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

April 15, 2026

44th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2026-Apr-15 vol. A (PDF)

L062A - Wed 15 Apr 2026 / Mer 15 avr 2026

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Wednesday 15 April 2026 Mercredi 15 avril 2026

Orders of the Day

Putting Student Achievement First Act, 2026 / Loi de 2026 donnant la priorité à la réussite des élèves

Royal assent / Sanction royale

Putting Student Achievement First Act, 2026 / Loi de 2026 donnant la priorité à la réussite des élèves

House sittings

Members’ Statements

Skilled trades

Coopérative Ami Jeunesse

Anniversaries in Kingston and the Islands / Anniversaires à Kingston et les Îles

Persian community

Jett Landry Music

Daffodil Month

Government investments

Cadets

Pharmacare

Introduction of Visitors

Wearing of pins

Remarkable Women at Queen’s Park

Question Period

Education issues

Manufacturing jobs

Correctional facilities

University and college funding

Regional governance

Correctional facilities

Housing

Education funding

Public safety

Autism treatment

Hospital funding

Public safety

Public transit

Notice of dissatisfaction

Deferred Votes

Meredith Act (Fair Compensation for Injured Workers), 2026 / Loi Meredith de 2026 sur l’indemnisation équitable des travailleurs blessés

Introduction of Visitors

Introduction of Bills

Keeping People Housed Act, 2026 / Loi de 2026 pour que chacun puisse garder son logement

Fair Grocery Prices Act, 2026 / Loi de 2026 pour des produits alimentaires à des prix raisonnables

Petitions

Cancer screening

Emergency services

Social assistance

Ontario economy

Laboratory services

Student assistance

Student assistance

Ontario economy

Retirement homes

Ontario economy

Municipal government

Pharmacare

Opposition Day

Student assistance / Aide financière pour les étudiants

Orders of the Day

Putting Student Achievement First Act, 2026 / Loi de 2026 donnant la priorité à la réussite des élèves

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Good morning, everyone. Let us pray.

Prayers.

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

Orders of the Day

Putting Student Achievement First Act, 2026 / Loi de 2026 donnant la priorité à la réussite des élèves

Resuming the debate adjourned on April 14, 2026, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 101,

An Act to amend various Acts in respect of education and child care / Projet de loi 101, Loi modifiant diverses lois relatives à l’éducation et à la garde d’enfants.

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

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I appreciate the opportunity to address this bill this morning. Speaker, you won’t be shocked to learn that I am not a fan of this bill, and I hope in the course of the next few minutes to talk a bit about what things are in this bill that I find problematic—a few things.

First off, there is nothing in this bill that will actually improve outcomes for students or ensure that they have smaller class sizes. If you are concerned about what is happening in our schools, if you are concerned about the future of the next generation, you should be talking about those issues. They should be at the centre of what you are doing. That is not going to be something coming out of this bill. There is not a focus on special education or mental health supports. And as I talk to teachers, I talk to parents and, frankly, as I talk to students, they say to me, “We aren’t seeing the resources in those areas that we need to see.”

I’m not seeing in this bill any commitment to ensuring that those resources are there. In fact, there are not even commitments to basic resources like pencils. Now, I know the minister has said, “We will be giving an allowance to each teacher so they can buy pencils and paper and so on.” I know this sounds strange, but typically in an organization, you have a budget for supplies. You make sure there are adequate supplies so that if a teacher needs supplies for a classroom, they can go to a storage room and get them. The idea that they have not been properly funded and you have to have a special allowance for teachers does not make sense. That is not a good purchasing policy.

This bill doesn’t put students first. This is about making sure that the Minister of Education is in a far stronger position than that minister has been in the past. And as you are well aware, the amount of money that is being spent per student, adjusted for inflation, has been dropping. So if you actually think that students are important, if you think that education is important, you would be ensuring that budgets were inflation-adjusted and that the students were getting the inputs they need to be successful.

This bill gives the minister more power, and it seems, frankly, to be set up to discourage people from running to be a trustee. That’s of interest to me in part because the minister has said that if there are situations where people don’t run, then he will be appointing trustees. I don’t think having a minister appoint the trustees on a board of education makes sense, certainly not in terms of responsibility to the people as a whole.

I know that democracy is a weird idea. Winston Churchill once said it was the worst of all possible systems, except for the others. I think that the election of decision-makers makes a lot of sense in an open society. When I talk to people who are unhappy with a trustee, I say, “Vote them out. There’s going to be an election. If you don’t think they’re up to snuff, vote them out. Run yourself, if you think you’re in a position to do that, and if you’re not in a position to do that, find someone else who you think is good and support them.”

I think vesting the power in the minister, who is effectively untouchable by the mass of parents, does not make sense in an open and free society. It’s a substantial mistake.

Now, it’s interesting that the bill mentions liability 43 times, while mentioning students five times and classrooms zero times. It’s been interesting to me to watch the bills coming forward from this government that consistently include a clause, or multiple clauses, protecting the minister or civil servants from legal liability for carrying out the act. I don’t remember that being a feature of bills in the past; I think I would’ve noticed it. You have to ask, what is it in the minds of the politicians who direct the drafting of these bills that they think they need protection from legal action?

Is it that they understand the consequences of what they’re doing and realize that it’s going to lead to legal action on the part of parents, teachers, communities? Or is it just an all-purpose “I don’t like to have anyone giving me a hard time” approach to life? It’s not clear to me.

Some of the new powers for the minister: establishing policies that assess student achievement. During the technical briefing that our caucus staff got, they said this was so the minister could require exams for all grade 9 to 12 students and change how grades are calculated across the province to have one standard that includes attendance.

I don’t have a particular rejection of the idea of exams, but it may be that in different school boards and in different schools with different populations you need to have a different method of assessing student achievement, a different method of determining what is actually being learned and a different method of understanding how to get students to perform at their peak.

This bill gives the minister power to set regulations regarding budgets, including giving himself the power to approve board budgets in certain circumstances and banning school boards from paying certain expenses. In the briefing, ministry staff said the minister would approve budgets when trustees don’t approve the CEO’s budget, which basically means trustees are at the mercy of the CEO and his budget. So you have to ask, if the trustees actually can’t decide what the budget is for their board—if the CEO gets to run back to daddy and say, “They don’t like my budget. They’re not voting for my budget.

We need to cut a lot of teachers; we need to cut a lot of support staff; we need bigger classes, and they’re resisting that. Minister, please step in and make sure that my budget is passed,” that’s effectively what’s happening here. So you have a continued shell of elected trustees but, in fact, the power has shifted fundamentally away from local communities and to the minister.

Now, I know—and some people in the House may dispute this—that Toronto is not popular in the rest of Ontario. My colleagues have said to me—

Interjections.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I even got applause for that one. Some colleagues have said to me—the best line they have is, “Do you really want some person in Toronto deciding what happens in your community?”

MPP Wayne Gates: No.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: See? I got even more support for that.

The idea that the minister is setting things up so that the old line, “Hey, it’s just Toronto dictating again,” is actually made real—it is made real. Local boards of trustees will essentially be subject to the minister, and in many ways they will be flack-catchers. I don’t think that this is a good way to operate any sort of democratic system. And I have to note as well the move by the minister to reduce the number of trustees—cap the number of trustees—in a board. So in Toronto, there are 22 trustees. This will be brought down to 12—roughly, one trustee for every two ridings.

Speaker, as you are well aware, the average size of a riding is 100,000 people, so that means one trustee for 200,000 people; 200,000 is bigger than most cities and communities in this province. It is a problematic number. I thought one trustee for 100,000 was a problem, but for 200,000, it makes it extraordinarily difficult for anyone to actually deal on a day-to-day basis with the concerns that people bring about their child’s education.

I’ll say to the members sitting on the government side, if you’re not doing casework in education now, believe me, you’ll be doing it in the future. I’ve been getting that education casework because people realize that the power has shifted from the board to the minister. It is extraordinarily difficult for us, as MPPs, to do that on top of the other casework that we do. But the reality is, when your parent and your child has got a problem in a school—a school is not working properly—you are going to jump in, and there are vast seas of detail that one has to address when one is addressing education.

What this will mean is that, increasingly, parents will not actually be able to have the advocacy for their children or their communities that they need to have. That is a big step backwards in a democratic society. It is a fundamental mistake on the part of this government.

The bill gives expanded powers to the minister to determine what constitutes a valid trustee expense, including the power to block payment of expenses to certain persons or for certain purposes.

You know, if a trustee or any politician makes a stupid spending mistake, then they should be held accountable in the court of public opinion. That should damage them politically. People should know about that. But to have the minister determine what is a valid expense or not, as opposed having the people decide, is a mistake. That gives the minister power, should they decide to exercise it, to be vindictive in dealing with the expenses of any individual trustee. That is not the role of the provincial government in a democratic society. That is the role of the electorate.

Now, that electorate needs to be well-informed. There needs to be the media coverage that will surface those bad actors, but that’s what democracy is about.

The bill will set communications policies for boards that will include “public communications made by ... board members acting as representatives of the board.”

In fact, this could put us in a situation where the minister doesn’t like what a trustee is saying about the situation they’re facing. Maybe a trustee is saying to the parents, “Hey, there have been ongoing cuts to education budgets, and that is affecting our ability to provide appropriate class sizes, appropriate supports in the school, appropriate staffing in the school. If you’re upset, go the minister.” The minister will be in a position to disallow that and only allow happy talk in the notes coming out from trustees or the emails coming out from trustees. That does not make any sense.

Again, if a trustee is communicating inappropriately, vote them out. If any of us are behaving inappropriately—well, sorry; early morning—vote us out. That is the way things get corrected in a democratic system and the way we need to have things set up because if, in fact, the decision makers are not accountable to the public, you get bad decisions. Again, Churchill was right: Democracy is profoundly flawed but better than all the other flawed systems.

Boards will now have to have the minister’s approval to acquire new land. This worries me because, as you are well aware with this government, games around land seem to be a pretty common thing.

MPP Wayne Gates: This is what this is all about.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: One member said this is what this is all about, and that member may be entirely correct. We went through the greenbelt scandal, where the Premier was giving, effectively, an $8.6-billion gift to a bunch of his buddies, people who had come to his daughter’s wedding, an outcome that is now under investigation by the RCMP.

We had decisions about a landfill in Dresden, Ontario, where, prior to an election, the government pulled back and said, “No, no, we’ll have a full environmental assessment.” As soon as the election is over—boom—the landfill goes ahead. Again, it was pointed out widely in the media that the owners of that landfill had very close financial connections with the ruling party.

The potential for abuse of the public purse and the public trust are profound, and turning that over to the minister—particularly to a government that has shown, on an ongoing basis, its weakness, let’s say, to pressure from buddies who are going to make big bucks—is not a good idea. It’s not a good idea for education, and it’s not a good idea for the public purse.

The minister can appoint someone to oversee a capital project, including building, expanding, renovating or repairing a school building, and that includes every component, including the contracts. Seriously? You’re going to have management of, I guess in Toronto’s case, a multi-billion-dollar corporation where the minister reaches in to mess with every contract? If you’re talking about red tape, if you’re talking about decision-making being—what could I say—lost in a maze of approvals, this is a classic example. If you’ve got a board of education, you’ve got elected trustees; you have professional managers.

