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

October 1, 2018

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2018-Oct-01 (PDF)

L030 - Mon 1 Oct 2018 / Lun 1er oct 2018

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Monday 1 October 2018 Lundi 1 er octobre 2018

Introduction of Visitors

Prison transfer

Oral Questions

International trade

International trade

Opioid abuse

Mercury poisoning

Employment standards

International trade

Opioid abuse

Environmental protection

Government fiscal policies

Opioid abuse

International trade

Privatization of public assets

Greenhouse gas emissions

Legal clinic funding

Indigenous economic development

Privatization of public assets

Greenhouse gas emissions

Peter Adams

Indigenous relations and reconciliation

Flag-raising ceremony

Deferred Votes

Time allocation

Members’ Statements

LGBTQ community

Herbert’s Boots and Western Wear

Muslim community

Mid-Autumn Festival

Social issues in Windsor and Essex county

Waves of Changes for Autism

Minimum wage

Dipak Bhatt

Mental health and addiction services

Introduction of Bills

Liability for Climate-Related Harms Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la responsabilité à l’égard des dommages liés au climat

Motions

House sittings

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

Seniors

Petitions

Long-term care

Employment standards

Employment standards

Employment standards

Gasoline prices

Indigenous affairs

Employment standards

Social assistance

Private members’ public business

Orders of the Day

Time allocation

Cannabis Statute Law Amendment Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 modifiant des lois en ce qui concerne le cannabis

The House met at 1030.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Let us pray.

Prayers.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I wish to acknowledge this territory as a traditional gathering place for many Indigenous nations, most recently the Mississaugas of the New Credit.

This morning, we have with us in the Speaker’s gallery the John G. Althouse Choir from the riding of Etobicoke Centre to perform O Canada. Please join them in the singing of our national anthem.

Singing of O Canada.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Members may take their seats.

Thank you very, very much. That was wonderful.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We have with us in the Speaker’s gallery today Ms. Takako Ito, consul general of Japan at Toronto.

Members should note that 2018 marks the 90th anniversary of Canadian-Japanese relations. Please join me in warmly welcoming our guest to the Ontario Legislature.

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: It’s an absolute pleasure today to rise in the House and welcome Chief RoseAnne Archibald and Sydney Oakes to the Legislature this morning.

Mrs. Marie-France Lalonde: It’s a great pleasure for me to welcome the mom and a friend of our great page from Orléans, Martin Leduc: his mom, Ashley Haugh, and Yvonne Spiczynski—if I pronounced it well. Welcome to our Legislature this morning.

Hon. Jeff Yurek: I have a few visitors here with us today. I would like to welcome a group from 3M Canada: Dr. Gayle Schueller and Jason Grouette. Welcome to Queen’s Park today.

I would also like to do a quick introduction. Eric Rayson is here with his daughter, page emeritus Annabelle. Welcome to the Legislature.

Mr. Randy Pettapiece: I would like to introduce Joe Hill, Judy Dirksen, Eric Schwindt and Brooklin DeForest from the Ontario beef, pork and veal associations. Welcome.

Mr. Norman Miller: I would like to introduce Sarah Litchfield, who is sitting in the members’ west gallery, who is a student at Seneca College’s Government Relations program. She is volunteering in my office. Welcome, Sarah.

One other announcement, Mr. Speaker, if I may: I would also like to welcome Gord and Shelley Haugh of Gravenhurst, Muskoka, who are here to see their grandson, Martin Leduc, who is serving as a page. Please welcome them.

Hon. Monte McNaughton: I would like to welcome Andrew Hejnar, Mark Jacob and Lauri Lyford from 3M. They are here today.

Hon. Greg Rickford: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. I would like to introduce an inspiring and incredible Indigenous leader for our province: Ontario Regional Chief RoseAnne Archibald, who was recently elected. We congratulate her and we welcome her to this magnificent place.

Hon. Christine Elliott: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. I would like to welcome four distinguished guests to Queen’s Park today: Mr. Karim Mamdani from Ontario Shores, Ms. Catherine Zahn from CAMH, Ms. Carol Lambie from Waypoint, and Ms. Joanne Bezzubetz from the Royal Ottawa. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. John Vanthof: On behalf of Andrea Horwath and the NDP caucus, I would also like to welcome the members of the Ontario Agriculture Sustainability Coalition, the people who feed us and keep our province strong.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: I would like to introduce a long-time friend of mine, Mr. Harold Wilson.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I would also like to extend a warm welcome to the 3M sustainability team, which is here led by Dr. Gayle Schueller. I would also like to congratulate them on winning the London Chamber of Commerce environmental leadership award last year. Welcome.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I believe that concludes our introduction of guests. The government House leader on a point of order.

Prison transfer

Hon. Todd Smith: I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding reversing the prison transfer of the convicted killer of eight-year-old Tori Stafford.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader is seeking unanimous consent to put forward a motion. Agreed? Agreed.

