with the ministry on the specifics of what billing system changes would be required should the bill be passed. Following consultations, the LDCs will require certainty as to the required changes before adjusting their billing systems.

Certainly for our local utilities, this would include a general regulation that’s made under the Ontario Rebate for Electricity Consumers Act in order to put in place the required mechanisms that would allow for electricity vendors to be reimbursed for the amounts credited to consumer accounts, as well as other important provisions related to payments, reporting requirements and, of course, billing requirements.

Without these regulatory mechanisms, rebates cannot flow from government to utilities and then from, ultimately, the utilities to consumers. The regulation cannot be filed until the act has been passed and the authority to create the regulation has been established.

Mr. Speaker, the Ministry of Energy has already been working with many of these local distribution companies right across our great province of Ontario, as well as the Electricity Distributors Association, the Independent Electricity System Operator—the IESO, as we know them—and the Ontario Energy Board to implement these measures, pending, of course, legislative approvals.

For some LDCs, filing of the regulation will be required before the billing system changes are initiated. Should there be a delay in enacting the program, these LDCs may not have enough time to ensure they are operational for January 1, 2017.

Mr. Speaker, providing the LDCs with program certainty and additional time to implement the 8% rebate program will facilitate a smoother transition on January 1, 2017, and ensure that Ontario consumers receive the 8% rebate in a timely fashion.

It’s important to recognize that this legislation that we’re talking about through the time allocation debate creates a requirement that the rebate be provided but, after its passage—as long as this bill passes—there is much more work to be done to implement it by January 1. These updates—with our local utilities, the distribution companies—those billing systems are quite complex and time-intensive as well, so there’s a pressing need to provide the LDCs and other entities responsible for delivering the rebate to consumers with the details on implementation in order to make the necessary adjustments to their billing and customer information systems.

So, concluding, making sure that we provide the LDCs with program certainty and additional time to implement the 8% rebate program would facilitate a smoother transition on January 1, 2017, and ensure that Ontario consumers receive the 8% rebate in a timely fashion.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paul Miller): Further debate? The member from Lanark—sorry, you don’t have any time left. You’re out of time.

Ms. Sylvia Jones: Well, they’re not going to use theirs.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paul Miller): That’s fine.

Seeing none, Mr. Naqvi has moved notice of motion number 1. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.

All those in favour, please say “aye.”

All those opposed, say “nay.”

I believe the “ayes” have it.

This will be deferred to after question period for the vote.

Vote deferred.

Promoting Affordable Housing Act, 2016 / Loi de 2016 sur la promotion du logement abordable

Mr. Ballard moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 7,

An Act to amend or repeal various Acts with respect to housing and planning / Projet de loi 7, Loi modifiant ou abrogeant diverses lois en ce qui concerne le logement et l’aménagement du territoire.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paul Miller): Now we’ll go to the Minister of Housing and poverty reduction.

Hon. Chris Ballard: I’ll be sharing my time with my parliamentary assistant, the member for Trinity–Spadina.

Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak to Bill 7, the Promoting Affordable Housing Act. I’ve already mentioned that I’ll be sharing my time with the member for Trinity–Spadina, so I’ll move along. The legislation I’ll be speaking to today was originally introduced by our government this past May. I had the privilege of reintroducing it earlier this month as a key plank in a suite of legislative priorities for the government to be achieved over the fall session.

Bill 7, the Promoting Affordable Housing Act, is a landmark piece of legislation that, if passed, is designed to increase housing access and affordability for all Ontarians. Through our Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy and legislation like Bill 7, Ontario is answering the call to provide more affordable housing across the province and end chronic homelessness within our communities by 2025.

Too many Ontarians are struggling to keep a roof over their heads: the homeless teen on the street, the woman fleeing from domestic violence to the safety of a shelter, the young family struggling to make rent, the senior citizens fighting to hold on to a lifetime of memories in a home where those memories happened. We can and must do better for them and every Ontarian.

We know that when people have a home they are healthier, able to pursue employment and equipped to participate in and contribute to their communities. By increasing the tools available to our local partners to improve access to housing, Ontario will continue to be a place where the work of building stronger communities begins at home.

The Promoting Affordable Housing Act, if passed, would amend four existing pieces of legislation: the Housing Services Act, the Residential Tenancies Act, the Planning Act and the Development Charges Act. Its aim is to increase choice by introducing inclusionary zoning, expand existing housing availability by making it easier to develop second units in homes, and encourage small landlords to provide rental housing, all with the goal of increasing affordability and access for Ontarians.

By increasing the flexibility of the housing sector, we can ensure that Ontario families find suitable housing, and keep the most vulnerable from going to sleep without a roof over their head. The member from Trinity–Spadina and I will speak more about these changes in a few moments. But before we do, I’d like to provide some context on the importance of these legislative changes before us.

Bill 7 is a core component of Ontario’s Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy, a strategy that was launched in 2010 by my colleague from the riding of Ancaster–Dundas–Flamborough–Westdale. Entitled Building Foundations: Building Futures, it was the first of its kind in Ontario and, as that member has said previously, recognized that local flexibility with accountability offers the best approach to housing, service delivery and building strong communities. The legacy of that first strategy, Mr. Speaker, is realized each and every day by those who have since embarked on an entirely new life trajectory because of the vision and practical solutions laid out in that strategy.

One of those solutions was consolidating five separate homelessness-related programs into a single flexible outcome-focused program called the Community Homelessness Prevention Initiative, or CHPI for short. The outcome: 30,000 families and individuals who were lifted off the streets and a further 100,000 at-risk households who never had to learn first-hand what it’s like to lose a roof over their heads. I want to thank the member from Ancaster–Dundas–Flamborough–Westdale for his work toward ending chronic homelessness and laying the groundwork for its prevention.

Improving access to affordable housing and ending homelessness, especially youth homelessness, are subjects that I hold near and dear to my heart. I cannot overstate the impact of this work on the lives of those individuals. But I have seen first-hand that there is still far more work to do. As the temperature cools around us here in Ontario, I want to take a moment to tell you about an extraordinary night I spent on the streets of York region, experiencing first-hand what homeless youth from our community go through every winter night.

Some time ago I was participating in the second annual 360°Experience, where community leaders spend a bone-chilling winter night on the streets, each re-enacting real-life 360°kids client scenarios. Organizers wanted us to better understand what homeless youth in York region face every night and to raise funds for a new youth shelter.

My scenario made me a 17-year-old single mom with a baby. It was minus 22 degrees, and the wind picked up as I and my partner, Bruce Bailey, who was then the chair of the organization, headed to the only shelter in York region that could take us in that night: the Blue Door Shelters for families at Leeder Place on Highway 11, north of Newmarket. Bruce and I were given two Viva bus tickets and $3 before being turned out of the 360°kids home base facility on Yonge Street at 8:30 p.m. That’s when that facility closed. Those bus tickets had to get us to the Blue Door Shelter and back.

The $3 was to buy a cup of coffee. We were also shadowed by two volunteers, to ensure we didn’t freeze to death. But I’m pretty sure in real life no one shadowed the 17-year-old mom and her baby we were pretending to be.

Arriving by bus at the Newmarket station, Bruce and I learned that there was no bus to the Leeder Place shelter, a five-kilometre walk north along Highway 11 in the dark and cold. Thankfully, an off-duty security guard took pity on us and drove us to the shelter on his way home. Would the 17-year-old mom and her baby been so lucky? We hope so.

Safely inside the warm and bright facility, Bruce and I learned about Blue Door Shelters, serving York region’s homeless since 1982. We learned that in 2013, the shelters turned away almost 6,000 people because they lacked capacity. We learned that in 2014, Blue Door Shelters provided more than 80,000 meals and close to 28,000 nights of safety to homeless people and families in York region.

Leaving the shelter, we faced a one-hour slog south along Highway 11 in minus-30-degree cold to the bus stop. There were no sidewalks. Thick, uneven ice was underfoot. Lighting was minimal and cars whizzed by dangerously close. Using our second bus ticket, we returned to Richmond Hill and spent the remainder of the night moving from coffee shop to coffee shop. A couple of middle-aged guys with silver hair were allowed to stay as long as they wanted in the early morning hours, but I suspect a young person who is homeless would soon have been told to move along. I’m told that coffee shops, all-night restaurants and bank foyers are favoured warming spots, and we saw that first-hand.

Back at the 360°kids home base, our starting place, we were given a sleeping bag and a tarp and invited to spend the wee hours of the morning sleeping in the deep snow in the backyard until the facility opened at 6 a.m. I’ve done a fair amount of winter camping, and I was well equipped for the temperatures we were in, so digging a trough and curling up into it and falling asleep wasn’t a big problem for me. But I couldn’t help thinking about a 17-year-old mum and her baby: What would she have done on that cold winter night?

What we learned that night was how tough and resilient the youth are who face this life without the support of family or community. When the doors at the 360°kids home base opened and the smell of a hot breakfast wafted out that morning, we all celebrated our survival. There were a lot of high-fives going on until we were asked who wanted to do it again that night and the night after and the night after that, like many young people must. I’ll tell you, it was a sobering moment. The jubilance at making it through the night was quickly gone.

When I’m out late at night now, I pay special attention to the young people in coffee shops. Do they have a place to call home? Does someone care for them? Finally, I wonder about the 17-year-old mum and her baby whose nighttime trip in search of shelter Bruce and I re-enacted. I hope they face a better future. Here in this chamber, we have the power to make that happen.