Let them make those decisions, and if they mess up, vote them out—vote them out. If they do good, re-elect them. But effectively having the minister inserted at every layer of substantial decision-making in a board of education does not make sense.

Interestingly, this line, that boards need approval to create or continue to “operate ... a school board controlled entity”—and it was pointed out by our critic that there are not a lot of examples of school board-controlled entities in Ontario beyond the Toronto Lands Corp. One has to ask if, in fact, that’s the aim here because the Toronto Lands Corp. has control of school board properties, and the opportunity for development and the opportunity for speculative profits from development on school lands are immense, particularly in Toronto.

I have to say that there’s often a short-sighted approach to school lands. I represent Toronto–Danforth. A few decades ago, a school at Logan and Danforth, Frankland, was scheduled for closure, demolition and sale of land. The local community fought hard against that, and they were successful; they were able to retain the school. Within a decade of saving that school, the school playground was full of portables because the demographics had changed. Families that dominated in that neighbourhood, which have had their children—people were moving into their 50s, 60s and 70s and didn’t have kids anymore.

The attendance at the school dropped. Those people moved out, passed on, a whole new generation came in with kids, and the school was flooded. I’ve seen over the decades the portables expand and shrink, expand and shrink. There are demographic waves.

You have to know that in a city like Toronto—frankly, Hamilton, Sarnia, Windsor—you’re going to get demographic waves. When you lose that school property, your ability to get that property back so that you can actually provide that service is close to nil. It is close to nil. So I believe we have to safeguard that property, and having this government, with all its focus on land deals, suddenly have access to a big portfolio of what will be extraordinarily valuable land in the city of Toronto is something that I find very disturbing, very worrying.

Now, the bill, again, as I noted—57 clauses regarding protection of the minister, cabinet and the minister’s appointees against legal cases. There’s only one clause on student achievement. That is a real concern.

MPP Wayne Gates: I thought they were tough on crime.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Someone has just said, “I thought they were tough on crime.”

If you are constantly trying to pull yourself out of the legal system, if you have written this bill and you understand that you may be in deep legal trouble, then I can see why you would be writing all this get-out-of-jail-free card stuff into the bill. I don’t think that serves the public purpose. I think that it makes sense that those who make decisions have to live with the consequences of those decisions, and this sort of thing says no.

I have to touch on two other things in the brief time left to me. One is that we have got a huge problem in Ontario with a lack of teachers and teachers effectively being demoralized and driven out of the system. That is something that causes disruption in individual classrooms and in individual schools. I have teachers come to me and say, “Why do they have such a low opinion of teachers? Why are we seen as a problem and not as a solution to a problem?” I think this government has done a lot to demoralize teachers.

I want to talk very briefly about the question of truancy. There was an interesting

article in the Star this morning about how truancy has soared since the pandemic. At the beginning of the current government’s term in 2018, truancy was a lot less than it is now. Has anyone done an analysis of what this government’s policies have done to cause a huge increase in truancy? Is this something related to the way the education system is running, or is this related to a tougher and tougher economic environment in which students are increasingly taking work outside of school to keep their families afloat and to—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Stephen Blais: I listened intently to your presentation. Thank you very much.

I do agree with you that if things were reduced to 200,000 per trustee, that would be a lot of constituents to try to represent. I think, though, that that representation forgets the fact that there are four different school boards. So the trustees don’t represent the entirety of the population; they represent the people who vote within that school board.

I’m hoping it doesn’t reveal your view that there should only be one school board. I’m hoping you can reiterate your support for fully funded Catholic and French education in Ontario.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I don’t often say this but thank you. That is a really good question, and I am very appreciative.

Yes, we need to have francophone education. We need to have Catholic education. We need a full range of publicly funded education in this province so that all communities are included and equally respected.

In terms of the number of trustees, I think that local communities should determine how many representatives they need. What is the number that is appropriate to ensure that the board is responsive and accountable? Having the minister put a cap on the number of trustees doesn’t make sense to me. Obviously, when you’re talking about a place like Barrie, Innisfil or you’re talking about—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Response?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: You didn’t like that response, Speaker? I thought it was a great response.

The number of trustees should reflect the population and the will of the people in that community.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I recognize the member for Thornhill.

Ms. Laura Smith: I listened to the member opposite. Accountability: We all agree in this House that accountability is important. I think that everyone in this House, specifically the parents—I’m a mother, and for my kids, showing up to class was a priority. It is a priority. Students attending class in high school should be a priority, full stop. This legislation makes attendance part of our students’ marks, an idea that, I should mention, came from the teachers.

Will the member opposite support our students and our teachers by supporting this bill, an obvious thing for everyone in Ontario, or Canada for that matter?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I thank the member for the question. I think the question of attendance is a really substantive one. If we are seeing dramatic reduction in the percentage of students attending on a regular basis, that’s something that needs to be addressed.

So the question that I think the government has to answer is, why are we seeing the drop in attendance? What is causing that? Are there socio-economic factors that are causing that? Are there problems with the way the schools are operating? Is that causing the problem? Will, in fact, what’s being proposed increase attendance, or will it simply mean that students in difficult circumstances are going to be penalized for not showing up?

I think the first task of any government is to understand the basis for something happening so that you can take corrective action. And I have seen no—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Response.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: What is it? What is it that caused a big drop from pre-pandemic to post-pandemic? What caused that drop? If the government can show the studies, it would—

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

MPP Lisa Gretzky: I appreciate the comments from my colleague from Toronto–Danforth.

The member for Thornhill asked a question about truancy, and I think my colleague from Toronto–Danforth summed it up quite nicely. It shows just how out of touch you are with what is going on in this province.

There are numerous reasons why students are unable to attend school. It could be for financial reasons. There are several high school students who have to work in order to support a household, to keep a roof over their head or food on the table. We have a record number of youth under your government that are now accessing food banks when they don’t have food, when they’re hungry. It’s very difficult for them to not only go to school but then do well when they are there.

When we’re talking about accountability specifically, this government has clauses in here to actually absolve themselves from any accountability.

I would like the member for Toronto–Danforth to explain, maybe, why the government is not focusing on supporting the students in the classrooms—like those with special education needs that are being excluded from schools—but instead focusing on reigning in power for themselves, but also bringing in legislation for them to avoid any accountability for their decisions.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I appreciate the question from the member. There are a few items here. This is a government that does not particularly want to be accountable. That’s my experience. That’s what I’ve seen. It will be interesting to see what the RCMP have to say when they finish going through the greenbelt investigation, to see what techniques were used.

And frankly, I’ll just point out again that the Premier’s actions to protect his phone information from freedom of information says to me that this is a government that does not want to be accountable in any way, shape or form for its activities. Shutting down a fundamental method to allow the public to understand why and how government makes decisions says to me that respect for accountability is out the window.

Why is it that they don’t want to be accountable? Maybe they’re going to do really bad things.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

MPP Stephanie Smyth: Thank you to the member from Toronto–Danforth. You mentioned that this whole Bill 101 is about acquiring land. That’s the bottom line. Can you maybe explain that? Help us understand how those dots connect.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Thank you for that. I should say that the acquisition of land is not the only thing driving this bill. I think cutting education budgets is another substantial and critical part.

But the acquisition of land—let’s face it, all of us: Schools sit on very valuable property in a variety of communities around this province. And the ability to acquire that property and sell it to a buddy at a really good price so they can make a fortune has got to be very tempting for a government that is apparently profoundly driven by speculators and land developers.

When you increase their power and decrease their accountability, the potential for land deals that disadvantage the public and make somebody really wealthy—who will be happy to come to the next wedding thrown by the Premier—is a very real risk.

I appreciate the question, and I think all of us should be very concerned about the potential for—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. John Jordan: Speaker, through Bill 33 and Bill 101, this minister and this government are all about responsibility and accountability to the students, the teachers and the parents.

So no, it’s not okay to wait for an election to do as the member says, throw them out, when we know that things have gone off the track—and that’s the entire time that someone could be in high school.

So does the member feel that it’s okay that a student, the teachers, the parents wait for a system to be corrected in the school board, wait for an election for that correction to happen?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: That is one of the more fascinating questions I’ve had in my time here, because this is a government that engages in some of the most bizarre behaviour I’ve seen in my 20 years—under investigation by the RCMP. After the greenbelt, should this government have been thrown out? Damn straight. If there had been an election, you would have been in deep trouble.

So you’re telling me that when it comes to trustees, we should have a higher power overrule them, but when it comes to you and your misbehaviour, you should be able to continue on. Should the Premier of Canada be able to reach into the province of Ontario when he sees or she sees inappropriate behaviour and redirect the government of Ontario? Is that what you’re saying to me, that governments should be in fact kowtowing to the government above them? Is that what you are saying? Because that is the content of their question.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

MPP Wayne Gates: I don’t have a lot of time to get an answer here, but I can tell you, one of my staff is a trustee in Niagara. She does a great job; the board does a great job. They’ve opened up a couple of schools already. But do you know how she got that job?

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I cannot hear the member asking their question.

MPP Wayne Gates: Do you know how she got that job, Speaker? She got that job through an election. She was the youngest woman ever to get elected in Niagara as a trustee. She does a great job and has opened up a couple of new schools.

Do you believe that this is nothing more about control rather than—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Response?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Well, I think this is about setting aside elections. I think this is a bill about making sure democracy has no impact on the education system—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Further debate? I recognize the member for Ajax.

Interjections.

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: Hey, hey.

Well, thank you, Speaker. I’m pleased to rise today to—

Interjections.

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: It’s still early, folks. I don’t have the same jokes as the member from Ottawa South, though.

I rise today to speak to this bill, the Putting Student Achievement First Act.

Speaker, I think if we’re being honest about what’s in front of us today, in my view, I don’t think that this is a bill that is going to be putting student achievement first. I do think it puts some of the goals of the minister, that the minister has spoken about over the last few months, first. It centralizes power, it continues to weaken local decision-making and, in my view, adds bureaucracy into a system that’s already under strain.

While I think the government is focused more on control and controlling school boards from Queen’s Park, just like we’re seeing with municipalities and conservation authorities—there is a theme with this government that everything can just be run out of right here in this building or the lovely office buildings that are just down the road—it’s going to be impacting students, educators and families that are still dealing with the real issues within our classrooms.

After eight years, people aren’t asking for some governance changes—and which I think the government is using as a distraction from the real issues that are happening in public education. Families, educators, students are asking for help. They’re asking for smaller class sizes. They’re asking for safer schools, and they’re asking for real support for their kids, especially kids with special needs. I don’t believe that’s what the government here is delivering to them.

Speaker, this bill doesn’t fix education; it simply reorganizes a part of it. It adds a new layer of bureaucracy, moving essentially the finance official to be the CEO—a bit of a shell game. It continues the trend of centralizing power in the ministry, and it’s taking power away from local communities. Boards are going to be weakened and decisions are going to be pulled back into Queen’s Park. Meanwhile, again, nothing changes for students within the classroom—class sizes being too large, schools not being made safer and supports remaining inadequate.