Hon. Todd Smith: Speaker, I move that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario should call on the federal government to reverse their decision to transfer Terri-Lynne McClintic, who was convicted of the kidnapping, rape and murder of eight-year-old Victoria Stafford, from the maximum-security Grand Valley Institution for Women in Kitchener.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Smith, Bay of Quinte, has moved that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario should call on the federal government to reverse their decision to transfer Terri-Lynne McClintic, who was convicted of the kidnapping, rape and murder of eight-year-old Victoria Stafford, from the maximum-security Grand Valley Institution for Women in Kitchener.

Are there any members who wish to speak about this?

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Motion agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): It is now time for oral questions.

Oral Questions

International trade

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, my first question is to the Premier. Last night, the Canadian government announced they had reached an agreement in a renegotiated NAFTA. Can the Premier share with us details of the briefings that he has received and any concerns that he has raised as Premier of Canada’s largest province?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, and to the Leader of the Opposition: Our full briefing, as I think everyone knows, is going to happen at 11 o’clock today, with the Deputy Premier and Minister Jim Wilson. We’ll be able to update you in the future.

But I will tell you: We are going to stand by the agriculture industry, our farmers. We’re going to protect our farmers. We’re going to make sure we protect the aluminum and steel industry, along with the automotive industry. That is the backbone of Ontario. We will continue to fight for our farmers, for our auto workers, for aluminum and steel workers. We will make sure that there’s going to be a fair deal with the United States of America. We’ll make sure that we hold the federal government accountable.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, we weren’t involved in the trade talks. We’re going to have to rely on the federal government to tell us the deal. Once we find out the deal, I’m sure everyone else will know about it, and we’ll have further words after that.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The Premier joined me at the International Plowing Match this year, promising farm families that he would defend supply management in NAFTA talks. As he knows, supply management has helped farm families secure decent, reliable incomes, and they’re concerned today that the system is going to be undermined by this new agreement. One dairy family particularly called it the “slow death” of supply management.

Perhaps the Premier can tell us exactly what he’s planning on saying to the federal government about the challenges facing farm families.

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: I think this is the only time we’re going to agree on something with the Leader of the Opposition.

We’re concerned too. We’re very concerned about the farmers. We’re concerned about supply management. We’re worried about the federal government throwing the farmers underneath the bus. We’re concerned, but we’re going to stand up for the farmers, along with the automotive industry, the aluminum industry and the steel industry.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Final supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Despite last night’s agreement, steel and aluminum tariffs are going to remain in place. These tariffs, as we know, have already had a devastating effect on working women and men, not just in the steel industry but across the manufacturing sector.

Perhaps the Premier can share with us what exactly he will be saying to the federal government about ongoing tariffs.

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: That’s the case, because we don’t know 100% yet, until 11 o’clock. We’re calling on the Trudeau Liberals to compensate our farmers, to support our steel and aluminum workers and our auto industry. They need the support of the federal government.

We weren’t at the table, or maybe the deal would have been a little different, but it is what it is. We are, again, calling out to the Trudeau government to compensate the agricultural industry—specifically the dairy industry, the farmers—and the automotive, steel and aluminum.

International trade

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is to the Minister of Economic Development and Trade. There’s no doubt that while many are breathing a sigh of relief about reaching a deal, there are many others who will be left behind in this new agreement.

My question is this: Not dissimilar to what other provinces have done, particularly Quebec, is the minister bringing forward transition assistance to help the industries and families that will be hit hard by this new agreement?

Hon. Jim Wilson: Thank you for the question. It’s a good question. It is the responsibility of the federal government to compensate in international trade deals, and as the Premier just said, we will be pushing them and are pushing them and have been pushing them. That’s why we went to Washington: to make it clear that if they did throw the farmers under the bus, they’d better pay the billions of dollars required to make our farmers whole again. That is a federal responsibility under the Constitution of Canada.

You’re darned right, I say to the leader opposite: We’re going to hold the federal government’s feet to the fire and make sure they don’t let our farmers down.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, many farm families will be hit especially hard by any concessions on supply management. My question is, what is this minister planning to do by way of assistance to farm families?

Hon. Jim Wilson: Thank you for the question again. It shouldn’t come to that if the federal government lives up to its trade obligations. It’s not the Ontario taxpayer who should foot the bill for a federally negotiated agreement. That’s not the way our country works; that’s not the way our Constitution works; that’s not the way nine other trade agreements work.

I say with respect to the honourable member across the way: We intend to stick to the way this country was put together by our Constitution, which puts the onus on the federal government, since they negotiated the deal, to compensate.

They have put forward $2 billion, and they said that several months ago; but a lot of that money—as far as I’m aware, none of that money has flown. It’s nice they put it in a press release; now they’ve got to walk the talk and look after our farmers, our auto sector and our steel and aluminum sectors.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, the US tariffs on steel and aluminum are devastating not just to our steel industry, but across the manufacturing sector. A lot of people rely on those sectors for good jobs, for well-paying jobs.

When the US first imposed tariffs, the government of Quebec stepped up with programs designed to aid small manufacturers in those industries. Ontario still hasn’t responded. When will the minister be rolling out assistance, and what form will it take?