Ontario took an important step in 2015 to help advance our long-term goal of ending homelessness by striking an Expert Advisory Panel on Homelessness. I was at the table for the launch of the panel that was co-chaired by my colleagues the member from London North Centre and the member for Ancaster–Dundas–Flamborough–Westdale.

As part of our second Poverty Reduction Strategy, the strategy I am now responsible for, Ontario set a long-term goal to end homelessness. The province worked with the expert panel to get practical advice on how to best approach this goal, beginning with ways to define and measure homelessness. With no consistent definition of homelessness or methods for counting the number of people experiencing homelessness in Ontario, defining the problem remained elusive and measuring the success of our programs difficult, so we needed to start at the beginning.

The panel was established to provide expert advice to government on

definitions, enumeration, setting a homelessness-related target and building capacity within that sector. In addition to setting a target to end chronic homelessness by 2025, we set four priority areas to guide provincial action, focusing on:

—chronic homelessness;

—youth homelessness;

—indigenous homelessness; and

—homelessness following transition from provincially funded institutions and service systems, such as hospitals, prisons, youth justice, violence against women shelters and the child welfare system.

We heard many voices and perspectives on the panel from other panel members, from experts and most importantly from people with lived experience of homelessness. The 13 experts at the table brought a wide range of expertise and knowledge, including the medical community and those whose organizations deliver service to the homeless. One individual brought a unique voice to the table, having lived the experience of being impoverished and homeless. I’m particularly glad two representatives at the table had experience representing First Nation members.

Working with the panel and meeting the organizations dedicated to helping the homeless and poor was a moving experience and one that left me even more determined to do something about this problem. Our long-term goal of ending chronic homelessness is an ambitious goal. We’re focused on it because it’s the right thing to do. We know it costs us more in health care, policing and justice than it does to help house someone. We’re looking at addressing Ontarians’ needs across the housing continuum, from homelessness and emergency shelters through to subsidized rentals and home ownership.

It’s more important than ever before to make sure our dollars are getting measurable results and helping people. That’s why our Poverty Reduction Strategy ensures that our investments are rooted in evidence. We know that one size does not fit all in terms of solutions to tackling housing and homelessness. That is why we’re building on the foundation laid by the first Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy.

It’s been more than 20 years since the Ministry of Housing has had a stand-alone ministry, which highlights the importance our government places on this area as we move forward with the next phase of the Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy.

Before handing the baton to me as Ontario’s new Minister of Housing, the member for Ancaster–Dundas–Flamborough–Westdale provided an important update to the strategy just this past March. The update builds on the important work of the first strategy while creating new tools for increasing affordable housing and ending chronic homelessness. The update to the strategy is bold and transformative, and invests 178 million new dollars over three years. It focuses on increasing the supply of affordable housing, supporting people and ending chronic homelessness. It relies on partnerships with the private sector, our municipal partners and the federal government.

The updated strategy takes into account the input the government received at 38 stakeholder meetings during the summer of 2015, and from 113 formal written submissions that reflect the housing needs of Ontarians across the province. From this feedback and under the strategy, we are making essential investments across a range of targeted projects. We’re modernizing Ontario’s social housing system to better meet the needs of tenants and providers, and to create more integrated communities.

Currently, Ontarians in need of rental assistance rely primarily on rent-geared-to-income assistance, which is most often tied to specific units at specific addresses. So we’re working on a framework for a portable housing benefit that would give people receiving financial assistance more flexibility to choose where they live: closer to family, social support networks, schools and employment opportunities. The portable housing benefit framework would allow Ontario’s municipalities to provide more housing choices to more tenants and get them housed faster.

Earlier this month, our government announced a portable housing benefit pilot program to help survivors of domestic violence escape unsafe situations. It allows them to immediately find housing in their communities instead of waiting for a social housing unit to become available. We are piloting this program in 22 communities across Ontario. In partnership with our federal counterparts, we’re investing more than $20 million over two years to provide ongoing assistance to approximately 1,000 survivors of domestic violence each year under the pilot program. Based on the outcomes, we will consider ways to enhance the program and extend the portable benefit to other communities.

To help meet our government’s goal to end chronic homelessness by 2025, we are also investing in more supportive housing to the tune of $100 million over three years. This investment will be focused on the four provincial priority areas I mentioned earlier to support our goal to end chronic homelessness. We have heard from our sector partners that this is where the need is greatest, so we’ve taken action. Up to 4,000 families and individuals will receive housing allowances and the wraparound services they need. The funding will also support the construction of up to 1,500 new supportive housing units over the longer term, eventually assisting up to 6,000 individuals and families.

As part of our efforts to end homelessness, we launched the Community Homeless Prevention Initiative. As I’ve mentioned, we affectionately call it CHPI. CHPI aims to improve access to suitable and affordable housing and homelessness services. It gives service managers greater flexibility to design programs based on local needs and priorities. Under CHPI, service managers can create their own local programs under four broad service categories:

—emergency shelter solutions for people who are experiencing homelessness or are in a crisis;

—long-term housing and transitional housing with supports;

—service and supports, including street outreach, case management and transportation; and

—homelessness prevention, including emergency financial assistance and education programs to help people stay in their homes.

CHPI supports a transition towards a system that is focused on more proactive and permanent solutions to addressing homelessness. In 2014-15, our government enhanced CHPI funding by $42 million to a total amount of almost $294 million per year—a 17% annual increase of funding for homelessness services. We’re also providing an additional $15 million each year over the next two years, bringing our government’s annual investment to almost $324 million by 2018.

We are developing an indigenous housing strategy in partnership with indigenous communities because we know that First Nations, Métis, and Inuit people are significantly overrepresented among people experiencing homelessness in Canada. A significant challenge is ensuring that culturally appropriate housing and homelessness services are accessible to indigenous people across the province, which is why a unique strategy is required. Since 2008, Ontario has committed over $150 million to off-reserve indigenous households in the province of Ontario. Our government will continue our sustained engagement with First Nations, Métis and Inuit partners to develop this important strategy.

The investments I’ve mentioned are helping to make housing more affordable for people of all income levels in Ontario. They are also helping to keep roofs over the heads of those who have nowhere left to turn. But there is still much work to do. Housing and homelessness are about more than the bottom line, and the value of a dollar depends on the environment it is invested in. That’s why we’re proposing a suite of policy and legislative tools in Bill 7 that we hope will have a meaningful impact on affordable housing.

During our government’s extensive consultations on the Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy update, we heard about the need to foster diverse, inclusive communities. To help reach this goal, we’ve provided a range of planning, financial and other tools through the Promoting Affordable Housing Act to help municipalities create more affordable housing.

One of those tools we’re proposing is called inclusionary zoning. The proposed change to the Planning Act would, if passed, give municipalities the option to require affordable housing units to be included in residential developments. This would enable the private sector to play a much larger role in providing affordable housing. According to the city of Toronto’s chief planner, Toronto could have built 12,000 affordable housing units in the last five years had inclusionary zoning been in place.

We want to help municipalities ensure that they have a range of housing at their disposal that will give their citizens better choices, because affordable housing options should address the needs of those across the housing spectrum and at various income levels.

Inclusionary zoning is just one of the many tools that the province is moving ahead with to increase the supply of affordable housing. We’ve consulted over the summer with our stakeholders on the former Bill 204 and on potential regulatory content to support inclusionary zoning. We met with various stakeholders representing the municipal, planning, housing, non-profit and development sectors. We know that these different sectors have different perspectives about how inclusionary zoning should be tailored for Ontario, but overall, our stakeholders were supportive of inclusionary zoning.

In fact, Mitch Cohen, president of the Daniels Corp., has said that inclusionary zoning is “the only way to ensure that affordable housing will be built across this city.” The message is clear: Inclusionary zoning is a necessary tool that will change the affordable housing landscape in Ontario.

Throughout the consultations, we heard a common view that municipalities should be given the flexibility to tailor inclusionary zoning to local social and economic conditions. We want to ensure that they have this flexibility, and that includes finding a balance between inclusionary zoning policies and

section

Section 37 of the Planning Act permits a municipality to authorize increases in allowable height and/or density through the zoning bylaw in return for community benefits like daycare spaces, transit improvements or heritage preservation.

Bill 7 would restrict municipalities applying inclusionary zoning from using

section 37, except as provided for by regulation. The legislation would allow the minister to make a regulation that could specify the circumstances under which

section 37 may be used by a municipality within the parameters of inclusionary zoning. Our recent consultations will inform potential future regulations relating to

section 37 and inclusionary zoning. It’s important to note, Mr. Speaker, that Bill 7 would not affect the use of development charges or parkland dedication in combination with inclusionary zoning.

Inclusionary zoning has been used extensively by communities around the world, including in England, and in over 500 municipalities in the United States. We want to make sure that our framework allows inclusionary zoning to be implemented in a way that works for Ontario’s municipalities.

We are also proposing changes to the Development Charges Act to exempt secondary suites in new homes from development charges. Secondary suites are a source of affordable rental units for many low- to moderate-income renters. I’ve always believed in allowing secondary suites in established neighbourhoods. We know they are already being built in many neighbourhoods, but the proposed amendment would support increasing the supply of rental accommodation. These proposed changes would help to increase the supply and range of affordable housing options in Ontario communities.

Our proposed reforms to the Residential Tenancies Act and the Housing Services Act would, if passed, help to further modernize social housing. My parliamentary assistant, the member from Trinity–Spadina, will elaborate more on the proposed amendments in these two pieces of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, the reforms we are proposing reflect the significant input we received over the past year from municipalities, community groups and the public at large, and we continue to have conversations with our citizens, stakeholders and other levels of government about affordable housing. This past June, for example, in one of my first duties as minister, I participated in the federal-provincial-territorial ministers’ meeting in Victoria on the development of a national housing strategy. It was a positive meeting.