In some ways, it’s really more about managing optics. It’s kind of saying, “Oh, we’re doing something. The government is doing something. The government is fixing education.” But really, it isn’t. It is just leaving the same issues that we have on the table. It’s about the perception of creating these kinds of changes. It’s not a bad communications exercise from the government, but students and families and educators are going to feel that within the classroom.

This government still refuses to deal with class sizes. Classrooms are getting bigger and students are getting less support. Since 2018, Ontario has lost nearly 5,000 classroom educators. Fewer educators mean more students per class and less time for each child. Teachers, they’re stretched thin. Students, they’re falling behind. This bill does nothing to change that—not one measure to reduce class sizes, not one plan to put more adults into classrooms. You can’t improve student achievement when students are packed into overcrowded classrooms. Teachers can’t give that individual attention.

Students who are struggling fall behind, and students with complex needs go unsupported. That’s what’s happening right now across Ontario, Speaker.

I think of a school board in Algoma, the Catholic board there. I believe, in talking to educators there, we’ve got some classes where a teacher is teaching five split grades. Imagine that: teaching five split grades in a class of about 30. That’s really challenging. You’ve got some boards, okay, three split grades—which I still think is too much. Imagine doing that. Those are some of the things that I think that this government should be looking at. They like to talk about schools in rural communities; well, this is one way to improve education in schools in rural communities. I think that would be a very important step. We don’t see something like that within this bill.

Violence in our schools is rising, and the government is failing to act. Educators are reporting more violent incidents, more disruptions and more unsafe classrooms, and it’s tied directly to unmet student needs and a lack of supports. But instead of addressing it, the government is looking the other way. It does nothing to reduce violence; it does nothing to support staff dealing with it in the classroom. And you can’t expect students to achieve if students and teachers don’t feel safe, so when violence increases, every student pays the price.

Learning is disrupted, classrooms become unstable, teachers are forced into crisis management instead of what they are meant to do: teaching. That is the reality that this government is truly ignoring.

Knocking on doors last summer, I had a parent tell me that he’s thinking about putting his kids into private school. I was shocked to hear that, but I asked why. He said that because of the disruptions in the classroom, because of the challenges in the classroom, because of the lack of adults in the classroom, his kids, who just want to achieve, his kids, who just want to do well and go after their true potential, are not getting the support that they need. It’s not because of the teacher. It’s because of the way this education system has been structured and dealt with. It’s failing our students.

Safety in our schools should be a top priority. I think this bill is going to make things worse. It eliminates the requirement for school climate surveys, the very tools that track safety, bullying, student well-being, physical safety. That means less data, less accountability and fewer warning signs. We’ll know less about what students are experiencing, about if they’re being bullied, about if they feel safe or if they have struggles with their mental health.

This government, in some ways, is choosing to fly blind. You can’t improve safety if you refuse to measure it, and it means that administrators and principals won’t have the data and the information that they need in order to do targeted interventions in classrooms or schools. When you’re building school culture and managing change in communities and trying to build that up, it’s not something where you flick on a light switch and it happens overnight. You need to build trust within school communities, and that means spending the extra time.

I used to work at a school board. We had 135 different schools—it’s a big system. We’ve got bigger systems and smaller systems, systems where schools are really spread out in rural areas where the principal really is the person who’s there. To have data, to have tools—and with central office knowing what’s going on, they’re able to provide that support. That’s really, really important because there are going to be some schools where you need to work to improve the school climate and culture, whether it’s among staff, whether it’s among students, whether it’s the relationship between families and the school. I think this is going to be taking a step back.

Choosing not to collect data doesn’t make problems disappear. Burying your head in the sand does nothing, and it makes the challenges that students are dealing with much harder.

None of this happens in isolation. It affects the people holding the system together every day, our educators and our support staff, who come in because they love teaching. They love seeing the smiling faces of kids in the school, and they love being able to support those kids to go on and hopefully one day be here in this chamber or achieve whatever success that they want to in life.

Speaker, there’s a growing teacher retention problem in this province. Educators are leaving the profession, especially within their first five years, and they’re leaving for a reason. Larger class sizes, rising violence, increasing workload and fewer supports: Those are daily realities in our schools. The government knows this, and they refuse to act on dealing with retention. This bill doesn’t do anything to improve working conditions, nothing to retain experienced educators. You can’t have a strong education system if you can’t keep teachers in it.

The government will say, “Well, we’re changing the teacher college so we can recruit new teachers and make it easier to do so.” But really, the best solution when we’re talking about retention is to retain experienced educators who are passionate and wanted to go into education in the first place.

When I speak to those educators, some of them are sad that they choose to leave public education, but they’re doing that for their own well-being. They’re doing that for their own mental health.

I think that is a failure of this government that we’ve seen the last eight years, Speaker, because when experienced educators leave, students lose. They lose that mentorship, stability and quality instruction, and it’s how systems decline.

Speaker, nowhere is that more evident than in special education. Special education in our province is in crisis. Students with disabilities aren’t getting the support that they need. Educators are being asked to do more with fewer resources. It’s leaving vulnerable students behind, and it’s putting pressure on every classroom.

Yet this bill doesn’t do anything to fix special education—no new funding, no new supports, no plan. I don’t believe this government can claim to support students, Speaker, by abandoning the students who need the most help. I know those students, if they receive that help, will be able to achieve their true potential.

When looking through the bill, there are a lot of elements to this, and it is a pretty big bill. I do feel in some ways it really is moving the shell game around. Let’s talk about some of these matters.

When it comes to the TDSB going from 22 to 12, I don’t know how those elections are going to work, quite frankly, over this really large geographical area. I think that’s probably going to be a challenge for them to sort out. I do question what is going on there because when you are overseeing a much larger area, I think it’s going to be very challenging to be able to respond to parents, to be able to help parents and help folks. That’s how I look at it when it comes to the TDSB context itself.

I think a lot more thinking really needed to be done. It felt like this bill was, in some ways, a bit of a rush job because there was this debate that we were seeing out in the public: “Are we going to get rid of trustees or not?” or “What are we going to do?”

Ultimately, the government decided not to get rid of trustees, which I do think, Speaker, was the right call. But the way in which this has been organized, the way in which this has been set up, it really feels like it’s a government and a Ministry of Education that’s a little bit in crisis management mode, trying to figure out, “How do we save face? We’ve talked tough for so long on this, and now this is what it is.”

It really doesn’t change overall very much the structure of our public education system. There are a lot of school boards where there are some challenges among trustees and, unfortunately, that serves as a distraction from what the focus needs to be within the classroom. So I do acknowledge that there need to be some changes around how school board governance is operated, around governance training, for example, Speaker, but I’m seeing this, and I don’t know that this is necessarily going to be the right approach because we’re just moving the chess pieces all over the table again.

When I talk about the ministry’s supervision powers being expanded, I think this really appears—now that the ministry has control of—what are we at now, six boards, something like that? I’ve lost track of how many boards are under supervision. I think now they’re realizing, “Oh, wait, we didn’t think about this. Oh, wait, we didn’t think about that,” and in some ways it’s, again, Queen’s Park. This is the direct way that Queen’s Park is able to control school boards right now. I said it before, when the previous education bill was here, that at the end of the day I think it is going to be a land play for those school boards.

If we look at Peel region, the Peel District School Board owns a very, very large swath of land. I fear—because everything seems to revolve around land and development with this government—they are going to be looking at that property and, “How do we give that property away?” There are properties in Toronto, properties in Ottawa, properties in school boards all across this province, Speaker, that are I think the government is looking at, that I think those supervisors are looking at.

I think it is the backdoor way in order to remove some important public properties from communities but do it in a way that doesn’t involve the public consultation that’s needed, do it in a way that may very well set those boards further back.

There are properties that should be suplused and that should be sold, absolutely; I will not deny that within our public education system. But I think the way in which it’s being done, frankly—I can’t trust this government to do it.

I’ve heard some positive feedback on the changes to teachers’ college. I know that’s always a bit of a debate among folks: Should it be the two-year or the one-year? I will give the government some credit because I think they’re trying to do the best in this situation here.

Around school board associations, I think this bill is going to probably mean the end of the Ontario Public School Boards’ Association, and probably the Catholic trustees’ association as well, by very likely removing the fees that are paid to those organizations. The important part, though, that some of those organizations do play is that they are able to bring together folks that are involved in public education from around the province. It’s things like professional development, things like connections. We’ve got 72 school boards across the province, so I think it’s really important that that communication happens there; otherwise it’s Queen’s Park again putting its head down.

Around some of the bargaining changes, I think the jury will be out on that. I know the minister was making a point to say that trustees shouldn’t be responsible for bargaining, but I want to make very clear that the folks working at OBSPA that are doing that bargaining are professional human resource officials, they are professional negotiators. They are professional. It’s not some trustee anywhere in this province saying, “This is how we’re negotiating.” That’s not the case, Speaker, and I feel it’s a bit disingenuous when it’s being referred to as otherwise. Again, it’s a bit of a distraction, a smokescreen.

It’s a distraction from the real issues that are going on within public education.

When we look at defining education materials, my colleague from Orléans asked a question the other day around learning materials and actually going back a bit to books and pen and paper. I think that’s an important distinction there, and that’s something this government really does need to be thinking about. I think the government also needs to be thinking about some of these e-learning courses that are now currently being offered, that students can access in school boards across the province—not necessarily with the school district that you’re at but another one.

And these e-learning courses don’t really have very many attendance requirements: “Oh, you’ve just got to log on once a day.” There’s no verification or knowing what those students are actually doing or not in those courses. Then, when it comes time for assessment, when it comes time for exams, now, with the rise of AI, what educators are telling me is that they’re seeing students using AI. They’re seeing students use that in order to complete sometimes very complex questions. When educators ask the student after, “Can you show your work on that?” the student just laughs.

I think there’s some gaps here that this government can be looking at because, in some ways, I feel like grades are being artificially inflated.

They want to talk about school graduation. I’m seeing kids graduating grade 12 that can’t read or write properly, can’t do math properly. That is a problem. That’s going to set that individual back, but it’s going to set our society back as well.

I think one positive element could be—and it will depend on what the regulation says—that I think there are some elements where it does make a little bit of sense to standardize amongst school boards, to provide a little bit more consistency, to in some ways create the box. I know, maybe some of my former colleagues or folks I know may not fully agree with that, but I do think, between school boards, it makes a lot of sense that you do some of that around communication. But the devil is really going to be in the details. We’ll have to see what’s in the regulation.

Speaker, requiring ministerial approval for boards purchasing land—in some ways, I think that does make a lot of sense because, ultimately, we’re at a point now within school boards where the ministry is fully funding those purchases. So unless the whole financial model of school boards changes, some of that makes sense. But I fear, as I’ve said before about the sell-off of school land and my fears about how this government will approach it—will it be local communities, or will it be done right straight through for Queen’s Park?

Speaker, after eight long years, this government cannot claim that these problems are new. Aside from those that really, frankly, they’ve created themselves, they’ve ignored known issues until they’ve become problems. They’ve created crisis and chaos., and now they’re trying to distract from their own issues that this government has created.