Hon. Jim Wilson: Again I say to the honourable member that it is the responsibility of the federal government. We will hold their feet to the fire. You’re absolutely right: The 25% tariff on steel has hurt many of our industries and has the potential to affect many jobs, but it has also hurt—Ford US reported last year that that tariff alone and the 10% aluminum tariff cost Ford in the US $1 billion. Honda in Alliston, which is building a new paint shop, which is a steel frame building with aluminum siding and aluminum venting throughout—it has cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The federal government said that they would look after these industries. We’re going to make sure they do. They’ve set $2 billion aside so far. We’re going to make sure they flow that money. That’s part of today’s phone call.

Opioid abuse

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is for the Premier—but it’s a little bit worrisome that we saw no aid from the province on steel and aluminum, and now we have supply management coming down the pike. I’m just worried that this government is not going to respond to the farm families that need help.

The opioid crisis is killing people on a daily basis, Speaker. Families coping with the addiction of a loved one know that the overdose prevention sites save lives. They were expecting a decision on proceeding with overdose prevention sites last week, a decision that has now been delayed yet again. They want to know what is delaying the decision on the opioid prevention sites.

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

Hon. Christine Elliott: In fact, the decision has not been delayed. What has happened is, we have applied to the federal government for the extension. The extension has been granted, and right now I’m finalizing my recommendations to the Premier’s office. That will be done within the next short while, and there will be another announcement very soon.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, everyone knows the Premier is capable of moving quickly on policy matters, and this is one where he actually needs to do that. People are dying every single day this decision is delayed.

Can the Premier explain to the people who are gathered here today and who were outside this morning how long it will take them to make a decision that could save countless lives?

Hon. Christine Elliott: The leader of the official opposition is correct: We are losing too many people to the opioid crisis. It’s something that we take very seriously over here and we want to make sure that we do it right. We want to make sure that if these overdose prevention sites are continued, they serve the purpose of (1) saving lives of course, but (2) getting people into the rehabilitation and treatment that they need, which includes housing and services.

There’s a lot to be encompassed in this decision. It’s not one thing; it’s many things, and we want to make sure that we do it right. That’s why I’m continuing to make my recommendations to the Premier. We’re finalizing those recommendations, and further comments will be made in the very next short while.

Mercury poisoning

Mr. Norman Miller: My question is for the Minister of Indigenous Affairs. I know that our government is committed to building strong relationships with our First Nations partners. We want to help our First Nations partners open up new economic opportunities and help their communities thrive. Our government has already taken steps to help make sure we are building relationships with First Nations communities.

However, we know that there are many historical challenges that impact these communities. I’m confident that Minister Rickford has the experience and knowledge to handle this important file. Can the minister explain to the Legislature what steps this government has taken to address some of these challenges?

Hon. Greg Rickford: I want to thank the member from Parry Sound–Muskoka for his question and his interest in these matters.

Late last week, I had an opportunity to visit two communities that are quite proximal to where I live in Kiiwetinoong, two communities known to me in my previous professional capacities as both a nurse, a lawyer and serving, as the member of Parliament, those communities on a number of other challenges. We wanted to make sure that these challenges became opportunities.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Norman Miller: Again to the Minister of Indigenous Affairs: A government that is truly for the people must work to acknowledge and address the concerns of Ontario’s first peoples. I’m proud to be part of a government that is working to help keep that promise.

I know that Minister Rickford’s experience and leadership will help us create strong relationships with our First Nations partners. Our government has already taken action to ensure that local communities have the support they need to access services when they are needed. Can the minister tell the members of this House any other actions that the government may be taking to help the people of Grassy Narrows and Wabaseemoong?

Hon. Greg Rickford: Indeed, our journey to Grassy Narrows First Nations included some other activities, one that’s very important to a certain number of people in that community and should be important to all of this.

Our government has taken immediate action to ensure that more than 200 people who receive mercury disability payments from these two communities are properly compensated. For far too long, these benefits have been frozen in time, from some 30 years ago today. I announced, as of Friday, that these benefits will be indexed. Not only will they be indexed, but they will be indexed retroactively. It’s simply unacceptable that more than 200 of these people who receive these benefits receive such a small amount.

The communities were very appreciative of this. Chief John Paishk: I gave him this medallion and he asked me to wear it in this place to signify and express his appreciation for our government’s actions.

Employment standards

Ms. Peggy Sattler: My question is to the Minister of Labour. The recent census showed that one quarter of working-age Londoners have dropped out of the labour market altogether, more than any other city in Canada. Now a new documentary from the London Poverty Research Centre reveals that fully half of Londoners who are working are in non-standard, unstable jobs. This includes Frances Hinna, a father of four with two Western University degrees. Frances is doing everything possible to find work in his field, but is barely surviving on his minimum-wage job.

An increase to $15 would have made a huge difference to Frances and his family while he struggles to find work. Why is the minister turning her back on Frances and the thousands of Ontarians like him?

Hon. Laurie Scott: I appreciate the member’s question. We do want to help people like Frances and his family. We made a commitment to keep the minimum wage at $14 an hour because it increased 20% this year. We want businesses to be the job creators so there are more job opportunities. We want good-paying jobs in the province of Ontario. We are creating a climate so that businesses can succeed and create jobs for Frances and his family.