We agreed to move forward collaboratively to develop a national housing strategy over the next few months, one that encompasses the needs of all Canadians. In service of that aim, I recently hosted a number of expert round tables across the province to discuss the national housing strategy. I will be hosting another one this week with our indigenous partners to get their feedback on how we can make a national housing strategy work for all Ontarians. Housing and poverty advocates across Ontario have been telling us very clearly for some time that the status quo is not working.

We need a strong national housing strategy with the flexibility to address the specific needs of the provinces and territories.

In the coming weeks, I’ll be sharing Ontario’s feedback with Minister Duclos and my provincial and territorial counterparts. Central to that feedback will be the core vision of the Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy: that every Ontarian have access to an affordable and suitable home, providing the foundation to secure employment, raise a family and build strong communities.

Mr. Speaker, we’ve outlined just some of the reforms today that we are proposing to improve access to affordable and stable housing for our citizens. Changing the housing system to make it work better for the people it’s designed to serve is going to go a long way to help us meet our goals. When one family achieves housing sustainability, it creates room for others to do the same. With the right tools, we can build a housing sector in Ontario that leaves no one behind.

Our ultimate goal—increasing affordability and ending homelessness in Ontario—is a bold, long-term goal, and we will face many challenges along the way. But it is possible. It requires a system built on partnerships with the private and non-profit sectors and between all levels of government. We all have a shared purpose. By working together, we can start taking meaningful actions to transform Ontario’s housing system and to end chronic homelessness by 2025.

This package of reforms we are proposing today will help to achieve this goal. I want to thank everyone who spoke to us about how to make more affordable housing a reality.

I also want to leave my colleagues with one last thought. In November, I will visit London, Ontario, to attend the fourth National Conference on Ending Homelessness, hosted by the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness. With the conference taking place in our home city, I know the words shared by the member for London North Centre at last year’s conference will be top of mind for me.

During her remarks, the member and my predecessor as the minister responsible for the province’s Poverty Reduction Strategy posed the following question: If home is where the heart is, where is the heart of the person experiencing homelessness? It is a question I hope all members of this Legislature remember as we sit in this place we call the House, considering this important legislation and those who have no place to call home. It is for them that I urge all members to vote for the passing of this landmark bill.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paul Miller): Further debate? The member from Trinity–Spadina.

Mr. Han Dong: Good morning, Speaker, and thank you. I want to thank Minister Ballard for giving me the opportunity to speak today.

In my work at Queen’s Park, I have come to understand first-hand the need for all Ontarians to have access to affordable, stable and adequate housing in their community. This rings true across the province, but the issue of affordable housing and homelessness presents a special challenge in our urban centres.

In my riding of Trinity–Spadina, tackling homelessness continues to be a priority. I can think of many great organizations that have put their efforts into resolving this challenge for many, many years; for example, West Neighbourhood House. They have volunteers actually going out and visiting homeless individuals and helping them to see if there’s any way they can leverage government programs or government funding, or if they can help them to file taxes—making sure they’re tapping into those potential incomes. I think that is a very noble thing for them to do.

We are making great strides to combat chronic homelessness. As part of the Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy update, our government just launched a consultation with stakeholders on potential amendments to the Residential Tenancies Act, to improve how the rules affect transitional housing programs.

Transitional housing provides a key role within the housing system. In addition to housing, it provides a mix of appropriate support services for vulnerable people to address specific needs; for example, people with mental health and addiction issues and survivors of domestic violence. It assists people to become more independent and able to transition to permanent, stable housing and independent living. This consultation supports Ontario’s goal of ending homelessness and addresses concerns expressed by our transition housing providers, so that they may be able to better serve the needs of their clients.

As Minister Ballard mentioned, our government is also working hard to modernize the way we deliver social housing in this province. This is reflected in Bill 7, the Promoting Affordable Housing Act, with the proposed reforms to the Residential Tenancies Act and the Housing Services Act. The amendments would support vibrant, mixed-income communities and encourage a healthy mix of rent-geared-to-income and market rent tenants.

By recognizing new and innovative forms of municipal housing assistance and increasing local flexibility to manage housing assets, we would empower service managers to provide assistance in a way that best meets their diverse needs.

We also want to create better outcomes for tenants by ensuring that housing assistance meets their needs in a way that is more equitable, flexible and timely. When it comes to social housing, I can think of communities such as Alexandra Park and Portland Place in my neighbourhood. The volunteers and the staff do a great job to make everyone feel at home.

The proposed amendments to the Housing Services Act represent the first step in modernizing Ontario’s social housing system to support economic and social inclusion for social housing tenants. These changes would provide municipalities with more flexibility in administering and delivering social housing, as well as require local enumeration to count people who are homeless in their communities, and we all know it’s a very, very difficult task.

We hope that this will lead to more stability and security for service managers, as well as for social housing and not-for-profit co-operative housing providers.

Arcadia co-op, Cawthra Mansions—these are just the two that come to the top of my mind, which I visited during the summer. They, again, do a great job of providing a sense of community to all residents around.

Our amendments could also help to reduce the wait-lists, as people would be able to find and apply for the housing and supports they need more quickly and easily.

Counting local homeless populations would provide valuable information about the diverse reality of Ontarians who experience homelessness, and inform smart approaches and program design.

Mr. Speaker, our proposed changes to the Residential Tenancies Act would also help to clarify the treatment of rent-geared-to-income tenants. More specifically, tenants could not be evicted when they cease to be eligible for rent-geared-to-income assistance after paying market rent for 12 months or more. This change would ensure that social housing tenants are not penalized due to the positive changes in their household incomes.

Other proposed changes to the RTA would bring all Ontario municipalities into alignment with respect to enforcing local residential rental maintenance standards. Most municipalities already do this either fully or partially, as they have their own property standard bylaws that include residential rental standards.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation we are proposing today would allow us to make great strides in transforming and modernizing our social housing system. In giving municipalities more flexibility in administering social housing programs, we are accounting for local priorities and situations, because every community is unique and a one-size-fits-all approach does not work anymore. These measures, along with the other proposed amendments that Minister Ballard spoke about today, will enable us to make a big step forward to provide more affordable housing options and in our goal to end chronic homelessness in 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, I join Minister Ballard in supporting Bill 7, and I urge all members of this House to vote for this bill and see the passage of this bill.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paul Miller): Questions and comments?

Mr. Jim McDonell: It’s always a privilege to get up in this House for the residents of Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry. Bill 7 is very interesting. We all know there’s a homeless problem in the city. Now the government is trying to just download that onto the municipalities. Will the municipalities take that provincial responsibility on, without any funding? They are stretched now under this government. They’ve seen funding cut back from them. We need to give the option, of course, but there’s no funding attached to this, and that concerns us.

Homelessness is escalating under this government. We see more and more people on the streets, and more and more people without help. A lot of the information seems to point to, in many cases, mental illness. We don’t have any increases or help for people that are experiencing mental illness. When you look through most families in this province, they have somebody that has a connection with or who is suffering from some type of mental illness. In many cases, that leads to homelessness. They’re unemployed. They can’t find a job.

It’s something that, in many cases, is very treatable with the right help. I had the opportunity to talk to a doctor from a nearby village in my area yesterday. She talked about the lack of funding and the lack of help. People that we see on the street actually could be very much helped, but this government refuses to fund those services.

We’re hoping, of course, to support this bill. We have some amendments to go in to it. But there must be some money that goes along with this, or else we’ll just see the price of housing go up for everybody, and of course that’s not good for the province.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paul Miller): Questions and comments?

Mr. Percy Hatfield: I’d like to begin the morning by answering the question that was just posed to us by the Minister of Housing and the minister responsible for poverty reduction. He said, “If home is where the heart is, where is the heart of” the homeless person? I’d like to inform the minister that the heart of the homeless person lies here within the NDP caucus: the party of the homeless, the impoverished, the downtrodden—the very people that successive Liberal and Conservative governments have ignored for the past 30 years. So you know where the heart is, Speaker, and it’s over here.

The devil is in the details. That’s why we’re waiting for the details on this bill to come forward, because right now there’s not a lot of information in there, not a lot of detail to speak about. I think that’s why the minister, when he first stood up, spent his first 15 or 20 minutes talking about his night on the street. The self-described—what was he?—middle-aged, silver-haired minister and his buddy Bruce spent a night on the street.

He talked about a homeless shelter that has turned away 6,000 people, provided 80,000 meals and provided 28,000 nights of safety. I agree with that. I found it very interesting. I’m glad the minister took the opportunity to spend the night out in the snow as if he was homeless, because that gets to the heart of where we’re headed with this bill in many ways. But until we get into the details—because this bill is so lacking in so much of the detail—it’s going to be very difficult, until we get to committee and can put some flesh on the bones, if you will, of what is proposed here and find out exactly where we’re going with inclusionary zoning, finally.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paul Miller): The member from Ancaster–Dundas–Flamborough–Westdale.

Mr. Ted McMeekin: I’m proud to offer a few comments in support of the good minister and his initiative, reintroducing this act, which has been a long time coming together. It has been a long and winding road that has led to this place. There have been a number of people advocating, including municipalities and members of this House, around some of the tools that need to be provided: inclusive zoning, a provision around granny suites, and requirements that the Minister of Housing, in his or her infinite wisdom, might decide to regulate.

The consultation with the industry is ongoing. It’s very, very detailed. We want to get something in place that works. There’s a long history in the housing area of things being suggested that either were never seriously considered or were considered and didn’t work. That’s one of the real joys that came about the expert panel that was put in place that the minister, I’m sure, has referenced and will reference: to get people with experience to make their comments so that the government can be guided appropriately.