This bill doesn’t meet the moment. It doesn’t address the crisis in our classrooms. It does not support students, and it does not support educators. It takes power away from communities. It concentrates it in the minister’s office even more, and it hopes that no one notices what’s missing.

But you know what, Speaker? I’ve received messages from parents and educators over the last couple days. People do notice. Students are noticing, parents are noticing and educators are noticing. And do you know what? As time goes on, they’re going to notice more and more that this is a failing government on public education. I would give this government an F on it. And frankly, students, families, educators and everyone in our school system deserves much better than that.

Royal assent / Sanction royale

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I beg to inform the House that, in the name of His Majesty the King, Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor has been pleased to assent to certain bills in her office.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Meghan Stenson): The following are the titles of the bills to which Her Honour did assent:

An Act to authorize the expenditure of certain amounts for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2026 / Loi autorisant l’utilisation de certaines sommes pour l’exercice se terminant le 31 mars 2026.

An Act to revive Holy Trinity Restaurant Inc.

An Act to revive 1955274 Ontario Inc.

An Act to revive Faris Team Mortgage Brokerage Corp.

An Act to revive Jarm Holdings Investments Ltd.

An Act respecting Pickering College.

An Act to revive 1000401924 Ontario Inc.

An Act to revive 1000401927 Ontario Inc.

An Act to revive 1505756 Ontario Inc.

An Act to revive Acme Restoration Inc.

An Act to revive 1758195 Ontario Ltd.

An Act to revive 668986 Ontario Inc.

An Act to incorporate the Roman Catholic Bishop of St. Catharines as a corporation sole.

An Act to amend the Pembroke and Area Airport Commission Act, 1992.

Putting Student Achievement First Act, 2026 / Loi de 2026 donnant la priorité à la réussite des élèves

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Questions?

Mr. Jeff Burch: Thanks to the member from Ajax for his speech.

Rather than putting student achievement first, this bill is all about putting the Minister of Education and his ego first. It vastly expands his powers and creates a whole new layer of bureaucracy but limits the advocacy and support that parents receive.

I’m wondering if the member could tell us the dangers of creating a whole new layer of bureaucracy in the school system, rather than addressing students’ concerns.

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: What this bill does is it essentially moves the finance official to potentially be the CEO. And the reality is that unless you are an educator that has worked in the classroom, went up and became a principal and a superintendent, you’re not going to know the impact of decisions that are going to affect students and families.

Even some of the best business and financial officials within our province do not have that same context. So to have the director, as an educator, making that final call, I think, is better for students. It’s better for families in the systems.

The other thing I would say is that that business official is also the treasurer of the board. Nothing really changes in that way. They already present that budget to the school board. They already go through that process. So it’s really just moving pieces around on the table. But at the end of the day, the person now that’s going to be in charge, that’s going to make the final decision, they will not know the same context and information within the classroom.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Stephen Blais: Thank you for your debate this morning. Part of the bill will require that attendance in class be part of the final grade. I think we can all agree that attendance at work and in life is part of how our employers judge us or how our spouse judges us and how we get judged broadly in society.

Attendance in this place is also a way in which the Premier and the cabinet are graded. They only have to show up to two thirds of all portions of question period and that allows them to achieve 100% of the goal. I’m wondering if you think that the rules around attendance in classrooms should mirror similarly the rules around the Premier and his cabinet’s participation and attendance in question period, or lack there of?

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: Frankly, we don’t sit very much in this chamber already, so there are not many opportunities to even be able to ask questions of the government. So when we are sitting, especially with government ministers and the Premier, I think it’s really important that we’re able to do that.

The other thing I’ll say, though, about this bill and student attendance is that it doesn’t take into account that students may be dealing with challenges outside of the classroom. They may be supporting a younger family member who is going to elementary school. They may be supporting their parents. They may need to make some money in order to support their family. This bill doesn’t take that into consideration, and I think it will penalize some of the most marginalized students within our schools.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Andrew Dowie: Thanks to the member from Ajax for his remarks. Listening to your statements—and I’m grateful for some great points—one thing that we’ve noticed down our way, in Essex county, has been the trustees themselves and their relationship with the directors of education. Many years ago, back in 2012-13, the Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board was put under supervision. Not too long ago, Paul Picard, who was the director of education at the time, said, “You have trustees who are responsible to electors and ... [who] want to get re-elected. There’s some reluctance to make the difficult choices. And so at that juncture ... the ministry stepped in to provide assistance.”

Further on he says, “On one side there’s going to be people saying ... local autonomy begins to erode, but on the other side, to get in this constant cycle of deficit financing, it’s going to reach a critical point to where it is impacting ... the most vulnerable.”

I know you worked in a board previously. I’m wondering if the director’s comments are valid as he said them?

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: I would say this bill doesn’t actually really change much of that in the first place. So that situation there, this bill doesn’t really change that. You’re still reporting to the board of trustees, so that reporting structure, frankly, doesn’t change.

From time to time—and I think we’ve seen it on municipal councils, which is why there is a bill that did come forward that I don’t believe has been enacted or passed yet, to deal with the removal of members. That would be something that we need to start maybe looking at, because ultimately you shouldn’t have councillors behaving badly, you shouldn’t have trustees behaving badly—because there will be, especially in some of these places, some of that dysfunction.

I would actually put it back to the member and the government to say that that bill they did, they should have included school board trustees in the bill to remove officials that really went afoul of conflict-of-interest rules, and actually have done it in way that it would have been effective.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I listened intently to the remarks from the member for Ajax. I’m interested in his perspective on the fact that this bill includes 57 clauses that reference protecting the minister, the government cabinet and the minister’s appointees against legal cases. The bill references the words “liable” or “liability” 43 times.

Would the member care to speculate on what the government needs to give itself immunity from with these extraordinary new powers that are included in this legislation?

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: How much time do we have to go through that? I think really it’s a government, with this bill, that is not focusing on student achievement. It is focusing on protecting the minister. In terms of what situations it could be, obviously there are some things—if they’re trying to do this—or some things they know that they’re going to be doing into the future, whether it’s around land, whether it’s around other aspects of school board governance or operations.

I think we can brainstorm what a pretty large list it would be. Frankly, it appears to me that it’s just a government that’s backpedaling on public education, that doesn’t actually have a plan, that’s scrambling. And then, they’re trying to clean up their own messes that they’re making.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Stephen Blais: Earlier you mentioned the municipal accountability bill. And about 20 minutes ago in debate, the government member from Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston said it would be inappropriate to allow trustees to continue in their position if they were caught in some form of malfeasance or inappropriate behaviour. I agree.

And yet this is a government that has rejected the idea—voted against the idea—of removing city councillors from office who are sexually harassing their staff. And it’s slow-rolling their own bill on that same thing, hoping that we get to municipal election season before they bring it back.

And so I’m wondering why they think it’s okay to remove trustees before an election for malfeasance, but they don’t agree that removing city councillors for sexual harassment is something that should be done before an election.

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: Frankly, in this situation—and this highlights why that bill around municipal accountability should have been passed. They actually could have incorporated some provisions within the Education Act as part of that bill in order to provide different levels of discipline for municipal councillors that were acting badly. This is a government that chose not to do that, and it was raised in debate on that bill. It was raised on the sidelines.

And it behooves me as to why this government actually isn’t seriously interested in ensuring that our municipal councillors—and I would say even school board trustees—are held accountable for the actions that they take. There’s a lot of talk; there’s actually not a lot of action, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Ms. Natalie Pierre: Right now, teachers across Ontario are spending hours of their day—personal time—scouring the Internet, looking at sites, Teachers Pay Teachers, just to find basic classroom materials because the system has failed to give them a reliable foundation to work from.

Bill 101 extends the existing Trillium List approach for textbooks to digital and classroom resources, giving teachers a high-quality, ministry-approved base to start from while preserving their own professional flexibilities to supplement with their own materials. Bill 101 is about supporting teachers, not second-guessing them.

Does the member opposite believe Ontario teachers should continue building their own lesson plans, or would you instead support a trusted, vetted set of resources the government has finally given them?

Mr. Rob Cerjanec: One, I would say professional judgment is enshrined in the collective agreements that educators have with the province. So the educator’s professional judgment should always be there.

The minister and I have had this conversation, especially around the technology tools, because we’ve got 72 different school boards in this province and many different processes—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Further debate? I recognize the member for Algoma–Manitoulin.

MPP Bill Rosenberg: Good morning, Madam Speaker. I’m pleased to rise today to represent the good people of Algoma–Manitoulin and to speak to Bill 101, Putting Student Achievement First Act, 2026, and highlight all the measures the government has done to improve the education system to date.

I’d first like it to be noted that I will be sharing my time with the member from Cambridge.

During this speech, I will go over a few of the changes that Bill 101, if passed by this assembly, will do to strengthen education in the province. We heard this morning some of the debate—we drifted off into the greenbelt, FOI, and that’s all easy, but since Minister Calandra has been appointed, his goal has been clear. He has been focused on making sure Ontario’s education system supports student success and helps students reach their full potential.

At its heart, this legislation is about student achievement. Our education system must give every student a fair chance to succeed. That starts in the classroom, and it continues through school.

It carries into life beyond graduation. Students need strong foundations in reading, writing and math. They also need practical skills that can use in everyday life, and they need to be prepared for post-secondary education and the jobs that they will take on in the future, whatever those may be. We must keep building a modern education system that supports learning in every classroom.

The latest EQAO results show some real progress. Reading and writing outcomes are at the highest levels since the COVID-19 pandemic, an indication our efforts are working, with many students performing better than ever before. Graduation rates are also at a historic high, which speaks to the hard work of students, families and educators across this province. These results give us confidence that there is improvement.

At the same time, they show us that we can do better. In some areas, especially math, progress has been slower than we would like. Many students are meeting expectations, but we cannot leave any student behind. Certain student groups and some school boards continue to face gaps in achievement. These gaps are not a reflection of effort or ability; they point to places where students need more support.

Our goal is simple: to help every student succeed, no matter where they live or which school they attend. The system is moving in the right direction, and we want to build on that momentum so more students can do even better.

That’s why our government has appointed an expert advisory board. Its role is to lead a comprehensive review of student achievement and assessment in Ontario. This review will focus on reading, writing and math; it will look closely at the real causes behind achievement gaps; and it will recommend clear, practical steps to better support teachers, parents and students.

Speaker, the review will ask important questions, such as: Are the curriculum and learning materials clear and easy to use? Are teachers getting the preparation and support they need? Do students have the right tools to succeed in the classroom?

It will also examine EQAO assessments. The review will consider whether those assessments match what students are learning. It will look at whether they are fair for all students and if the data they generate contributes to improved student achievement. The recommendations will be released publicly. Families, educators and communities deserve to see the steps being taken to improve outcomes for every student.

While this review continues, the government is not standing still. We are already taking action; we cannot afford to wait. A big part of the work is supporting teachers and educators across Ontario. Teachers are the backbone of student success. Strong students depend on strong educators. Ontario has talented teachers and dedicated school staff. Many of our schools are among the best in the country. Our responsibility is to make sure educators have the tools, the resources and the support they need to help students succeed.