We know that we were elected to make life more affordable for people in the province of Ontario. By helping businesses create jobs, making life more affordable to the people in Ontario, decreasing our hydro rates, decreasing the price of gasoline and cancelling the cap-and-trade carbon tax, we’re reducing the burden not only on individual people but on businesses so they can succeed and create—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. Supplementary?

Ms. Peggy Sattler: Again to the minister: Stuart Clark is 50 years old and was laid off from his IT job about five years ago, working contract-to-contract ever since. The average rent for a one-bedroom apartment in London is $980, which means that Stuart is spending more than half his monthly income on housing.

Since 2005, London has lost 5,400 good-paying full-time jobs while our population has grown by 7%. Food bank usage in our city is up 30% over the past decade. Can the minister explain how rolling back workplace benefits and protections will help contract workers like Stuart to make ends meet?

Hon. Laurie Scott: Mr. Speaker, the opposition party supported the previous Liberal government that made life more unaffordable and that made the use of food banks go up. You supported life being unaffordable and hurting businesses throughout the province of Ontario. It is time for a change.

We were elected to make that change. Yes, we are going to make Ontario open for businesses. We’re going to help businesses succeed, and we’re going to bring in good-paying jobs to the province of Ontario so fewer families are struggling. That is what we’re doing.

International trade

Mr. Stephen Crawford: My question is for the Minister of Finance. Last evening, the federal government and the United States reached a last-minute trade deal. The new agreement, called the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA, comes after months of uncertainty—uncertainty that left many business owners and workers concerned about the future.

Could the minister outline what steps this government took to defend the interests of workers and businesses in this province?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you to the member from Oakville. From day one our government, under the leadership of Premier Doug Ford, has offered our full support to the federal partners throughout trade negotiations. Our number one priority was making sure that a deal got done that protected Ontario workers and industries.

Premier Ford and Minister Wilson travelled to Washington a few short weeks ago to meet face to face with members of the Canadian negotiating team, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Canadian and American ambassadors. They reiterated that any deal must protect Ontario workers and industries, including steel, aluminum, agricultural and auto.

Our government knows that in order to create jobs and protect jobs, Ontario must be open for business. This is dependent on open and fair trade with our largest trading partner. Our government will be speaking directly with industry representatives from Ontario’s steel, aluminum, auto and agricultural sectors to determine the impacts. We’ve been standing up for the people, Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Stephen Crawford: Thank you to the honourable member for outlining what steps this government took to get a deal done. Many businesses and workers in Ontario depend on free and open trade with the United States. It is great to hear the work our government did to protect jobs in Ontario.

Our government has heard from businesses that it is hard for them to remain competitive in today’s business climate. Could the minister please provide the current status of the United States-Mexico-Canada trade agreement?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: As mentioned before, our government has been standing up for the people since day one, and will continue to do so. It is more important than ever to open Ontario for business and create and protect good jobs for the people. We are pleased to hear that an agreement in principle has been reached. It has always been our position that a renegotiated trade deal is in the best interest of all parties. It’s critical to hundreds of thousands of jobs in Ontario.

Speaker, our team right now has gone to receive the full text of the deal and will speak directly with industry representatives from the Ontario steel, aluminum, auto and agricultural sectors to determine the impacts of this deal. We are calling for assurances from the federal government that any sectors in the province that are negatively affected by federal negotiating decisions will be provided financial assistance and transitional support. We need that to protect our economy.

Opioid abuse

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: My question is for the Acting Premier. The government is putting the health of Ontarians in jeopardy. While we ask for even more time to receive evidence, we already have overdose prevention sites. These sites work. These sites save lives. This is exactly why we unanimously voted in favour of bringing a safe injection site to St. Catharines while I was on city council.

Will the minister admit that the evidence is already clear? Overdose prevention sites work, and we need one to tackle the growing opioid epidemic in St. Catharines.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: As was outlined by the Minister of Health a few moments ago, the extension that has been granted was paused for three sites. The Toronto Overdose Prevention Society was holding a vigil this morning. The announcement on Friday was that we received an extension from the federal government for the three paused sites.

The government is committed to get people struggling with addiction the help that they need. We are reviewing the latest data, evidence and current drug injection sites. Our health minister continues to speak and consult with experts, health care workers, police services, community leaders, business owners and stakeholders, reviewing the reports to ensure that people struggling with addiction get the help they need.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Mr. Speaker, I didn’t hear “St. Catharines” in there, and I think that’s what the question was about.

Niagara saw a 335% increase in opioid overdoses between 2016 and 2017. There were 76 overdose deaths in St. Catharines last year, up from 40 deaths the year before. While these deaths are tragic, they are also preventable. Just one of these lives could have been saved by administering naloxone or testing for fentanyl. The overdose prevention sites would have been worth it.

When will the minister do the right thing and approve the overdose prevention site in St. Catharines that was already promised?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Speaker, let me just tell you a little bit about fentanyl and what we have done in the past. We have brought in our patch-for-patch program, which has done more to save more lives with fentanyl than you can imagine. In my city of North Bay, we had 15 deaths—15 deaths in my city of North Bay alone before we brought patch-for-patch in. The minister of—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for St. Catharines, come to order.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: The minister of many things also brought a private member’s bill in that was to strengthen education. We also brought a bill in to ban illegal pill presses. These are the various processes that are all part of a bigger program. Incrementally they’re all important, but collectively they are part of a bigger picture to tackle the opioid crisis that we know needs so much work.