Reference to the standing committee is appropriate. I think there is a lot of detailed work here. I think we’ll want to hear from some of the various stakeholders in society, because it’s only together that this is going to work, and work to the benefit of the people who need the assistance that the good minister and his great staff—I happen to know a few of them—are working so hard at trying to deliver.

I offer that up. I urge the members of this House to stand in solidarity with the minister and get this bill processed to the next step.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paul Miller): Questions and comments?

Mr. Ernie Hardeman: In 2010, the government released an affordable housing strategy. In that strategy it said, “The success of the Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy will be measured using performance indicators” and reported annually. Six years later, we’ve not seen a single report. The only way we have to measure the effectiveness of their six years of their Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy is the wait-list and the additional 20,000 families who have been added since this strategy was launched.

Now the government has released an updated version of the Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy, resulting in this bill. Once again, it contains nice words, but I have concerns that it doesn’t truly address our housing crisis.

I wrote the minister before the updated Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy was released and asked him to include these measures or something equivalent. But there are no performance measures—just nice words in this bill. If we’re going to be able to measure, if we’re going to be able to help the homeless in this province, we need to keep track of what we’re doing. So far, since 2010, they have kept track of nothing, and it doesn’t appear, in this bill, that they want to do any better in the future. So I have some questions as to whether they are really going to accomplish what they said they’re going to do.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paul Miller): The Minister of Housing has two minutes.

Hon. Chris Ballard: I’d like to thank specifically the members from Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry, Windsor–Tecumseh, Ancaster–Dundas–Flamborough–Westdale and Oxford. I have heard their comments and made note of their comments. I think it’s important, on an issue such as homelessness and affordable housing, that we recognize that all of us in this House have a responsibility; that really this is an issue that resides in everyone’s house, no matter what side of the House we sit on.

I’d like to reiterate that I look forward to this bill moving to the committee stage so that we can have a more fulsome discussion and debate with members of the opposition and the third party and better understand what their concerns are so that we might be able to incorporate some of those appropriate changes into the final legislation. We look forward to that discussion going forward. I also look forward to taking this legislation out to the community and to our stakeholders, who have been so valuable in giving us our original input.

I will end by reiterating one of the many successes that this whole program has had. I’ll focus for a second on the success of our CHPI program. The assertion that nothing has been done could not be further from what reality tells us is the truth: 30,000 families lifted off the streets, and 100,000 at-risk households will never have to know homelessness because of that single program.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paul Miller): It being close to 10:15, this House stands recessed until 10:30 this morning.

The House recessed from 1010 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Jeff Yurek: I’m pleased to welcome to the Legislature Dan Kelly and Dave Karn, from Dowler-Karn in the St. Thomas area. Welcome, guys.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Today, I’d like to welcome representatives from the propane industry. They’re here for their advocacy day at Queen’s Park. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Norm Miller: I’m pleased to welcome Dominic Palladino from Superior Propane, Ian Appleton from Parkland Fuel and Phil Eddy from Sparlings Propane, whom I met with this morning. Welcome to the propane day here at Queen’s Park.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I’d like to welcome our guest Aymara Heath to the Legislature. She’s a friend of Andrew Forgione, who works in my office. She’s visiting from New Hampshire, so this is her first time in the Legislature. Welcome.

Mr. Lorne Coe: It’s my pleasure to introduce Tereasa Vaxvick and Matthew Vaxvick. They are the parents of page Nicole Vaxvick. Welcome. They’re in the members’ gallery.

Hon. Liz Sandals: I’m very pleased to welcome today friends from the Retired Teachers of Ontario who are here in recognition of international seniors’ day. We have with us David Kendall, their second vice-president; Rich Prophet from the executive; Jim Grieve, their executive director, who is no stranger to Queen’s Park; and Sylvia Link and Kimberly Brathwaite from their staff.

Mr. Rick Nicholls: I would like to welcome some friends to the members’ gallery this morning: Clifford Pilon, Pamela Phillips, Cathy Landry and Larry Landry, my former executive assistant, who is now retired.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I would like to welcome a good friend of mine and former colleague from the Boston Consulting Group and now someone who’s a director of career services and alumni relations at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto, Lauren Shanahan. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Todd Smith: I would like to welcome a couple of members of the Canadian Propane Association who I had an opportunity to meet with this morning: James Daniels and Terry Elligsen from Sparlings Propane. Welcome to the Legislature.

Hon. Mitzie Hunter: I would just like to join the President of the Treasury Board in welcoming Ontario’s retired teachers. Thank you so much for being here today.

Shimon Peres

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Point of order from the Premier.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to have a moment of silence on the passing of Shimon Peres.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Premier is seeking unanimous consent for a moment of silence. Do we agree? Agreed.

Could I have all members please stand for a moment of silence upon the death of Shimon Peres.

The House observed a moment’s silence.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you for that tribute.

The member from Bramalea–Gore–Malton on a point of order.

Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Speaker, we seek unanimous consent for the immediate second and third reading passage of Bill 23, the Islamic Heritage Month Act, 2016, in time for Islamic Heritage Month, October 2016.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The deputy leader is seeking unanimous consent for second and third reading passage of the bill. Do we agree? I heard a no.

British Home Child Day

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Leeds–Grenville on a point of order.

Mr. Steve Clark: Point of order, Speaker: I’d like to recognize that today is the fifth anniversary of British Home Child Day in Ontario. The bill proclaiming September 28 as British Home Child Day was introduced by former Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry MPP Jim Brownell. I was honoured to co-sponsor the bill with the member for Parkdale–High Park.

I encourage all members and Ontarians to take a moment today to remember the 100,000 home children who came to Canada between 1869 and the 1940s. They overcame tremendous hardships, and today we recognize and honour their contributions to Ontario.

Oral Questions

Hydro rates

Mr. Patrick Brown: My question is for the Premier. On September 22, the Premier of Ontario told Evan Solomon that skyrocketing hydro costs were “worth it.” Is it worth it that this government forces people to choose between heating and eating? Is it worth it that there are 567,000 households that are behind in their hydro bills? Can the Premier tell the families who can’t put food on the table that these prices, using her words, are worth it? Can she say it is worth it for people to have to sell their homes? Can she really tell the people of Ontario that this mess she has created is worth it?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: What I can say to the Leader of the Opposition is that it is absolutely imperative that we make sure that people have the supports that they need so that they can pay their electricity bills.

The changes that we are making to make sure that there is, for example, the Ontario energy support program in place, the removal of the debt retirement charge from bills, and the changes that we’ve made most recently that we announced in the throne speech—the removal of the provincial portion of the HST, the additional 12% that means that rural and northern communities have access to 20% reduction: All of those were an acknowledgement of the fact that the improvements that we’ve made in the system, the fact that we have invested in the system, has a cost associated with it.

We understand that we need to help people to deal with those costs every day.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Patrick Brown: Back to the Premier: I’m bewildered when the Premier talks about improvements because no one in the province of Ontario has seen improvements.

I was recently in Kakabeka Falls in northwestern Ontario, and I stopped by Odena Foods. I chatted with the owner there, and he had a question for the Liberal government that he asked if I could ask the Premier directly. As a small business owner in northern Ontario, he wanted to know how he is expected to pay his hydro bill and staff with $13,000 as his monthly bill. Are those hydro bills worth it if a business is struggling to meet their payroll? There is a question of whether he can continue to actually keep his staff for a local business that was previously successful.

My question to the Premier: Is her hydro mess worth it if it means that businesses are going to have to close?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: It’s exactly why we are expanding the ICI program: so that smaller businesses can take advantage of the opportunity to reduce their electricity bills by up to 34%. I know that the Minister of Energy is going to want to give the member opposite some examples of businesses in the next supplementary. That is precisely why we’re expanding that conservation initiative, the industrial conservation initiative—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. I’m receiving signals that we want to continue going down the road that I didn’t want to go and I will. This will be my last—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I don’t need your help either. This will be the last time I have to talk about warnings; I’ll just introduce them right away.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: That’s why we’re expanding that program. Is it worth it to kids who have asthma to have clean air because we shut the coal-fired plants? Is it worth it to communities that have unreliable energy to now—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I’m now moving to warnings. The member from Prince Edward–Hastings is warned.

Carry on.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: —because we invested in more than 10,000 kilometres of line that they have reliable power? Yes, it’s worth it to have no smog days and to have a system that is 90% clean and has been rebuilt. It’s worth it.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary?

Mr. Patrick Brown: Again to the Premier: What we hear in the government’s talking points is “reliable power.” That’s their defence for having this extraordinary disaster of an energy policy. So let’s talk about their defence. Let’s talk about reliable power. All you have to do is look next door to Quebec. In 2015, Quebec had three power outages that were a result —

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Please stop the clock. The Minister of Housing is warned.

Carry on.

Mr. Patrick Brown: Quebec had three power outages that were a result of either faulty equipment or human error; Ontario had 32. Total outages in Ontario equalled 11.5 days; in Quebec, it was only six and a half hours. Ontario has had as many outages as BC, Manitoba, Nova Scotia and Alberta combined. We don’t have reliable power in the province of Ontario; we have the opposite. Our hydro system is both unaffordable and unreliable.

A direct question to the Premier: How dare you say we have reliable power in the province of Ontario? You have created a mess. Why won’t you apologize to the people of Ontario?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Energy.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I’m very pleased to rise and answer the Leader of the Opposition’s question because perhaps the Leader of the Opposition should not be so quick to choose who he compares our province to, Mr. Speaker. He claims that Quebec hardly experienced an outage at all last year but just two nights ago, 150,000 residents of Gatineau lost their power during rush hour. The outage was triggered by a substation transmission failure.