Over the past year, the government has taken practical steps to better equip educators with the tools they need in the classrooms. That is why last month, Premier Ford and Minister Calandra announced the Classroom Supplies Fund. We know that many teachers have been paying out of pocket for supplies. While school boards receive funding for classroom resources, we have not always seen those dollars consistently reach every classroom. That is why we are putting funds directly into the hands of teachers who know best what the students need.

Starting this September, eligible elementary teachers will receive $750 each school year to purchase classroom supplies. Teachers will receive a classroom supplies card directing them to the website and instructions on how to access that site. This website will offer a grade-by-grade selection of commonly used classroom items, including writing materials, notebooks, calculators, arts and crafts supplies, facial tissues and paper towels. This will make it easier for teachers to get what they need without paying upfront or waiting for reimbursement.

It also helps create more consistent access to supplies across classrooms. This matters because elementary school sets the foundation for future success. Teachers should never have to hold back because materials are not available.

The government is also taking steps to better support teachers’ professional growth. Working with the Ontario College of Teachers, the government has removed long-standing barriers for technology education teachers, teachers of Indigenous languages and teachers of Indigenous ancestry, opening clearer paths into school leadership roles. These changes support career advancement and help attract and retain a strong, diverse teaching workforce.

Last week, Minister Quinn and Minister Calandra announced a shorter, more efficient teacher education program. Hands-on training and strong mentorship help new teachers feel ready for the classroom, which also means they are more likely to stay in the profession. In addition, our government is investing $16.8 million over three years to increase honoraria for associate teachers. Our goal is to ensure teacher candidates can learn from experienced mentors during their placement.

Speaker, all of this reflects our commitment to support educators so they can continue helping students succeed, and it brings us to the introduction of the Putting Student Achievement First Act, 2026. If passed, the proposed changes in this bill would allow us to improve consistency and effectiveness in curriculum delivery by giving teachers the tools they need to support student learning. We are also helping improve student preparedness for post-secondary pursuits and ensuring consistent assessment practices for students in grade 9 to grade 12. These are but a few of the proposed changes that would come into effect if Bill 101 passes.

As mentioned earlier, I will be sharing my time with the member from Cambridge. I’ll hand over the debate to him and look forward to questions from my colleagues.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I recognize the member for Cambridge.

Mr. Brian Riddell: It’s always an honour to stand in this place, representing the people of Cambridge. I will be continuing where my colleague from Algoma–Manitoulin left off, highlighting additional areas where Bill 101, if passed, would strengthen education and further support parents, teachers and students all across Ontario.

Strong student outcomes depend on a consistency of high-quality teaching materials in the classroom. Ontario has already provided a government-approved list of textbooks. This approach works quite well. It gives teachers a clear structure for their lessons. It also saves time, so teachers are not required to build everything from scratch. Most importantly, it helps create greater consistency across the classroom.

We want to extend this same approach to other classroom learning materials. Right now, educators rely on a wide range of independently chosen materials; not all of these are clearly aligned with the curriculum. This has led to differences from classroom to classroom and, in some cases, learning materials that are not appropriate for students. That’s why what the government wants to do is make sure students have access to high-quality, age-appropriate learning resources. These materials should be aligned with what the students are expected to learn, no matter where they attend school.

Speaker, the proposed changes, if passed, would allow the Ministry of Education to mandate the use of ministry-approved learning resources in classrooms across the province. It would help to ensure a consistent and effective implementation of the curriculum.

Of course, flexibility remains important, with teachers still able to use supplementary materials where needed: for example, to accommodate students’ needs, or support denominational or French-language education rights; this would be one of these areas. The government is working on developing classroom resources to be available for the beginning of the 2026-27 school year.

These resources may include lesson plans, student materials—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Thank you.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

House sittings

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I beg to inform the House that the Clerk has received written notices from the government House leader indicating that temporary changes in the weekly meeting

schedule of the House are required, and therefore, pursuant to standing order 9(h), the House shall commence at 9 a.m. on Monday, April 20, 2026, for the proceeding Orders of the Day, and pursuant to standing order 9(g), the afternoon routine on Wednesday, April 22, 2026, shall commence at 1 p.m.

Members’ Statements

Skilled trades

Mr. Brian Riddell: I rise to recognize an important investment in the future of the skilled trades in Ontario. I recently joined Premier Doug Ford and Minister David Piccini in Cambridge to celebrate the grand opening of LIUNA Local 837 training centre, supported by an $8.8-million investment from our government.

This new facility is about more than just bricks and mortar. It’s about investing in people, skills and opportunity. Skilled trade workers are the backbone of our economy, building our homes, infrastructure and communities. Our government is working to ensure these careers are seen as a first choice, while investing in trades training and creating pathways for the next generation. At a time when new technologies are reshaping the workforce, the skilled trades remain an essential item and in demand.

Before entering public service, I worked as a mechanical millwright and industrial engineer, and I have seen first-hand the pride and discipline this work requires. This training centre will help prepare the next generation right here in Cambridge, a community with a strong and growing trades sector.

I want to thank LIUNA for their leadership in building safer work sites, stronger futures. I congratulate them on this achievement.

Coopérative Ami Jeunesse

M me Chandra Pasma: Je prends la parole aujourd’hui pour souligner le travail de la coopérative Ami Jeunesse, un organisme francophone qui se trouve au coeur de ma circonscription d’Ottawa-Ouest–Nepean, au sens propre comme au figuré.

Chaque mois, la coopérative prépare des paniers alimentaires pour plus d’une centaine de familles francophones, souvent nouvellement arrivées, à travers toute la ville d’Ottawa. Leur soutien est indispensable au bien-être et à la stabilité de ces familles, surtout de leurs enfants.

J’ai récemment eu le plaisir de leur rendre visite et de voir concrètement les améliorations logistiques rendues possibles grâce au soutien de la Fondation Trillium de l’Ontario. Ce réaménagement fait une différence réelle dans leurs opérations. Je tiens à remercier chaleureusement toute l’équipe, les bénévoles et les partenaires pour leur travail inspirant et l’exemplarité de leur solidarité.

Leur travail essentiel nous rappelle une réalité difficile : dans notre province, les besoins croissants des banques alimentaires représentent un signal d’alarme que nous ne pouvons ignorer. Nous devons continuer de faire tout ce qui est en notre pouvoir pour ne pas vivre dans une province où un enfant ne sait pas d’où ni quand viendra son prochain repas.

Anniversaries in Kingston and the Islands / Anniversaires à Kingston et les Îles

Mr. Ted Hsu: I want to take a moment to mention some big anniversaries in my riding this year. Congratulations to the Archdiocese of Kingston, celebrating its 200th anniversary. The first Catholic diocese created on British land since the Reformation, Kingston is the mother Catholic diocese of all Ontario.

The Kingston chamber of commerce and the Kingston police force are both celebrating their 185th anniversaries this year. Peace, order and commercial success have gone hand in hand for almost two centuries.

Congratulations to the Kingston Brewing Company, celebrating its 40th anniversary. It is Ontario’s oldest brew pub, where we warmly welcome visitors, like the leader of the official opposition.

And finally, congratulations to Mabuhay Fil-Can, celebrating its first year as a registered not-for-profit in Kingston, as a vehicle for the proud Filipino-Canadian commitment to unity, cultural pride and community service.

Je remercie l’ensemble des institutions et des organismes communautaires qui composent notre société civile et contribuent à la force de Kingston.

Thank you to all the institutions and community groups that form civil society and make Kingston strong.

Persian community

Ms. Laura Smith: My riding is home to an incredible Persian community that are deeply proud of their heritage, and I recently had the opportunity to celebrate the rich heritage of Nowruz with members of this House and our Premier right here at the Legislature.

The Nowruz Haft Sin table they crafted represents renewal and hope, and despite the painful reality of their homeland, they had great strength through their community ties that reflect resilience and acceptance.

I was reminded of Cyrus the Great. He was a Persian warrior and a founder of the Achaemenid Empire, known for recognizing human dignity and civil society engagement amongst diverse cultures. And he’s also celebrated in Jewish history for ending their Babylonian captivity. Cyrus maintained a policy of religious and cultural tolerance, allowing for local customs and religions to thrive.

Here in Ontario, we are so privileged to benefit from the legacy of Cyrus through the contributions of a very vibrant Iranian Canadian community, whose commitment to democratic values enhance our province every single day.

An important movement has begun in recognizing April 19 as Cyrus Accord Awareness Day, so please join me in celebrating the Cyrus Accord and how we can positively shape public conversations through principled and peaceful advocacy.

Jett Landry Music

MPP Jamie West: It’s the end of an era in Sudbury. After 55 years, Jett Landry Music is closing their doors. Jett Landry is the largest independent music store in northern Ontario. It’s a family-owned music store that was started by Jett in 1971. He now runs it with his son, Jett Landry Jr.

Jett Landry Music is where Sudburians take their children when they’re interested in music. They do repairs, they offer lessons and, of course, they have a huge selection of musical instruments. In fact, when my son Thomas wanted a guitar, everyone I spoke to said, “You’ve got to go to Jett.” They didn’t sell me the most expensive guitar; they sold me one that was good for beginners and that was easy to play. My story isn’t unique. There’s been generations of families taking their children to Jett Landry to pick out new instruments, to take lessons, to be inspired, to pursue their talents and creativity.

Jett Landry Music’s personalized services from community-driven and passionate staff is probably what’s kept people coming back for 55 years. I know I join countless others in Sudbury when I say thank you to the Landry family. We wish you a happy retirement and best wishes for whatever comes next. As Jett always says, music is forever.

Daffodil Month

Ms. Natalie Pierre: I rise today to mark Daffodil Month, led by the Canadian Cancer Society. Each spring, the daffodil is one of the first flowers to bloom, a simple but powerful reminder that even after the hardest winters, brighter days lie ahead.

For me and so many families across Ontario and across Canada, this message of hope is deeply personal. Nearly half of Canadians are expected to be diagnosed with cancer in their lifetime. These are our parents, our siblings, friends, neighbours, co-workers and people that we love, facing some of the most difficult moments of their lives.

This month is about them. It honours the resilience of people living with cancer, remembering the loved ones we carry with us in our hearts, and inspires us to stand together in support every step of the way. It’s also about the incredible work being done through research, support programs and advocacy to improve outcomes and help people live longer, fuller lives.

Because small acts—whether it’s a donation, wearing a daffodil or simply starting a conversation—can make a real difference, together, we will continue to bring hope to those who need it most.

Government investments

Mr. Robert Bailey: The government of Ontario continues to make strategic investments in the success of businesses in Sarnia–Lambton. Recently, I had the opportunity to tour St. Clair Mechanical in Brigden, Ontario, which was the recipient of a $500,000 grant from the government of Ontario’s Regional Development Program to help support a $3.5-million expansion of their industrial fabrication facility.

The new 10,000-square-foot expansion has helped St. Clair Mechanical increase its metal fabrication, manufacturing and production capacity while also enabling access to new market opportunities in high-growth sectors such as nuclear energy, renewable energy, mining and battery manufacturing.