Environmental protection

M me Nathalie Des Rosiers: Ma question est pour le ministre de l’Environnement, de la Protection de la nature et des Parcs. The Environmental Bill of Rights was adopted in 1993 and is a primary tool for all Ontarians to be consulted on environmental matters. It’s premised on the right of all Ontarians to have a say on their environment and its future.

Initially, the ministry had decided not to post Bill 4 on the Environmental Registry for the reason that the government had won the election and that that was sufficient consultation. Obviously this

interpretation would gut the Environmental Bill of Rights since any future government could always do any development or any change without ever posting on the EBR. I’m glad that I understand that after a lawsuit initiated by Ecojustice, the government has finally decided to comply with the EBR.

Can the minister assure us that his government intends to continue to comply fully with the letter and the spirit of the Environmental Bill of Rights and does not intend to water down its requirements?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member—and thank you for the question—the member is right on two counts. This government was elected with a clear mandate: to get rid of the cap-and-trade program of her government, to return affordability to Ontarians, and to have a more balanced approach to a healthy economy and a healthy environment. The member is also right that the Environmental Bill of Rights is an important piece of legislation, a piece of legislation that this government and this minister will respect, and—as we have posted Bill 4—will continue to use it and other vehicles to consult with Ontarians when it relates to important environmental matters.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

M me Nathalie Des Rosiers: I’m reassured that there is a commitment to the rule of law in environmental matters, but I’d like you to continue, to explain, then, why the $1-billion proceeds from the cap-and-trade that was obtained in the auction before the election is not being used for the legal purposes for which they were obtained. Indeed, they were in trust for the reduction of emissions.

So I am asking the minister: Why doesn’t he dispose of these auctions in the way in which they were collected: to help people, as in my riding, that need to have social housing refurbished to protect the environment and reduce emissions?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member: Let me assure the member and the Legislature that the funds that were collected under the previous cap-and-trade program are being used for the orderly wind-down and, in some cases, the completion of some programs that were contracted with. Responsibly, the government—after it ceased to collect cap-and-trade revenues, as we promised to people—has no longer extended the costs and expenditures associated with that program. But the revenues that were collected for that program will be used for that. That is specified in the legislation, Bill 4, that is in front of the Legislature, and that is how we will proceed.

Government fiscal policies

Mrs. Robin Martin: My question is for the Minister of Finance. Over the past few months, our government has taken action to reverse the damage caused by the reckless spending of the previous government. It’s clear that the Liberals ignored the reality of Ontario’s finances, giving us higher taxes and higher spending and higher debt. In order to protect our core services and our future generations from an ever-rising debt load, we must act, and we must act now.

The reality, Mr. Speaker—and experts are in agreement—is that the Liberals’ out-of-control spending cannot continue. In fact, last week the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s Fiscal Sustainability Report 2018 painted a dire picture of Ontario’s finances. Can the minister please inform this House as to what the report said and what we are doing to take the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s conclusions seriously?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: To the member from Eglinton–Lawrence: I can tell you exactly what the Parliamentary Budget Officer said. He warned us that the “fiscal policy is not sustainable over the long term.”

For years, the Liberal government ignored warnings from experts about Ontario’s unsustainable spending. The Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry, the line-by-line and now the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s sobering report all point to one conclusion: We need to take action. That is why we’re working to restore accountability and trust in our province’s finances. That’s why we’re putting more money in people’s pockets. And that’s why we’re sending a message to the world that Ontario is open for business.

The people of Ontario finally have a government working for them, and not a moment too soon, Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mrs. Robin Martin: Mr. Speaker, I’d like to thank the minister for his response. It’s truly shocking that instead of talking about Ontario’s soaring debt and how it threatens core public services, the NDP continue to ignore all the warnings. The NDP stood by and watched happily as the Liberals recklessly increased spending. In fact, even though the Parliamentary Budget Officer just last week said that our fiscal policies were not sustainable, as the minister said, the NDP were in this House that same day asking that more money be spent.

Just last year, the Financial Accountability Officer warned that if nothing is done, “the burden of stabilizing Ontario’s public finances would be increasingly shifted from the baby boom generation to younger Ontarians.” Can the minister please inform this House how reckless it is to ignore the warnings about the province’s debt level and how we must respond?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: President of the Treasury Board.

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: I’d like to thank the member from Eglinton–Lawrence for the question. There have been endless warnings from experts, including myself in 2009, about the provincial debt and out-of-control spending. The most recent report from the Parliamentary Budget Officer reaffirms that our provincial debt is out of control.

We have reported to the public through, as the minister mentioned, our line-by-line review, our public accounts and the commission of inquiry. In all of these, we’ve told the public and this Legislature that current spending and debt trends are unsustainable. The PBO agrees with us. The Financial Accountability Officer agrees with us. The AG agrees with us. This isn’t ideology, Mr. Speaker; this is about simple mathematics. We will fight to reduce the debt so that we leave a legacy of financial sustainability to this and future generations. It’s too bad that the NDP won’t work with us.