It seems that Ontario and Quebec are not immune to occasional, unforeseen events, and luckily we have the hard-working power workers’ unions that work in both of our provinces to quickly remedy these outages. I know the opposition has begun to make these truly bizarre claims about dump trucks hitting poles and weather knocking down wires. I’d like to hear the plan from the Leader of the Opposition for how he can control car accidents and the weather, because he has no plan for anything else. He must have a plan for that.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Order, please. You’re on W, by the way.

New question.

Energy policies

Mr. Patrick Brown: My question is for the Premier. The Premier’s Minister of Energy said yesterday that this government has “been tasked to find ways to bring bills down.” The minister said he is going to save families $2.45 by cancelling the next round of renewable contracts. But, in fact, he is not saving them a cent. He’s just not going to raise prices. The definition of a saving is a reduction. No one is saving anything. Did I save $25,000 this morning by not going out and buying a car? That’s not how savings work. The government’s logic is completely faulty.

Will the Premier come clean? Will she admit that this latest PR stunt won’t save families a cent?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: As I said, we inherited an electricity system that had been badly neglected under the previous government. Families and businesses across Ontario couldn’t count on the electricity system. It was dirty. We shut down the coal-fired plants. It is 90% clean, renewable energy now. By the elimination of coal, we’ve avoided about $4 billion in health care and related costs. I think that kind of savings—that is direct savings to the people of the province.

Mr. Speaker, we’ve put in place initiatives to help people to deal with their bills, whether it’s the Ontario energy support program, whether it’s the removal of the provincial portion of the HST, whether it’s the removal of the debt retirement charge. All of those are initiatives that will help people and businesses deal with their bills. We’re further moving to take costs out of the system that will mean there will be future cost avoidance.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Patrick Brown: Back to the Premier. Don’t get me wrong, Mr. Speaker. I do applaud the government for finally realizing these renewable contracts that they signed were reckless and not in the best interests of Ontario. But the question is, why did it take so long for this government to realize it? Is it because they milked 30 of these renewable energy companies for over $1.3 million in donations to the Ontario Liberal Party? It is clear these contracts were never what was in the best interest of Ontario. It was all about what’s in the best interest of Liberal coffers.

My question, Mr. Speaker, is: Now that the Premier has acknowledged these renewable contracts for energy we couldn’t use—had to give it away to Pennsylvania, New York and Michigan—now that she has acknowledged that was a mistake, will the Premier consider apologizing to the people of Ontario and giving back the $1.3 million they took from these companies, and help families out with their hydro bills?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Energy.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I find it reckless that we have a party talking about energy with no plan. I want you to think, Mr. Speaker, that just a few years ago we had to send warnings out to let people know that if they went outside, they would have difficulty breathing. The simple act of breathing was difficult. But we’ve got a party on the other side that doesn’t want to invest in that. They left a crumbling system for us to pick up.

The 2013 long-term energy plan had forecasted some costs, and we made sure that we’re removing those costs.

They may ridicule $2.45, but for families that is important. I will find 50 cents or $50 to make sure that we continue to help families—not just sit there and make up mistakes.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please.

Final supplementary.

Mr. Patrick Brown: Mr. Speaker, I’m going to ask the Premier this question again. I hope this time I can get an answer, not passing the buck.

The reality is, the government has acknowledged that these contracts were reckless and unnecessary. The government has admitted that mistake.

Given the fact that the Liberal Party has received $1.3 million in donations because of these contracts that were a mistake, and also given the fact that the Auditor General has said that we are going to overpay by—hear this—$9.2 billion because of these contracts the government has now acknowledged were a mistake—$9.2 billion, Ontario was going to overpay; the Liberal Party gets $1.3 million—my direct question to the Premier, and I hope she will answer it: Will she apologize to the people of Ontario for taking $1.3 million into the Ontario Liberal Party and causing Ontario to overpay on hydro by $9.2 billion?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

Minister?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: In terms of renewable energy, our government is very proud of the electricity mix that we have in this province: 18,000 megawatts of renewables contracted or online. Ontario ranks first in Canada for installed wind capacity. More than 40% is wind.

When we’re talking about fundraising, Mr. Speaker—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Order. Just to remind everybody, the warnings are still on the table. If you get a warning, the next one is out.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I’m still standing, so therefore some people making comments on the government side are not helpful when I’m asking them to come to order. Everyone come to order.

Finish, please.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I hope I have enough time to rhyme off the long list of the events that the Leader of the Opposition has done in fundraising over the last little while. At the Albany Club: $10,000 per person. Guests with the PC health critic: that’s $500. At the Metro Toronto Convention Centre—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. Come to order, please. Start the clock.

New question.

Privatization of public assets

Mr. Jagmeet Singh: My question is to the Premier. For three days, New Democrats have asked a very simple question and have yet to receive a clear answer. Is the Premier planning on helping the sale of Toronto Hydro? Yes or no?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: If the member opposite wants to speak about Toronto Hydro, he will have to speak to the mayor of Toronto and the councillors on the city of Toronto council.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Just over two years ago, our leader, Andrea Horwath, asked the Premier about the sell-off of Hydro One. Now, the Premier said, “It must actually be very hard for the leader of the third party to ask these questions. She knows that we’re not selling off the assets.” Of course, Ontarians all know that all the while the Premier was in fact working on the sell-off of Hydro One.

So now it’s very understandable that people are concerned about the next moves. The Premier is leaving the door wide open to selling off municipal hydro utilities, and people are worried that yet again the Premier is not telling people what’s actually going to happen. Does the Premier understand how people are worried that she is planning to help the sale of more of our hydro system?

Hon. Bob Chiarelli: Only city council can make that decision.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Infrastructure is warned.

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Let me just repeat that if the member opposite wants to speak about the city of Toronto or other municipalities, he is going to have to talk to the elected officials in those communities. That’s the way it works.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary?

Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Speaker, we all know, and the Premier ought to know, that the province has a large role in this. They can actually assist or not assist in the sale of local utilities. So New Democrats are again asking a very simple question: Is the Premier hoping to distract from her decision to sell off Hydro One by helping to privatize local utilities like Toronto Hydro?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Mr. Speaker, the fact is that there are other municipalities in Ontario that have made decisions like this. They have done that on their own, and if the member opposite wants to talk with a municipality about their decisions around electricity, he will have to go to their mayors and their councils and have that conversation.

Privatization of public assets

Mr. Jagmeet Singh: My question is again to the Premier. It’s déjà vu all over again in Ontario. In October 2014, people wanted to know if the Liberals were going to privatize Hydro One. After all, privatizing Hydro One was something that they didn’t run on; it wasn’t something that they mentioned in their campaign. But the government wouldn’t give a straight answer.

Fast-forward to today, and Ontarians saw a throne speech that didn’t say a word about the Liberal provincial government assisting local utilities in privatizing. Now, Liberal insiders are saying that selling Toronto Hydro “is a good idea and Queen’s Park is interested in helping make it happen.” Just like in 2014, the Premier is dodging this very simple question. Will the Premier be honest with the people of Ontario? Are the Liberals planning to privatize more local utilities? Yes or no?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Mr. Speaker, let me just say to the member opposite that I’m being very honest with him, this Legislature and the people of Ontario. Those decisions are decisions that local councils have to make, as has happened in other parts of the province where local councils have made decisions around their distribution companies. The local communities are going to need to make those decisions.

If the member opposite wants to talk about the building of transit and transportation infrastructure in the province, and how there is a build going on across the province, whether it’s roads and bridges or whether it’s transit all across our urban centres, I’m happy to talk about that, because we know how important it is that we make those investments, that we create those jobs in the immediate term and foster the economic development going forward. If the member opposite wants to talk about that, I’m happy to talk about that.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Local municipalities will certainly make decisions, but those decisions will be influenced if they know that the provincial government wants to assist them in privatizing those utilities, so that’s why the question is here.

Two years ago, the Premier denied that she was privatizing Hydro One. Today, the Premier isn’t denying that she’s planning to help the municipalities sell local hydro utilities. Ontarians are worried. They’ve been let down by the Liberals before and they’re worried that they’re going to be let down yet again. Will the Premier just clear the air once and for all and tell Ontarians: Is she going to help privatize municipal hydro utilities like Toronto Hydro and the many others around this province?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Energy.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I’m very honoured to be able to stand and answer the member’s question relating to Toronto Hydro. That is totally a decision for Toronto city council. I know the other member is contemplating running for other offices, so if he’s interested, he may want to consider running for Toronto city council and he can be part of that decision.

But until that time, let’s talk about Hydro One. Every dollar realized from our current assets will be reinvested in Ontario’s infrastructure. This sale will support the single largest infrastructure investment in Ontario’s history. I was very proud to be able to announce in North Bay, in Kapuskasing and in my own riding of Sudbury $20 million for infrastructure investments that are truly needed by many of these municipalities. I’m looking forward to making more of those announcements.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary?

Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Yesterday’s FAO report shows that Ontario is on the brink. Particularly, low-income people and people in northern and rural Ontario are paying more and more for energy. People will be pushed over the edge with the further privatization of Hydro One. Privatizing local municipal hydro utilities will only make it worse. These are real people who can’t pay their bills. More than half a million Ontarians are in arrears.