The project’s expansion also includes the installation of new welding systems and fabrication technologies, which have enhanced efficiency, precision and quality, as well as reduced lead times in fabrication to meet customer demand.

Ontario is investing over $220 million through its Regional Development Program to help manufacturers across the province to grow while supporting distinct regional priorities. Since its launch, the Regional Development Program has supported more than 180 projects, leveraging more than $2.5 billion in new investments to help create over 4,800 new jobs.

Madam Speaker, thanks to our government’s plan to protect Ontario, I look forward to sharing more good news about strategic investments in Sarnia–Lambton in the months ahead.

Cadets

Mr. Will Bouma: As many of you are aware, my riding of Brantford–Brant is home to a vibrant, motivated and active cadet movement. Today, I would like to continue the tradition of welcoming the top cadets as chosen by their commanding officers for their dedication, excellence and willingness to make our community the best that it can be. The cadets of Brantford–Brant not only improve themselves but also improve the communities we serve.

From the Navy League of Canada Cadet Corps Admiral Landymore, I welcome Able Cadet Elora Murtagh and Ordinary Cadet Rosemarie Masheiel, accompanied by their officer, Lieutenant Richard Carpenter, and Sub-Lieutenant John Sinden.

From the Royal Canadian Sea Cadet Corps Admiral Nelles, I welcome Chief Petty Officer First Class Rebecca Papez and Petty Officer First Class Ari Henderson. They are accompanied by their officer, Lieutenant Shane Downey.

From the 2659 Royal Canadian Army Cadets, I welcome Master Warrant Officer Danyka Jorgensen and Master Warrant Officer Jacob Russell, alongside their officer, Captain Josh Jenne.

From the 104 Starfighter Royal Canadian Air Cadets, I am pleased to welcome Warrant Officer Second Class Ella Kendall and Corporal Hanna Town, alongside officer Captain Celina Corner.

Cadets, officers, the people of Ontario salute you for your hard work and contribution to Brantford–Brant.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Pharmacare

MPP Robin Lennox: I’ll always remember Joan, a patient in my family practice who was living with type 2 diabetes. She would come in diligently every three months for her checkups, but her glucose tests were almost never within range. You see, Joan was working full-time, but she didn’t have benefits and the $200 for her diabetes medications was the one thing she could never squeeze into the budget at the end of the month.

She would end every appointment the same way, by saying “I’m sorry” for not being able to get her medication, and I would say, “I’m sorry,” because there was no way for me to find coverage for her medication. Here we were, a patient and a physician, both apologizing to each other for what is actually a government failure, a choice not to have universal drug coverage in Ontario.

I imagine Joan must have felt such relief when she heard that federal pharmacare passed and there was a promise for universal coverage for diabetes medications and devices. Finally, she would be able to stop apologizing and just focus on her health. But because of this government’s neglect, Joan and thousands of others are still waiting.

First, the Minister of Health said the holdup was figuring out how to protect private drug plans. Now, the minister is blaming the federal government. Meanwhile, people living in BC have had their diabetes medications covered since March 1, and four other provinces have coverage on the way.

I call on the Premier to take accountability, to take action and to finally get Ontarians access to the essential medications they deserve.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Joining us in the Speaker’s gallery, we have the member for Thornhill for the 39th and 40th Parliaments, Peter Shurman.

Ms. Laura Smith: Continuing on with Thornhill, it’s my pleasure to welcome to the House Dr. Alan Bostakian from the organization Cyrus the Great; Jesse Primerano from the StandWithUs Canada organization; Dario Chaiquin, associate director at CIJA; Jonathan Spiegelman, AVI board member; and Shermineh Salehi Esmati, team member from the Cyrus the Great organization.

Thank you for coming.

MPP Lisa Gretzky: I want to introduce the incredible workers at Titan Tool and Die Unifor Local 195 who are in Windsor on the picket line watching question period today.

I also want to give a very special shout-out to my husband. Today is our 30th anniversary, and both of us are in separate cities.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Congratulations.

Hon. Natalia Kusendova-Bashta: I wanted to welcome Mrs. Pooja Walia, who is a personal support worker, but she’s also Mrs. Globe Curve’ 2025. Welcome to the House.

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: I would like to welcome Mr. Achal Madkan, the parent of Navya Madkan, our page from the Mississauga–Erin Mills riding. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Lee Fairclough: April is the Canadian Cancer Society’s Daffodil Month. As somebody who worked in cancer care for many years, I’ve seen the impact of that.

We have many people here today from the Canadian Cancer Society. I’m pleased to welcome Stephen Piazza, the director of advocacy; Stuart Edmonds; Hillary Buchan-Terrell; Apiramy Jeyapalan; Arian Del Bianco; Olivia Kulbak; and Vanessa Silano. Welcome to your House.

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: It gives me great pleasure to welcome my executive assistant from London North Centre, Nadine Abi Raad, as well as my constituency assistant, Ella Moore. Welcome to Queen’s Park. I hope you enjoy the visit.

M me Dawn Gallagher Murphy: From my riding of Newmarket–Aurora, I’d like to welcome Men’s Shed Aurora: Ron Maislin, Anthony Garramone, John Seaman, Davis Dane, Jost Lighter, Stephen Leung, Doug Kilpatrick, Anton Coetzee, Arthur Barlas, Bruce Corbett, Stephen Choi, Sanh Tank and Alex Caron. Welcome.

Hon. Nina Tangri: From my great riding of Mississauga–Streetsville, I’d like to welcome Julie Sheridan, who’s here with the Canadian Cancer Society today.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I am also pleased to recognize representatives of the Canadian Cancer Society. Joining us today: Mr. Stuart Edmonds, executive vice-president, mission research and advocacy, as well as, of course, the advocacy volunteers Shailly Prajapati and Mr. Frederick Barber.

On behalf of all members, I want to thank them for their continuing advocacy and important work supporting people impacted by cancer and advancing cancer prevention and research across Canada.

Ms. Aislinn Clancy: I want to give a shout-out to my daughter and her Kitchener Lady Rangers U18B team. They’re watching today. I want to congratulate them on winning provincial championships—it’s the first time a team has won two times in a row. Thanks to coaches and families. Go Rangers!

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: I would like to welcome Pooja Walia from Brampton West. Pooja Walia is the newly crowned Mrs. Globe Curve’ 2025, where she proudly represented Canada in the international pageant in California, US, in June 2025. Today she’s here with her husband, Amandeep Walia, and their two daughters, Aahana and Aaina. Thank you, and welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Matthew Rae: I’d like to introduce Fred Barber, who’s from Perth–Wellington. He’s here with the Canadian Cancer Society.

Ms. Catherine Fife: It’s my pleasure to welcome Dr. Jeannie MacGillivray to the House today, as well as Dr. Bernard Lawless, who is also an Order of Ontario winner.

Hon. Doug Ford: I’d like to welcome a few people from the greatest jurisdiction anywhere in the world, Etobicoke North. Here today with the Canadian Cancer Society, who are doing an incredible job, as my great deputy Premier just mentioned, is Nadia Headley. She’s an absolute champion, and it’s so great to see her today.

Also with us today: Another champion from Etobicoke and also one of our pages, Hanuj Patel, brought his parents, Archana and Jignesh. Welcome to Queen’s Park. You live in the greatest place in the world.

Wearing of pins

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member from Essex on a point of order.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: Thank you, Speaker. If you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for members to wear yellow daffodil pins in the House in recognition of Cancer Awareness Month.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Essex is seeking unanimous consent for members to wear yellow daffodil pins in the House in recognition of Cancer Awareness Month. Agreed? Agreed.

Remarkable Women at Queen’s Park

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Colleagues, in 2025, I launched the Remarkable Women in the Workplace initiative, a monthly recognition program celebrating the outstanding women who work for the Office of the Assembly. These individuals exemplify dedication, professionalism and leadership in their roles, and this initiative is a small but meaningful way to honour their contributions to the Legislature.

Today, I am pleased to draw your attention to the Speaker’s gallery and introduce our newest honouree, Lisa Luke, senior purchasing specialist from purchasing and operations. Lisa’s professionalism, reliability and strong work ethic make her highly deserving of this recognition. She manages multiple portfolios with precision and represents her division with integrity in every interaction. Her willingness to take on additional responsibilities and support team initiatives demonstrates a collaborative spirit that strengthens our workplace.

On behalf of all members and staff, I extend our heartfelt congratulations and gratitude to Lisa. Thank you for your remarkable service to Ontario’s Parliament.

Applause.

Question Period

Education issues

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is to the Premier.

Yesterday, the Minister of Education had a lot to say about leadership and what parents and students are asking for. I know he doesn’t like to listen to me, but he should at least listen to the people he claims to represent.

The main thing that educators and students and their families and educational experts are saying makes a big impact on students and students succeeding is smaller class sizes. That’s it. Every education expert is going to tell you that. That is what works. You could be hiring teachers, you could be hiring more educational assistants, you could be making classrooms smaller instead of laying off another thousand teachers and creating Danielle Smith-style banned book lists.

Why doesn’t this government do the obvious thing and hire teachers for smaller class sizes?

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

Hon. Paul Calandra: The Leader of the Opposition is incorrect; I do like listening to her. I find her very fascinating. I just think it’s the people of the province of Ontario who don’t particularly enjoy listening to the NDP.

This bill that is before the House right now is in addition to Bill 33, of course. It puts more authority, yes, with the Ministry of Education—authority that I would suggest and that I would argue the ministry has downloaded for the last 50 years. Leadership on education should come from the Ministry of Education.

What this bill does, of course, is it listens to our secondary school teachers who have been telling me that they need help when it comes to management of the classroom and that going back to exams for our courses and having that weighted in the course mark is an important part. That’s why the bill has it. Curriculum resources for teachers are an important part of a better outcome. That’s why this bill has it. Attendance and participation are important parts of developing a student and giving them the tools to succeed in the future. That is why this bill has that.

I hope that the Leader of the Opposition will support our teachers by supporting this bill, because that’s—

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: You know what helps teachers to manage classrooms? Smaller class sizes—right?—fewer students and more educational assistants to support those kids that are struggling—that’s what helps in managing a classroom. This minister is doing the opposite. He is firing teachers. He is firing educational workers, the caring adults who help our kids succeed.

I want to tell you, kids and parents in our schools right now don’t know who’s going to be teaching their kid next week, let alone next September. That’s a reality. What students need to improve outcomes is smaller class sizes, but the minister doesn’t seem to care about that.

So Speaker, my question is very simple, to the Premier: Why do he and his minister continue to ignore what is best for our children?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Well, actually, that’s completely wrong, Madam Speaker, because under this government, we’ve seen literacy rates, the scores in literacy—reading and writing—at their highest level ever recorded. We are seeing graduation rates—highest level ever recorded. We’re seeing math scores finally starting to increase, albeit, in agreement with teachers, not fast enough. That’s why we’re doubling down on some of the supports. After 15 years of a very challenging system under the Liberals, we’re plowing resources back into the classroom. We’re listening to our teachers, who are telling us that they need help managing their classroom. This bill does that.