Opioid abuse

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: My question is to the Acting Premier. Today on the west lawn, a vigil was held by faith and community leaders, health care professionals, harm reduction workers and the family and friends of the 1,265 Ontarians who lost their lives due to the opioid crisis. They are looking to the government for answers, but this government has established a pattern of ignoring the facts. That has to stop now. When confronted with the evidence that there are opioids leaking into the streets from Ontario’s pharmacies, the Minister of Health shrugged off her responsibility to prevent these crimes.

Speaker, how many more lives have to be lost before this government steps up to the plate and starts fighting for the people of Ontario affected by the opioid crisis?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Well, Speaker, first of all, we absolutely disagree with any part of that question, the premise of that question and the accusations that are made. This government is absolutely committed to getting people struggling with addictions the help that they need, Speaker. We’re reviewing the latest data. We’re reviewing the latest evidence. We’re reviewing the current drug injection sites, the supervised injection sites and the overdose injection site models.

Our minister is speaking and consulting with experts, as I said, with health care workers, police services, dealing with experts and community leaders, business owners, stakeholders, and reviewing the reports to ensure that people struggling with addictions can actually get the help they need.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: Back to the Acting Premier: We know most pharmacists are law-abiding caretakers who work hard to improve the lives of their patients. But the unfortunate reality is that a few pharmacies were the source of great harm, flooding our streets and contributing to this ongoing public health emergency.

Despite a freedom-of-information request showing that last year 17 pharmacists distributed more than 10,000 maximum-strength oxycodone pills each, there is no indication that the province looked into why this happened. Speaker, is the Minister of Health going to get to work making sure these crimes never happen again, or will she continue her pattern of sitting back and letting communities, families and individuals struggle to save lives on their own?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Premier Ford was very clear during the election campaign that we will listen to the experts, and he committed again—over and over—to the $3.8 billion in mental health addictions and housing supports over the next 10 years. That includes $1.9 billion from the federal government and $1.9 billion from the provincial government.

Speaker, we have been consulting with groups right across Ontario. I know in my hometown I have been asking them, “Please help us identify the way that this money can be best spent and best put to use.”

I know that our Minister of Health is actively leading this process. She has toured multiple sites and heard from people with lived experiences. She has been continuing to meet with health care workers and police workers, and we will continue to hear from the people.

International trade

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: My question is for the Minister of Finance. Last night, the federal government and the United States reached a free trade deal, now referred to as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. The USMCA comes after months of uncertainty and tariffs, tariffs that have placed an enormous strain on Ontario’s businesses. While the agreement is a step in the right direction, I understand that it does not remove the remaining steel and aluminum tariffs.

Could the minister please discuss what is being done to address these tariffs?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you to the member from Carleton. From day one our government, under the leadership of Premier Ford, has offered our full support to the federal partners throughout the trade negotiations. Our number one priority was making sure a deal got done that protected Ontario workers and Ontario industries.

While we are cautiously optimistic that the USMCA will create continued opportunities, we remain concerned about the remaining steel and aluminum tariffs. These tariffs have cost business thousands. Take Honda Canada as one example: These tariffs have cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars to date. We need to create and protect good jobs here in Ontario. Our government, at the moment, will be speaking directly with industry representatives from Ontario’s steel, aluminum, auto and agricultural sectors to determine the impacts of this deal.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: Through you, Mr. Speaker: Thank you to the minister for outlining the steps this government took to get a deal done. Many businesses and workers in Ontario depend on free and open trade with the US. It is great to hear of the work our government did to protect Ontario’s jobs.

Our government has heard from businesses that it is hard for them to remain competitive in today’s business climate. Could the minister please inform the Legislature of the next steps regarding the implementation of the USMCA?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thanks to the member. Our government has been standing up for the people since day one, and we will continue to do so. It is more important than ever to open Ontario for business and create and protect good jobs for the people.

Once again, we are cautiously optimistic that the USMCA will create continued opportunities, and we remain concerned about the remaining steel and aluminum tariffs. Both Ontario and our partners to the south succeed when we can create trade easily. Ontario does $389 billion worth of trade with the US.

So while we wait to receive the full text of the deal, we’re calling for assurances from the federal government that any sectors in the province that are negatively affected by federal negotiating decisions will be provided with financial assistance and transitional support. Our government will continue to vigorously defend and advance our interests.

Privatization of public assets

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is to the Minister of Finance. During the election, the Premier said he would “leave no stone unturned” when it comes to selling off Ontario’s public assets. Following the election, the Premier commissioned a quickie report from a private consultant that recommended monetizing public assets. That’s the same code for privatization that the previous Liberal government used just before they sold off Hydro One.

Instead of speaking in Liberal code, will the minister come clean with Ontarians and just tell them whether he is considering the sale of public assets like OPG, OLG or the LCBO?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: President of the Treasury Board.

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member, thank you for that question. Our government is working day and night to restore trust and accountability to Ontario’s finances. While the NDP believes that the government can rack up unlimited amounts of debt without consequences, the reality is, it cannot.

In fact, the report, in its 48 pages, does not refer to the OLG or to the OPG or the LCBO, so OMG.