Will the Premier start listening to the people of this province, take action and commit to no more sell-off of our public assets and public hydro utilities?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I thank the member for the question because it’s another opportunity for me to be able to stand up and say, you know what? We’ve also heard that from the FAO, but we’ve heard it from the people of Ontario, and that’s why we acted. We brought forward our three-point plan with a specific piece in there for 20% for northerners and rural folks, to make sure that they can get that 20% reduction on the bill.

The unfortunate thing is that when we tried to get this bill passed quickly—because we still have a lot of work to do to make sure that we can get the LDCs in place—the opposition voted against our unanimous consent to make sure that we can get this through quickly.

And speaking of the FAO, the FAO confirmed that the average Ontario household spends less on electricity than every other province except BC. But we still know that some families are having difficulty. That’s why we brought this program forward. That’s why we have six other programs in place: the OESP, the LEAP—Mr. Speaker, we have so many I don’t have enough time to rhyme them all off.

Prescription drug abuse

Mr. Jeff Yurek: My question is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Every day, we read about the opioid crisis and how it is killing someone in Ontario every 14 hours. Western provinces have already created a system to track these overdoses, finding real-time data for the fentanyl crisis. They utilize the data to deal with this drug crisis. However, Ontario is unable to track in real time, and the data they are using currently is from 2014.

When will the minister put in place a system to track the overdoses and deal with the opioid crisis that’s killing Ontarians every day?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: I appreciate the question. The fact is that Ontario does have an automated real-time system existing in, I think, 118 hospitals across the province—and we’re actually expanding that to include all of the hospitals—which, based on triage, provides us, in real time, automatically to the ministry and to public health officers if they want to access that data, all data on overdoses, including overdoses that are due specifically to opioids.

Now, when it comes to opioid deaths or overdose deaths, it is slightly more complicated, and I’m happy to address that in the supplementary. But I want to reassure Ontarians that, in fact, we didn’t need to take the measure that BC did because we already had in place an automated real-time process through triage at hospital ERs that provides the ministry immediately with that data with regard to overdoses in the majority of hospitals in this province.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Back to the minister: It’s interesting that the Premier contradicted the minister’s claims when speaking to Global News’s Alan Carter. She said that Ontario does not have the data the minister claims to have and that they should actually appoint someone to look into the problem. Even the Premier doesn’t believe the minister’s claims.

Health professionals and law enforcement need the tools to deal with the fentanyl crisis. When will the government get its act together and come up with a plan to deal with this opioid crisis?

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Minister?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: You were standing right there.

Hon. Eric Hoskins: Yes, I was standing about two feet away from the Premier when she did address this with Alan Carter, and that certainly isn’t my recollection of what she did say.

When it comes to overdose deaths, it is important that Ontarians understand that there is a process in place. Those deaths which are suspected as well of being the result of a narcotic overdose have to be referred to the coroner of Ontario, and the coroner is required, or has the opportunity if he feels that it’s merited, to actually undertake a death investigation.

I hope the member appreciates that there is a time required to undertake that death investigation to determine if that overdose is due to a narcotic overdose and to a specific type of narcotic, whether it’s opioid or other. That process does take a little bit longer; however, we are working with the coroner and many others. I hope to have more to say shortly on this in terms of further improving the system that’s in place.

Renewable energy

Mr. Peter Tabuns: My question is to the Premier. We expect the Conservatives to attack renewable energy. It’s not what people expect from the Liberals, and they have every reason to be disappointed. Bills aren’t increasing because energy is renewable. At heart, it’s because we’re privatizing the energy system. But instead of fixing the problem, instead of admitting that they’ve made a mess because of privatization, the Liberals are turning their backs on renewable energy. Why are the Liberals abandoning renewable energy and defending privatized energy?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Energy.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I’m very pleased to rise and answer the question from the honourable member. It’s very important for me to continue to emphasize that we have 18,000 megawatts of renewables already contracted or online. As I mentioned, we rank first in Canada when it comes to installed wind capacity. More than 40% of all wind and all existing clean energy contracts will be honoured. Since 2003, green energy has invested billions of dollars from private sector investments, creating over 42,000 jobs,

Let’s not forget that 90% of our electricity system is emissions-free, and we haven’t stopped yet. We still have the FIT program and we still have the microFIT program, and we’re bringing forward net metering to continue with renewables in this province.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I’m not surprised the Premier doesn’t want to answer this question, because her approach is directly contrary to the way she represents herself to the people of this province.

The core reason that hydro bills keep going up is privatization. But instead of stopping the sell-off of Hydro One or shutting down the process of helping local distribution companies sell off their utilities, instead of focusing on ensuring that renewable energy is publicly owned and affordable, the government is abandoning renewables.

Can the Premier explain why she’s defending privatization and abandoning renewable power?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: No one is abandoning anything. We’re actually continuing to invest in more. I think the important thing for us to say is that we’re committed to renewable energy and we’ve built a strong track record that demonstrates many of our successes.

As I said before and I’ll continue to say, it’s something we should all be proud of in this province: 90% emissions-free. Our electricity system is generated by a diverse supply of generation sources, including wind, solar, nuclear and hydroelectricity. I got to go up and see the Lower Mattagami: 450 megawatts of power coming from hydroelectricity.

Renewables are an important element of our government’s plan to close all of our coal plants. We are the first jurisdiction in North America to make sure that we do not have any coal-fired electricity generation, making it healthier for everyone in this province.

Research and innovation

Ms. Daiene Vernile: My question is for the Minister of Research, Innovation and Science.

Minister, I understand that you recently were at Princess Margaret hospital to announce a new round of funding for the Ontario Research Fund.

Support for this sector is creating tangible benefits for the people of Ontario. We’re seeing this every day in hospitals right across the province. Some of these breakthroughs have the added benefit of creating more effective and efficient treatment options so that the money we are saving can be reinvested into research for life-saving advancements.

Minister, I know that people in my riding of Kitchener Centre, where we are an innovation leader, want to know that we’re continuing to introduce cutting-edge medical procedures which are putting us at the forefront of medical research in North America. Could the minister please tell us more about some recent advancements that were made possible through the Ontario Research Fund?

Hon. Reza Moridi: I want to thank the member from Kitchener Centre for her advocacy for research and innovation across the province of Ontario, particularly in the Kitchener-Waterloo region.

I recently had the pleasure of attending Princess Margaret hospital to award a total of $51 million to support world-class studies and research talents at leading institutions across our province of Ontario.

Thanks to the funding that this government provides for medical research, our scientists are always on the brink of new and exciting advancements. For example, the Ontario Research Fund helped scientists at Sunnybrook hospital develop high-intensity ultrasound technology that can be used in the treatment of uterine fibroids. This discovery will save Ontario hospitals $35 million annually.

Other discoveries made through this same program have helped scientists discover that bone tumours can also be treated using high-intensity ultrasound.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to report that last year, Sunnybrook scientists were able to breach the blood-brain barrier and deliver—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Supplementary?

Ms. Daiene Vernile: I want to thank the minister for his answer.

Minister, investing in research excellence and supporting the people who are driving our innovative economy is key to developing medical technology that is saving lives and making our health care system more efficient. In my community, I know it’s providing hundreds of jobs.

We know that this

part is much bigger, though. There’s a bigger plan to bring health benefits to the people of Ontario and position us as a continued economic leader. The difference between thriving and merely surviving in this very competitive global economy is the priority that we’re placing on medical and scientific research.

Minister, could you please share with the members of this House some of the recent examples that demonstrate advances as a result of investing in the Ontario Research Fund?

Hon. Reza Moridi: Again, thank you to the member from Kitchener Centre for the question.

Mr. Speaker, our government is dedicated to making sure that Ontario is a global leader in medical sciences. Our investments in the Ontario Research Fund have recently yielded significant advances. For example, at the Ottawa Hospital, Dr. Duncan Stewart discovered that stem cells are able to treat septic shock, a condition with a high fatality rate.

Investments in the Ontario Research Fund also helped Dr. Michael Rudnicki discover that Duchenne muscular dystrophy is a disease that affects stem cells, not muscle fibres. This breakthrough discovery will help us save people who suffer from the debilitating disease.

Investments in the Ontario Research Fund have tangible benefits to Ontarians, and that is why our government, under Premier Kathleen Wynne, will continue to invest in this fund.

Home care

Mr. Steve Clark: My question is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Sarah Patterson and Jordan Yolkowskie love their eight-month-old daughter, Everley, and they want her home. Everley needs 24-hour care but doctors at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario supported her coming home. But the South East Community Care Access Centre is missing in action. For four weeks, they’ve delayed funding, forcing Sarah and Jordan to pay $300 a day for care—now over $10,000 and counting.

Monday, the CCAC presented a woefully inadequate plan and shockingly said, “Take it or leave it.” These parents won’t sign it, and I support them standing up to this heartless action. It will cost 10 times more to care for Everley at CHEO and it will tear this family apart.

Baby Everley belongs at home, Speaker. Will the minister join me and tell the CCAC to do its job and keep her there?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: I can’t imagine what the parents of this tiny baby are going through right now. I am familiar with the situation, and I certainly do commit to doing what I can to ensure that that family and that young child is able to get the resources that she needs to support her in her young life.

But we have made and we are making important changes that do enable this kind of flexibility and this kind of support. We’ve eliminated the nursing maximums that are able to be provided through home and community care, through our CCACs, for those most complex patients.