But more importantly, we’re investing in students. We’re ending the constant fighting that puts teachers in the middle of disagreements between boards and parents. We’re focused on student achievement. That’s what this bill is about. That’s what we have been about since 2018, and we’ll continue to double down to support parents, students and teachers so that we can have the best outcome for our students.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, I give the minister an A for creativity but an F for effort, I’ve got to tell you.

Nothing in that legislation is actually about outcomes for students. It is simply another way for this government to centralize power and to hand out some pretty plum assignments: $500,000-plus, I would say, CEO appointments to their failed Conservative candidates and insiders and, at the same time, firing, again, another thousand education workers, a thousand teachers.

It is simple, right? If you hire more teachers, you have smaller class sizes. If you hire more educational assistants, you have more support for our children.

We have seen what happens already when this government centralizes power in the ministers’ offices. We get the greenbelt grab. We get the Skills Development Fund disaster. We get a sketchy luxury spa in downtown Toronto. What we don’t get is results for the people of Ontario.

Back to the Premier: Is this just another way for this government to help out some insiders while our kids fall behind?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Again, the challenge is, Madam Speaker, that if you don’t read the bill, you don’t know what’s within the bill, right?

I just heard the Leader of the Opposition say we’re going to give out $500,000 jobs. Well, the reality is, we’re hiring a CEO to run the management of our school boards, whose budgets in some instances rival those of provinces. Imagine that: We want to have somebody who understands management, somebody who understands financing and somebody who understands capital and human resources leading an organization like that. But do you know who will be making the decision on hiring that person? Elected trustees, not the Premier, not the Minister of Education—elected trustees will make that decision, Madam Speaker.

Education and academic achievement: Where will that be put in? In the hands of a qualified educator.

This is about moving the system forward. This is about putting students, parents and teachers forward. It is about refocusing boards on what they’re supposed to be focused on, student achievement, while ending the constant fight between school boards and parents that puts teachers in the middle all of the time.

Manufacturing jobs

Ms. Marit Stiles: This question is to the Premier. I met with Diageo workers when I was in Windsor and Essex last week. Those are the very workers that this Premier promised to protect.

I met Kathy. She was laid off by Diageo after 26 years of service and loyalty to that company—a quarter of a century. Do you know what she has now? She has no job, no pension, no benefits. She was one month short of receiving her pension. She actually wrote to the Premier when she heard that he was in the backrooms making a deal with Diageo, and she said, “Please, I saw you pour out the bottle. What I really need is I need you to show some leadership and get us some fairness.”

Instead of fighting for workers like Kathy, this Premier did make a backroom deal with Diageo. Do you know what he got? He got money for downtown Toronto. That’s what he got—not a single penny for Kathy or for any workers and not a single job sold.

Will the Premier apologize for failing those workers?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Minister of Economic Development.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Speaker, as President Trump’s tariffs continue to affect businesses all across Ontario, this Premier, this government, is standing up for workers as we continue to face unprecedented uncertainty.

Last month, of course, we reached an agreement with Diageo that will see $23 million in Windsor and other cities across Ontario. These are investments that they will make that would not have happened if it weren’t for the strong leadership of Premier Ford.

At the same time, just last week, we continue to support Amherstburg with an $838,000 investment through the trade-impacted communities fund. That will help them build new economic opportunities, Speaker, bringing more good-paying jobs and more investment to Amherstburg and to southwestern Ontario.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: I guess the Premier doesn’t want to answer the question. He doesn’t care about the workers like Kathy, Speaker.

And if he won’t apologize, maybe he’ll at least get up and do something for some other workers who are struggling in Windsor–Essex. They’re watching right now. Right now, they’re watching from the line.

These are the workers at Titan Tool and Die. I raised this with the government—oh, my gosh, nine months ago now—because these Titan Tool and Die workers have been locked out by that company now for almost nine months. Those workers have been there for 30, 40 years, building that company up. Do you know what that company was doing? They would be loading up the trucks and sending all the parts down to the United States where they’re setting up. They’re shutting that company down, but they don’t have the decency—the decency—to sit down with those workers and negotiate a closure agreement. They locked them out. Those workers can’t even get EI right now.

I want to ask the Premier, on behalf of the workers at Titan Tool and Die: You have already failed the 200 workers at Diageo; will you commit to getting Titan Tool and Die back to the table today?

Hon. Doug Ford: Madam Speaker, the difference between ourselves and the Leader of the Opposition—all they do is talk about it. We actually struck a deal for $23 million, not to mention, we have companies looking at that facility that you don’t even know about. And you didn’t mention that over 80% of the members have jobs at Stellantis because we created a deal down there to run a third shift.

You didn’t realize that Windsor has one of the lowest unemployment it’s had in decades. You didn’t realize that we’ve seen—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Through the Speaker.

Hon. Doug Ford: —investments of $35 billion just the last year alone.

And what you don’t realize is you chased 300,000 jobs out of the province with your buddies the Liberals. There’s a million more people working today than there was when you were in power. And you’ll bankrupt this province, God forbid, if you ever do come in power.

We’re going to continue attracting companies, billions and billions of dollars—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I have zero problem naming members today, so if we don’t tone it down, we may not be sitting in the chamber.

I recognize the member from Windsor West.

MPP Lisa Gretzky: Back to the Premier: He can bluster all he wants, but the reality is that Diageo and Titan screwed the workers first and the Premier is doing it to them again.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I’m going to ask you to withdraw.

MPP Lisa Gretzky: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I’m going to just remind members—in our standing orders, number 25: “In debate, a member shall be called to order by the Speaker if he or she ... uses abusive or insulting language of a nature likely to create disorder.” If you don’t understand it, look at your standing orders, but I will be applying this today.

Back to the member for Windsor West.

MPP Lisa Gretzky: Titan Tool and Die workers have been locked out for over 250 days. The company moved equipment to the US, claimed the plant is closed, locked the workers out and refuses to negotiate a closure agreement that doesn’t strip workers from Unifor Local 195 of the pensions and benefits that they were promised and earned after working 30 and 40 years at Titan Tool and Die.

And now the company is using replacement scab labour in the plant to do what the locked-out Titan workers had been and should still be doing.

The Premier has supported using scab labour. He’s voted against banning scabs numerous times in this place.

Speaker, the Titan workers are watching us right now from the picket line. They want to know if the Premier will do what’s necessary to support them and end the lockout by finally passing the anti-scab labour legislation that they need.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): A reminder to make your response through the Speaker.

I recognize the Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: Madam Speaker, just to give a little history lesson to the opposition: We’ve seen $222 billion of investment and thousands and thousands of jobs down in Windsor. I support the front-line Titan workers. I’ll always support them. I don’t support the scab workers.

And isn’t it ironic, Madam Speaker? Isn’t it ironic that 23 private-sector unions endorsed the PC Party for the first time ever? They’ve lost the front-line workers. They’ve lost the front-line labour workers. They’ve come to our party because they know we’re creating that environment for good jobs, better paycheques, bigger paycheques. That’s what we’re doing.

We’re constantly reducing the cost of business by $12 billion a year, Madam Speaker. They vote against it. Everything we put forward in legislation for economic development, they vote against it. They don’t care about the workers. We’re the party that cares about the workers.

Correctional facilities

Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Premier. After eight years of this failing Ford government, we can see they’re clearly out of touch. And for years we’ve heard the Premier talk tough on crime: things like “stack them ... high,” “should have shot him a couple more times” or convicting people before they’ve had their day in court—lots of tough talk from this guy.

Now we’ve all learned, through an FOI, that over the last five years more than 150 prisoners have been released by mistake. The Ford government has lost 150 criminals. They’re in the wind, and we can’t find them.

My question is simple: Can the Premier tell us about his catch-and-release program?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Attorney General.

Hon. Doug Downey: It’s ironic that the three-peat Liberal leader is—

Mr. John Fraser: Three-peat: Remember that—three times.

Hon. Doug Downey: Absolutely—is asking us about catch-and-release, when we are fighting hoof and tong with the federal government to make changes to bail, and they support absolutely nothing. They won’t pick up the phone to talk to their federal cousins. They won’t align with us to make it tougher, to keep criminals in jail, Madam Speaker. They are aiding and abetting the catch-and-release that is happening in this province, and we will not stand for it.

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

Mr. John Fraser: Translation: It’s okay to lose 150 prisoners in five years. That’s what the Attorney General is saying.

Speaker, today in committee, we’re debating a bill. Do you know what that bill is called? The bill is called the Keeping Criminals Behind Bars Act. I’ll repeat that again: We’re debating a government bill called the Keeping Criminals Behind Bars Act, and it seems like the Premier has got a big problem with that.

What it really means is people are less safe. The Premier likes to say “Protect Ontario,” “protect, protect.” He’s not protecting; he’s pretending—lots of tough talk. The Premier has lost 150 criminals, and it’s getting worse.

So again, can the Premier please tell us about his catch-and-release program?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Solicitor General.

Hon. Michael S. Kerzner: Let’s just go back in time, back to the future. For 15 years, there was no investment made in our correctional system by the opposition.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order.

Hon. Michael S. Kerzner: They believed in closing jails, and they don’t talk about it.

Madam Speaker, we have made an unprecedented investment. The Canadian Press just showed the other day that we are building thousands of beds. And for the first time in government history, thanks to the leadership of Premier Ford, we’re actually telling people when the beds are coming online and where they’re going to be. We’ve made an unprecedented investment to keep Ontario safe, and we’re not stopping.

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

Mr. John Fraser: So I guess the Premier is not proud of his catch-and-release program. And by the answers I’ve got, it means that the Premier is okay with losing 150 criminals, and it’s getting worse.

We do know that our jails are overcrowded—130% to 170% occupancy—and they’re not safe places for the people who work there, the corrections officers or the nurses. And they’re not safe for the people who are incarcerated. And what does that mean? It means that people get let out, or they get out by accident—right, Premier?

Speaker, the Premier is all talk and no substance. He likes to talk tough like a Texas sheriff, but the reality is he’s left the jail door open and 150 criminals have got out.

So Premier, my question is, what have you got to say for yourself?

Hon. Doug Ford: The question goes back to the three-peat Liberal leader: Why do you vote against our bail reform?

Why weren’t you leading the charge on bail reform? Because they closed jails. They closed a dozen jails. We’re opening up thousands and thousands of new cells to keep the criminals.

Ask your colleagues, ask the Prime Minister, ask the Premiers: Who led the charge on bail reform? I’ll tell you who led the charge: We did. Our great Attorney General sat across from the federal Attorney General. Bail reform did not exist.

The new Bail Compliance and Warrant Apprehension Grant, the expansion of the OPP, repeat offenders parole enforcement, the establishment of intensive serious violent crime bail teams—we’re adding hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars to our police services that they don’t like. They’re the same group of people who said, “Defund the police.” Your former leader said, “The police scare us.” And you believe in letting these criminals out—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order. Everybody take a deep breath.

Interjections.

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

I recognize the member for Nepean.

University and college funding

MPP Tyler Watt: After eight long years of this out-of-touch and clearly out-of-ideas government, they’ve created a workforce crisis that everyone across this province is feeling, especially young people and students.