We know the Liberals left us a mess and, unlike the NDP, we are working to fix it for the people. We have fixed the public accounts. We have fixed it with the Auditor General, with the first clean opinion in three years. Our government’s priority is to ensure financial stability for future generations in this province.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Members take their seats.

Restart the clock. Supplementary.

Ms. Catherine Fife: The Conservatives were all for hydro privatization for over a decade. In fact, they started this entire fiasco. Then the Liberals did what the Conservatives had wanted to do, and when the public pushed back, the Conservatives pretended that they were opposed to privatization all along.

But as recently as four years ago, under one of their many previous leaders, the Conservatives were touting a white paper that proposed to “monetize Ontario Power Generation and Hydro One.” The paper was crystal clear that this meant sell-offs and the privatization of Ontario’s public services. The white paper was signed by the then energy critic, who is now the finance minister.

I think it is incumbent on this minister to be very clear with the people of this province. Is OPG and the sell-off of OLG and LCBO on the table? Tell the people of this province.

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: Our government has been working hard for the people of Ontario and has been restoring trust and accountability to government. EY had a mandate to consider all options and present those to government. They did an excellent job and left no stone unturned.

While the opposition has been breathlessly fearmongering, we have been looking for solutions. The line-by-line audit presented some solutions to government. Just because an option was presented to the government doesn’t mean it will happen. What I can say, Mr. Speaker, is this: We are not pro-privatization; we are pro the people. Every choice we make will be to modernize and transform government for the people so that they can continue to receive high-quality public services now and into the future.

Greenhouse gas emissions

Miss Kinga Surma: My question is for the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. Five years ago, the Auditor General released a report concluding that the Drive Clean program had outlived its usefulness. Almost 15 years ago, the minister who founded the Drive Clean program called for it to be phased out.

On Friday, in Etobicoke, the Premier and the Minister of the Environment announced that our government is cancelling this program. It is about time. Families don’t want to subsidize a redundant program that ultimately results in longer lines, more paperwork when renewing their licence plate or purchasing a new vehicle, and costly, unnecessary car repairs.

To the minister: What other benefits can Ontarians expect from this announcement?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member from Etobicoke Centre, thank you for the question. She’s quite right. Last Friday, Premier Ford announced the cancellation of Drive Clean. This was a program that was costing two million Ontarians’ time—two million Ontarians who had to do unnecessary tests and paperwork—and over $40 million of taxpayers’ dollars.

This is something that the PC caucus in opposition was very clear in its opposition to, at least five years ago. It took that long, Mr. Speaker. It took this government to act on Drive Clean, a program that was effective at reducing emissions in the 1990s but lost that effectiveness with standards for cars and cleaner gasoline and when older cars came off the road. As the Auditor General stated and as the founder of Drive Clean talked about, it was time for the program to be phased out, and it has been.

Mr. Speaker, this government will always be looking at programs, looking to balance a healthy economy and a healthy environment. Where the programs are not supporting either of those objectives, they will be phased out, and programs that do work—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock.

Start the clock. Supplementary.

Miss Kinga Surma: Thank you to the minister. I know my constituents in Etobicoke Centre and all over the province will be more than happy with this development.

The Toronto Star has polled over 20,000 readers, and 66% of participants believe that Drive Clean is an outdated program and cars are built differently now. Cancelling this outdated, inefficient program is going to save $40 million per year. I know my constituents approve of getting rid of waste. I know it is important to my constituents that Ontario continues to be a leader, to care for our environment and do so in an effective manner.

Can the minister tell us what the future of Drive Clean looks like and how our government plans to continue to reduce emissions and protect the environment?

Hon. Rod Phillips: As Toronto Star readers and Ontarians said very clearly, the time for Drive Clean was over. But that does not mean the end to important on-road testing.

In the place of this program that I’ve noted has been ineffective for a long time, we will, be first of all, winding down the program in an orderly way over the next six months, and then a program that will be focusing on the big emitters today—heavy trucks and the people who are using diesel fuel in those heavy vehicles—will be put into place. These are the emitters that the University of Toronto engineering school and other experts say should be the focus today. I can share with the House that I spoke to the head of the Ontario Trucking Association today, who agrees. Good trucking-industry participants don’t want to pollute, but there are some that do.

That program will come into place. Once again, we will be taking programs that are ineffective out of play, putting programs that are effective into play, protecting the environment and protecting the economy.

Legal clinic funding

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: My question is for the Attorney General. Lesbian and gay Canadians are twice as likely to experience violence when compared to heterosexual Canadians. That number jumps to four times for bisexual Canadians and is even higher for trans and two-spirited community members. That’s why the LGBTQ community eagerly welcomed Canada’s first LGBTQ community legal clinic, set to open this fall. But under this new government, funding for the Egale clinic is no longer there.

Will the Attorney General let our community know if the clinic is going to be more collateral damage as a result of this government’s cuts?

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: I thank the member opposite for the question. Ontarians deserve to live free from the threat of violence and abuse. Our government for the people is committed to continuing to invest in programs that provide the supports to survivors and to those at risk of violence, such as emergency shelters, counselling, sexual assault centres, and court-based victim and witness assistance.