We recently announced more than a million additional hours of PSW support services through our CCACs and other changes that we’re making to hopefully be able to provide this kind of flexibility and assistance. I certainly commit to working with the member opposite.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mr. Steve Clark: Back to the minister: The government and the CCACs’ self-managed care model forces families to set up a small business. They must get WSIB and $2 million in liability insurance, pay taxes on the funding and even hire an accountant. It’s ridiculous, but Everley’s parents will jump through the hoops. They just want, in Sarah’s words, “something that’s fair and manageable, so we can live life.” They’re surviving now but only because of incredible community support. That’s what Ontario’s health care system has come to: families relying on bake sales and coin cans at gas stations.

Sarah and Jordan are exhausted, and they’re running out of money. And the CCAC? It couldn’t be doing less.

So, you know what? I’m just going to ask the minister: Please, pick up a phone and call the CCAC. Tell them to get their act together.

Hon. Eric Hoskins: I have no doubt that ministry officials are working with the CCAC and with CHEO as well. I hope the member can appreciate that there are a small number of high complex cases across the province. This, I think he would agree, is one of them. We need to make sure that we’re doing everything we can to provide the appropriate health care and medical support to individuals.

I wish the member opposite had come to me specifically to enlist my support. It’s unfortunate that he has to raise it in this context. We are working on this case, and I commit to the family that we will do everything possible.

Minimum wage

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: People in my community of London continue to experience higher rates of unemployment than elsewhere in the province. For Londoners who do have jobs, many still struggle to make ends meet. Their hydro bills are too high. They can’t afford child care. Even people who finished college or university years ago are struggling with student debt.

Speaker, the city of London had a great idea, to become a living-wage city—$15 an hour. It’s about doing better so that more people can have hope and opportunities. Will the Premier follow London’s and Alberta’s lead and increase the minimum wage to $15 an hour?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Labour.

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the member for this question.

When you look at examples around all of North America of how governments have treated this issue, I think we should be especially proud of what we’ve been able to do in the province of Ontario to bring in a system that’s predictable and that’s stable. It was given to us on the advice of poverty advocates, people from organized labour and people from the business community.

I think we’ve become an example of how it’s done. We’re about halfway through a five-year period before we take another look at it. We’ve got one of the highest minimum wages in the country. Businesses know when it’s coming in; they can plan for it. And those people that are working at the minimum-wage level, know that they’re going to get a predictable wage increase from time to time—every year, actually, not from time to time.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: Londoners read this week that one of our own local employers pledged to increase his employee’s wages to $15, and it literally changed her life.

Living on minimum wage is a reality for twice as many Ontarians now as when this government came to power. Ontarians deserve good jobs. They should be able to build a life, and a minimum wage is an important start.

Will the Premier commit today to raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour?

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Thanks to the member for the supplementary.

Speaker, you have to go back to a time between 1996 and 2003; Ontario didn’t increase its minimum wage once. People who were working at that level simply saw no increases at that time. We know who was in power then.

What we did is that we were obligated as a government to look at this in an organized way, in a way that was predictable and in a way that was stable. We came up with a system that I think other provinces, other states, are looking at around the world. I think it’s a predictable way of doing things, but it also, as I said earlier, allows that every five years, you take a review. What has that led to? People at the minimum-wage level in the province of Ontario have earned more than in any other jurisdiction in this country over the past few years. They’ll continue to get regular increases.

I bring this up once again: When the opportunity was there to provide advice, the NDP made not one single submission to that group.

North American Indigenous Games

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: This question is for the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation. I understand that next summer Ontario will host the 2017 North American Indigenous Games right here in Toronto. These games will welcome up to 10,000 indigenous people from all across North America to the traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation, the Huron-Wendat Nation, the Six Nations of the Grand River and the Métis Nation of Ontario. The games sound like a wonderful opportunity to highlight the accomplishments of indigenous athletes, especially those from Ontario.

Can the minister tell us how our government is supporting the 2017 North American Indigenous Games?

Hon. David Zimmer: I want to thank the member for Barrie for that question. Yes, next summer we are prepared to welcome over 5,000 indigenous athletes to Ontario to compete in 14 different sports. This is the first time that Ontario has hosted the games. To bring the games to Ontario, our government is investing $3.5 million over three years to support the Aboriginal Sport and Wellness Council of Ontario.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Finish, please.

Hon. David Zimmer: A few weeks ago, I was in Hamilton for the announcement of a major partnership between the city of Hamilton and McMaster University to support these games through a new western hub. I was also at a similar event at York University in the city of Toronto earlier this year. I am confident that the 2017 North American Indigenous Games here in Ontario will be the best games ever.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: I’m excited to hear that our government is supporting this great initiative to showcase indigenous sport and bring the games to Ontario. This is also a wonderful opportunity to take advantage of the exceptional sports facilities, infrastructure and programs that are a lasting legacy of the 2015 Pan and Parapan American Games.

We know that sport is empowering for both indigenous and non-indigenous youth and that participation in sport gives them self-confidence and resiliency and generates pride. Can the minister tell us how our investments in the 2017 North American Indigenous Games will benefit indigenous youth and athletes in Ontario?

Hon. David Zimmer: Again I thank the member for Barrie for her interest in these games.

Our investment in the games will support the development of indigenous athletes, coaches and mentors. It will build a brighter future for indigenous youth in Ontario.

Sport has the power to heal and to improve the quality of life for indigenous youth. It encourages emotional, spiritual and physical strength. That’s why five of the recommendations in the Truth and Reconciliation report involve sport, including support for these games. For young people, sport has the power to heal and to improve the quality of their lives. It encourages emotional and physical growth, confidence and ambition. We are looking forward to all of the broad benefits that these games can bring to Ontario and to indigenous peoples.

Personal support workers

Mr. Bill Walker: My question is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. I’m hearing first-hand accounts from personal support workers about the precarious working and living conditions at some long-term-care homes, such as how, on some shifts, one PSW is expected to look after 30 or 40 frail and sick residents—an impossible if not dangerous task.

As Ontario is facing a double demand for personal support workers, there can be no greater priority than improving our PSW workforce so that our seniors can enjoy safety and comfort in the care they receive. Knowing this, why has this minister not prioritized providing that job stability and consistency to Ontario’s 100,000 personal support workers?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: Well, Mr. Speaker, I would disagree. We’re doing a great deal for our PSWs across the province. In fact, we were the government that instituted and implemented a minimum wage for our PSWs. We’ve also increased hourly support to our PSWs, the funds that flow through the LHINs directly down to the PSWs, a $4 increase over the past several years to the wages they are receiving.

We’re also working with our PSWs on a long-term strategy, not only to elevate the profession of these essential health care workers who are working so hard, diligently and compassionately throughout our health care system, including in our long-term-care homes, but working with them, we’ve developed a standardized curriculum which is now in place. We’re working with them in terms of issues of regulation and professional abilities to make sure that our PSWs are able to practise to the full scope of their ability.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Bill Walker: Back to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care: The minister has to take responsibility for the continued lack of standardized training and regulation of PSWs in Ontario. Instead of looking to the leadership of other provinces like Nova Scotia and British Columbia, who managed to put the safeguards in place and define their PSW standards, this government wasted 13 years and squandered $5 million on a defunct PSW registry. I say, Minister, that the ball is in your court. When will you give the PSWs the plan they so desperately need so that they can do their job?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: We are developing those standards. We have a standardized curriculum for PSWs. We’re responding to what we’re hearing from PSWs, the associations that represent them and the organized labour that represents them, as well, and we’re working very hard to make sure that we’re putting in place—guided by them and their good advice—the measures, supports, training and financial supports to enable them. In fact, we’re providing many of them with financial support to upgrade their training.

There is a whole set of issues, and regulation is certainly one of them where we’re engaging the sector very vigorously to determine how, on a go-forward basis, we can continue to respect and acknowledge and improve the delivery of services that our PSWs offer. That work will never be complete, but I think we have to acknowledge there have been important gains made for this important sector within health care, and we will continue to make further gains.

Personal support workers

M me France Gélinas: Ma question est également pour le ministre de la Santé et des Soins de longue durée. The throne speech said personal support workers are getting the pay hike they were promised, but the Ontario Personal Support Worker Association, representing 21,000 members, says that is “incorrect and misleading.” In fact, according to the Toronto Star, thousands of PSWs—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member cannot do indirectly what she cannot do directly. You will withdraw.

M me France Gélinas: I withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Please finish your question.

M me France Gélinas: The Toronto Star says that thousands of PSWs have seen their weekly incomes go down. Can the minister tell us exactly how many PSWs have seen their paycheque go down, and if not, why not?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: It’s ironic because both of the opposition parties voted against the increase in wage for our PSWs, what has amounted to—

Interjections.

Hon. Eric Hoskins: We’re hearing the heckling from them now, but the reality is, it was this side of the House that implemented a $4-an-hour increase to our PSWs who were some of the most vulnerable members of our society, let alone in the health care sector. They deserve that increase. We provided it to them; you did not. So we are working with our PSWs, and those are funds that flow through directly and all the way down to the PSWs in terms of increases.

We’re also working with all of our health care providers in the home and community sector to standardize the contracts so we will be ensuring that, even more, the supports are there for our PSWs.

If we look in long-term care as well, we’ve added 2,500 more PSWs in long-term-care homes since 2008.

We’re working with the sector. We’re taking their advice. We’re making great progress.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Supplementary?

M me France Gélinas: The question was: How many PSWs saw their paycheque go down? I can tell you, Speaker, that it is thousands of them who have seen their weekly income fall, not rise. They are seeing their times with their clients being cut, sometimes down to 15 minutes.

People are getting less home care, not more, and it’s not just me saying this; we’re hearing it from the PSWs on the front lines. We’re hearing it from the Ontario Personal Support Worker Association, as well as being reported in the Toronto Star, the Ottawa Citizen and other papers.