We should be investing in Ontario’s future workforce and future generations, but this government is doing the opposite. Look at their cuts to OSAP, look at their eight years of underfunding our colleges and universities, making it harder, not easier, for students to get the education or training that they need.

And let’s be real: With rent, groceries and cost of living going up, students are already stretched to their limits. Taking on more debt just to stay in school is not the solution here.

Speaker, through you to the Premier, how does making post-secondary education more expensive help fix Ontario’s growing labour shortage?

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

Hon. Nolan Quinn: He talks about eight years, Speaker, but I think the people of Ontario remember 15 long and dark years of Liberal government and the challenges they created. We just invested a historic $6.4 billion into the system. That’s going to bring another 70,000 funded seats online to ensure that when students want to get into a course, there will be a seat available for them.

The Auditor General made it very, very clear in 2017 when a desperate Liberal government decided to change the grant-to-loan ratio. The Auditor General said it was unsustainable. Ask the third-time interim leader why they did not listen to the Auditor General, Speaker, because they made it very clear. We’re ensuring the sustainability for OSAP, not just for these students but for the next generation of students as well.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member from Nepean.

MPP Tyler Watt: Sustainability of OSAP, but we’re totally fine with building a fantasy convention centre in the middle of Lake Ontario. We’re fine with paying $500 million for a parking lot near a private spa at Ontario Place.

This government’s priorities are crystal clear, and they’re totally out of touch. And by the way, that last bit of funding injection is too little and too late. We’re still seeing programs being cut just as of this week. We are seeing people being fired left and right at colleges across this province.

At Conestoga College, hundreds of staff have faced repeated layoffs—repeated layoffs. Imagine, you keep being told over and over again, “You’re being laid off. No, you’re not. You’re being laid off. No, you’re not.” That’s the system that you have created. This is not a system expanding. It’s a system under severe strain.

Speaker, through you to the Premier: When will this government finally take responsibility for the growing crisis in our post-secondary system and fix OSAP ASAP?

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

Hon. Nolan Quinn: I hope I don’t have to tell that member, but the federal cuts were the final straw to the challenges that our institutions are facing right now. There is rebalancing going on because there’s less students at our institutions, Speaker, but they don’t want to talk about the historic $6.4-billion investment—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Etobicoke–Lakeshore will come to order. The member for Orléans will come to order.

Hon. Nolan Quinn: —the largest investment in Canadian history, but I’ll speak about that, Speaker. Thousands of seats are coming online because of our historic investment.

But again, I will remind the member opposite, under the tenure of the Liberal government, they had a lesser amount of grants to loans. It was only 15% during the whole tenure of the Liberal government. They got desperate; they knew they were going to lose the election, and they cranked it up to 85%, which was unsustainable. The Auditor General made it very clear. We’re bringing sustainability back to OSAP because we want to ensure that the students of tomorrow will continue to have access to OSAP like the students of today.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Nepean.

MPP Tyler Watt: It’s always someone else’s fault, eh? It’s always someone else’s fault. One of—

Interjections.

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

MPP Tyler Watt: Accountability: This government pretends to have that—transparency, accountability. We don’t see any of that. It’s always someone else’s fault. When we actually talk to young people right now—those thousands of people that have been protesting across this province—they’re worried. They’re worried about their exams right now. They’re worried about whether they’re even going to come back to school in the fall.

Cost of living, rent, groceries: They have so much stress, and this government is saying, “You need to take on more debt to get that education and training, to be in this workforce that we desperately need”—students like Megan Beacock, a heavy-duty equipment student at Cambrian College, who said her heart dropped when she learned about these cuts.

Speaker, this government has the opportunity to reverse their cuts to OSAP this afternoon by voting in favour of protecting the future of post-secondary education for students. Will this government vote to fix OSAP ASAP?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Premier of Ontario.

Hon. Doug Ford: Madam Speaker, I just want to inform the member, do you know what students want when they graduate? They want a job. And under your government, you chased 300,000 jobs. We are creating hundreds of thousands of jobs in the tech sector, in the AI sector, in the life sciences sector, in the mining sector and in the nuclear sector. We’re leading the world when it comes to nuclear, when it comes to mining. That’s what people are looking for.

I’m listening to a bunch of amateurs who have never met a P&L statement in their life. They have never run a business. I wouldn’t trust you with my daughter’s lemonade stand. You’d bankrupt a lemonade stand. You’d sell off the lemons, because that’s what you do. You’re a bunch of amateurs. I don’t even—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I’m going to ask the Premier to withdraw.

Hon. Doug Ford: Withdraw for calling you an amateur.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Withdraw.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order.

The member for Don Valley North will come to order. The member for Ottawa South will come to order. The government side will come to order.

The next person is going to be warned.

I recognize the member for Oshawa.

Regional governance

Ms. Jennifer K. French: My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, or the Premier. In 2010, the voters of Durham region voted in a referendum to stop having appointed regional chairs and voted overwhelmingly to elect them. Since 2014, we have elected our regional chair to be the head of regional council. Now, this minister and Premier have decided they don’t care what we voted for. Their new law will allow them to hire and fire regional chairs in places like Durham, Waterloo and Niagara and pick their own puppet chairs who will answer only to them.

I wonder if Durham regional chair John Henry did something specific to be fired so publicly, or if he simply didn’t kiss the ring.

But my question is, why does this minister think he knows better than the people of Durham what’s good for them?

Hon. Rob Flack: For the record, nobody was fired. We are going to have an open process. People can apply—and I emphasize the word “apply.” We’re going to have a vetting process that includes our Integrity Commissioner. We want the brightest, the best, the best-talented people to apply. I would also suggest any existing chair can apply for the job.

Nobody was fired, Madam Speaker. What we are talking about is bringing more accountability, better focus, better efficiency, wonderful efforts in our regional government. Every regional council will have elected members there to work together. We have provincial priorities, including infrastructure, including housing. They’re going to continually work with their regional councils.

Speaker, we’ve got this right, and we’re going to get this done.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Oshawa.

Ms. Jennifer K. French: I’m not going to split hairs over language. They’re firing them. The job that they ran for, they can’t—because it’s not there anymore. So “fired,” “pink-slipped,” “corporately reorganized,” or whatever they call it, they are firing them. They’re firing someone the voters actually elected.

Bill 100 is making regional governance better only for the Premier. The future unelected PC puppet chair is being given strong-mayor powers to control the regional budget, so they will have their hands in our pockets and we will have no say. That is taxation without representation. The Premier will have unrestricted access to regional budgets and taxpayer pockets once the elected chairs are out of the way. It’s fascinating that he’s saying the existing chair can apply for the job.

So I’m confused. My question is: What is the real reason behind this?

Hon. Rob Flack: Speaker, there’s no reason for the member opposite to be confused. We’re crystal clear: We’re bringing good governance to our regions.

There are two regions in this province that have appointed chairs. I haven’t heard her talk about that of late. They’ve worked well. The chair of Peel region is not a member of any political party—never has been. He has done a wonderful job. Just ask the mayors and regional councillors in Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon in Peel region. York is the very same.

We are bringing accountability. We’re going to hire the brightest and the best. We’re going through an important vetting process, and, at the end of the day, we’re going to have better government, more efficient government, more accountable government, and we’re going to get the job done for the people of all the regions in this province. Some 50% of the people who live under regional government in this province live in York and Peel. It’s working there; it’s going to work in the rest of the regions.

Correctional facilities

MPP Stephanie Smyth: My question is to the Premier. I want to go back to his catch-and-lose program. The Premier loves to say he’s tough on crime and then blame others for a rise in crime, so let’s have a reality check here. Ontario jails are operating at 130% capacity. Facilities in Sudbury and Maplehurst are dangerously overcrowded, and because of these conditions, sentences are being reduced and offenders are being released early, or they’re being lost.

So let’s be real, Speaker: Criminals are not being released because Ontario is too soft. They are being released because this Premier has allowed our corrections system to become overcrowded, unsafe and completely overwhelmed. So why, I ask, has the Premier spent more time blaming others than actually fixing Ontario’s jails?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Solicitor General.

Hon. Michael S. Kerzner: Madam Speaker, there has never been a government that has been more transparent about investing in our public safety than our government. Again, for the years they were there, they didn’t even tell us they closed seven jails. I’m working hard to bring two online: the Brantford jail and the Walkerton jail.

I said we would bring a thousand beds online in the shortest possible order. We’ve well exceeded our target. I said we would hire thousands of correctional officers. We’ve now hired more than 3,000. I said we would put $1 billion in our existing infrastructure. We’re exceeding that. And most recently, our government said we would put billions of dollars to bring thousands of future beds online.

Their record was a disaster. They knew it. It’s about time they stood up and said, “Why did you close seven jails when our population was growing?”

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

MPP Stephanie Smyth: I am so happy for freedom-of information-requests that the media still has access to. Because of those requests, we have learned that 150 criminals have been lost, something our government never did. This is basic mismanagement, Speaker. The government can’t even keep track of who should actually be in custody or who should not be in custody.

In any other system, this would be unacceptable. Imagine if a school lost track of 150 students. There would be outrage and immediate action. And yet here, people who are supposed to be behind bars are walking free because this system is not being properly run—full stop.

The Premier, again, claims to be tough on crime. Under his watch though, offenders aren’t just being released early. They’re being released by mistake and we can’t find them.

How can this Premier justify a correction system that’s so broken, it can’t even keep track of who belongs in jail?

Hon. Michael S. Kerzner: Madam Speaker, I’ve asked the opposition before: Are they suggesting that the murderers, the human traffickers, the drug traffickers, the people who are on the sexual offenders registry belong in our community?

Our government believes they belong in one place, and that’s in jail. That’s why we’re making the investments that are unprecedented.

We are still dealing with the fact that for seven jails that were closed, over 2,000 beds were taken offline. We’re reversing it. We’re building new jails. And in Thunder Bay, our new jail will be open on time, just like I said.

The Premier and I were in the beautiful community of Brockville. We’re expanding the Brockville facility. We opened hundreds of beds in London; we opened hundreds of beds now in Toronto South. We are building. Do you know why? Because unlike you, we’re going to protect Ontario.

Housing

Mr. Hardeep Singh Grewal: My question is to our great Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Global economic uncertainty and high costs continue to make it harder for homes to be built and families to achieve home ownership. That’s why our government took action and cut the HST on new home builds, reducing costs and creating conditions to get more shovels in the ground.

We’re already seeing encouraging signs of progress since the measure came into effect, and home sales activity has strengthened, reaching its highest level we have seen in over a year.

At a time when confidence in the housing market is critical, can the minister explain how this targeted tax relief is helping restore more momentum and supports home building across the province?

Hon. Rob Flack: Thank you to my good friend and colleague from Brampton East. It’s a wonderful question.

We have been clear from the very start, Speaker: Housing affordability has been out of reach for too many for too long. And that is why, under the leadership of Premier Ford and our great Minister of Finance, we’ve cut the HST.

What are we seeing? We’re seeing a game-changing event. I’ve talked to builders throughout Kingston, Milton, Mississauga, London, Hamilton—it is a game-changer. We are seeing a buzz in sales offices. We’re seeing h