When will this government step up, stop cutting the hours of care that families need and make sure that every PSW sees the full wage increases that were promised to them for every hour that they work?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: Here’s what we’re hearing from PSWs across the country: that they appreciate the wage increase and they appreciate the attention that the Liberal government has been providing to them—in the complete absence of any leadership, I should add, from either of the opposition—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Finish, please.

Hon. Eric Hoskins: Many PSWs have said to me that they have never experienced a government that has acknowledged the importance of their contribution to the health care sector in this province ever—not the NDP, not the Conservatives. Both voted against any wage increase for PSWs.

Interjection: Shameful.

Hon. Eric Hoskins: It is shameful. And they stand up now talking about those who perhaps may be affected by this policy. She doesn’t talk about the tens of thousands of PSWs who have moved into a position where they can actually earn a wage which is worthy and responsive to the talent that they bring every single day.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. Be seated, please. Thank you. Start the clock.

New question.

Condominium legislation

Mrs. Cristina Martins: My question is for the Minister of Government and Consumer Services. When I travel throughout my riding, whether it’s in the north or in the south, I see many new condo developments. Actually, there are many new condo developments across the entire city. Many of my constituents live in condos and that number continues to grow as developments are built in my riding. My Davenport office is regularly asked about what our government is doing to protect condo owners, a question that is not only important to condo owners in Davenport but to all condo owners across Ontario.

Currently there are 1.6 million people, or one in 10 Ontarians who are living in condos. Just last year, many of my constituents were pleased to see that new legislation was passed providing greater protections for condo owners in Ontario.

Can the minister please inform the House on how the Protecting Condominium Owners Act is modernizing condo law in our province?

Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: I want to say thank you to the member from Davenport for her question, but mainly for her advocacy on condo laws. Congratulations.

Our government is committed to modernizing our condo laws. We are doing so by ensuring that the condo industry will become more transparent and accountable. My ministry is establishing a condo authority that will provide owners and boards with quicker, lower-cost and less stressful dispute resolution. The act will also strengthen financial management rules for condo corporations to help prevent mismanagement. We will also establish a second authority that will licence condo managers to help provide further protections to owners and their homes.

I’m very confident that condo owners will have greater peace of mind knowing that they are protected after making such a large investment.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mrs. Cristina Martins: Thank you, Minister, for your response. I’m very appreciative of your ministry’s efforts to protect consumers in Davenport and across this province.

The minister mentioned the creation of two new delegated administrative authorities. One of these authorities will protect condo owners and boards with a modern and efficient dispute resolution system. The other will license condo managers and ensure their ability to effectively manage these organizations.

Can the minister speak to the creation of these new delegated administrative authorities and how they ensure greater accountability and transparency within the industry?

Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: Thank you again to the member for Davenport for her question.

The creation of those two delegated administrative authorities will prove to be crucial in establishing greater accountability in the condo sector. These authorities will be self-funded, not-for-profit corporations that collect fees from their regulated industries.

Combining these transparency measures and increasing owners’ access to dispute resolution—condo owners will develop positive and mutually respectful relationships with their boards.

Our government is taking concrete steps to ensure that the condo industry is fair to owners and all those involved.

Public transit

Mr. Michael Harris: A question to the Premier: Premier, when I asked the transport minister this spring about significant delays in LRV delivery for the Eglinton Crosstown and Waterloo ION, I was of course brushed off. Since then, it’s become clear that this government has completely dropped the ball on vital LRT projects, leaving commuters waiting for the train. There were indications last year that Bombardier was struggling to deliver on the Metrolinx contract for 182 LRVs, followed by a series of warning flags that the government failed to heed.

Today, we learned that the Premier has finally opened her eyes to alternatives, allowing competitors for the Finch West LRT to include vehicle procurement in their bids—vehicles that were to be delivered by Bombardier.

Waterloo’s LRT launch is only a year away, and now we have an eleventh-hour bid opening to replace trains that we’ve already paid for.

Will the Premier tell us why she has failed to ensure that her $770-million train deal will actually put trains on the tracks?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: The Minister of Economic Development and Growth.

Hon. Brad Duguid: I’m pleased to respond to this on behalf of the Minister of Transportation. I can tell you that it’s not the Premier and it’s not the government that make these decisions. It’s Metrolinx, and it’s part of the process as they go through and procure this work. We respect their process. We respect what they’re doing.

At the same time, we recognize that Bombardier is a company that employs thousands of Ontarians here in this province. Bombardier is a company as well that has done very well by this province and done very well by this country. It competes globally. It’s a global company. It’s one that has had challenges of late, but we’re quite confident they’ll continue to resolve those challenges and continue to be a globally competitive company in the future. I would think that the member opposite would not want to downgrade the importance of Bombardier in our economy.

At the same time, we respect what Metrolinx is doing and the process they’re going through to ensure they get the best value for the people of this province.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Michael Harris: Back to the Premier: It’s important that this government provide critical oversight for such a large infrastructure project here in the province. In fact, it was the Liberal government that negotiated the terms, and now delays are running right through the entire $770-million, 182-car deal. The testing vehicle for the Eglinton Crosstown light rail line was supposed to arrive in 2014, and then it was in the spring of 2015. Today we wonder if it’s ever coming.

In Waterloo, there is growing concern that when the operator, GrandLinq, is ready to launch and meet its contractual obligations, there will be no trains on the tracks. Once the track is laid, the clock soon starts ticking on contracted operational costs. What commitment can the Premier provide to ensure that Waterloo residents, who have already paid $92 million through the Metrolinx contract, won’t also be paying for a train service with no trains in the station?

Hon. Brad Duguid: Let me respond to that by comparing our commitment to the commitment of the party opposite. We are committed to building public transit. We’re making the challenging decisions, including broadening the ownership of Hydro One to invest in these very important projects.

Your leader and your party are nowhere when it comes to infrastructure investments. You’re running and hiding on the opportunity to create more revenues to put into infrastructure. We’re investing $160 billion over the next 12 years in infrastructure, with absolutely no support from your party whatsoever.

Everything we’re doing, we’re doing because of the important decisions that we’re making. We would like a little support from the members opposite—rather than trying to criticize every little detail along the way.

Ring of Fire

Mr. Michael Mantha: My question is to the Premier. People are worried about whether there will be a future for the next generation in northern Ontario. The Ring of Fire can create good jobs and good lives for people in northern Ontario. The throne speech, once again, had nothing but a brief mention about the Ring of Fire development, even though the Canadian Chamber of Commerce has asked that it be declared a national priority.

People in northern Ontario have been let down over and over again by this Wynne Liberal government. They are struggling to pay their hydro bills. They deserve good-paying jobs and not more promises.

When will this government act and develop the Ring of Fire?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Municipal Affairs.

Hon. Bill Mauro: I’m pleased to answer the question from the member on this particular topic, on behalf of the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. The member references, in his words, the lack of a reference to this particular project in the throne speech, but what I can say back to the member is that I remember very clearly the commitments that were made in the 2014 election platform around the Ring of Fire and the $1 billion that we have attached for this particular project when it begins to move forward. You know what I remember?

When the leaders’ debate was in Thunder Bay—and your leader was there—on the day of the debate, there was not anything in your platform when it came to committing to the Ring of Fire in northern Ontario, but the day after the debate or somewhere around that time, she finally saw the light and decided, “Well, we need to do what we can.” And so an unidentified number was attached. I think the language that came from your leader was “Whatever we need; we’ll do whatever we need.” Clearly, it’s something that your party had not thought about. A very clear commitment from our government on the Ring of Fire: $1 billion—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Michael Mantha: Last year, the Auditor General said that in six years, the hand-picked Ring of Fire Secretariat spent $13 million and had nothing to show. Your minister’s mandate letter, Premier, says that work on roads and infrastructure in the region to connect with the future Ring of Fire development would start in 2018. So northerners won’t even see your Ring of Fire for a decade or more.

When will this government have the once-in-a-lifetime Ring of Fire development shovel-ready?

Hon. Bill Mauro: I know that the member opposite represents a northern community and a northern riding, and I would expect that in his questions and in his knowledge of this particular issue, he would at least attach some importance and make some reference to the significant amount of work that’s gone on by the minister and the government in terms of working with our First Nation partners, in terms of the ability to advance this project. But on a number of occasions, as the critic for northern development and mines and on this file, he has stood in this place and asked these questions as if that is not a significant component regarding what has to occur before the project can go forward.

Speaker, we know that that is significant. You know the minister has done a lot of work in that particular regard. I would like to say to the member, once again, it would be nice if your leader would actually stake out a position and make a commitment on this in terms of what dollars she would attach, if she had the opportunity to lead the province, to the Ring of Fire in northern Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I would offer a reminder that you always refer your questions and your answers to the Chair. When you start getting into across, it’s more confrontational. I appreciate that.

Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I’m going to recognize the member from Parry Sound–Muskoka on a point of order.

Mr. Norm Miller: I wanted to welcome the mayor of Kenora, Dave Canfield, who is in the east members’ gallery, and Kristen Oliver, the executive director of the Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport on a point of order.

Hon. Eleanor McMahon: They’ve unfortunately left the chamber but I do want to welcome, from my riding of Burlington, teacher Judith Genis, six teachers from Ontario and from my community, along with students from the Netherlands—42 students in all—from Apeldoorn, our twin city in the Netherlands, here visiting the Ontario Legislature as part of a twin-city youth exchange. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Deferred Votes

Time allocation

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): We have a deferred vote on the motion for allocation of time on Bill 13. Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1139 to 1144.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Would all members please take their seats.

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016, Mr. Naqvi moved go