The government is currently looking at all programs and funding commitments, as you know, and more information on this will be available at a later date.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: Back to the Attorney General: Last week, the Toronto Star asked the Attorney General’s office if this clinic will receive the funding that was promised. The response from the office failed to confirm if this clinic is still on the agenda, and today’s answer is no better. They say they’re going to look at the evidence, and then we wait and we are delayed.

After the third year of rising hate crimes against the trans community, we have a Premier who has refused to march in the Pride Parade and who has removed the critical sex ed curriculum. And now, this government is taking away my community’s legal supports.

What will it take for this government to stand up for the LGBTQ community?

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: Mr. Speaker, I reject the premise of the question. The previous Liberal government left our province saddled with a $15-billion deficit and over $340 billion of debt. The people of this province have services, programs and supports that they expect and deserve, and it is the mandate of our government, as we have been saying very clearly for the past few weeks in this House, that we are reviewing every program, because we know that it has an impact on people’s lives. Therefore, we are going to take the time and consideration to make these decisions.

As I said to the member opposite, we are reviewing the programs and we will report back in due time.

Indigenous economic development

Mr. Doug Downey: My question is for the Minister of Energy, Northern Development and Mines. Mr. Speaker, northern Ontario has a lot to offer the provincial economy, and I know that our government is going to make sure that we unlock more of its potential. I also know that Minister Rickford is extremely qualified to lead this important file. He has already shown how strong his commitment to northern Ontario and Indigenous communities across the province is, and I’d like to thank him for all the important work he has done already.

Mr. Speaker, I know our government has been taking steps to open Ontario for business, so I’d like to ask Minister Rickford if he can explain some of the initiatives our government has undertaken to deliver on our promises to the people to show that Ontario is open for business for northern residents and Indigenous communities.

Hon. Greg Rickford: I want to thank the member from Barrie–Springwater–Oro-Medonte for his question and his interest in this opportunity. It’s true, Mr. Speaker: Whether it’s First Peoples, for the people, this government is committed to ensuring economic opportunities span this great province. We know what northern Ontario can contribute, and in particular we know the contribution our Indigenous communities can make.

That’s why I visited Ochiichagwe’Babigo’Ining, otherwise known as Dalles First Nation. Regional Chief RoseAnne Archibald joined me, and we celebrated a $1-million investment from the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund, in addition to half a million dollars from Indigenous Affairs Ontario to invest in a business centre of excellence in this dynamic community.

They already have a great footprint in Kenora, involved in integrated resource management, but now they have a business development centre with anchor tenants paying rent, a training area and a conference centre, as well as space dedicated to the development officers who work for Treaty 3 to generate business. Chief Lorraine Cobiness said it best, Mr. Speaker: Dalles First Nation is open for business.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock.

Restart the clock. Supplementary.

Mr. Doug Downey: Thank you, Minister, for answering the question and your response.

Mr. Speaker, I know that our government is keeping promises to the people of Ontario, and I am proud that we and you have already delivered so much. I know that, through the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corp., our government is making even more important investments to support northern communities. I’m happy to hear that this weekend’s announcement will have such a positive impact on creating opportunities for Indigenous communities in this province.

I know that additional investments through the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corp. are ensuring that Ontario is open for business. Can the minister please tell the members of this House about another way our government is helping the people of northern Ontario?

Hon. Greg Rickford: Again, another busy latter part of the week in Kenora–Rainy River. I travel a lot—I know many of my colleagues do—but I had a unique opportunity on Saturday. I sat on the other side of the gate at this brand new airport in Kenora and I said, “Kenora passengers, destination for the world. Flight number 1 is about to take off.”

That’s because we have a brand new airport there. Full credit to the federal government for their contributions, but it was a difficult road there. That was formerly a two-room house as an airport. It needed several upgrades over the course of time. We’re investing in perimeter fences to prevent deer and moose from coming on the site; a state-of-the-art runway; and various other equipment to keep that place safe.

Yesterday, I was pleased to celebrate half a million dollars by NOHFC and some money to invest in making sure that that airport authority has a strategic response and that Kenora will be open for business.

Privatization of public assets

Mr. Jamie West: My question is for the finance minister. Speaker, when the Premier was a Toronto councillor, he said, “We’re going to be outsourcing everything that is not nailed down.” One of his first acts as Premier was to commission a quickie report from a private consultant that recommended privatization and outsourcing.

Thanks to privatization, Ontario is already locked into a 22-year contract with a private company that’s embroiled in a massive money-laundering scandal in British Columbia. Is the minister considering taking us even further down this risky and costly road by privatizing the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp.?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: President of the Treasury Board.

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member opposite: Thank you for that question. The EY report was commissioned so that we could do a deep dive into the previous Liberal government’s spending. They went through 500,000 lines of data, which is a very deep review. In that review, which they completed on time and below budget—there are lots of great ideas within that report. I’d encourage that the members opposite read that report because, within that report, it very clearly says that we should leave no stone unturned, that we will look at all elements of how to save the public money.

There has been duplication and waste for a number of years, and we are very encouraged that we have a blueprint and a path forward.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Jamie West: In 2014 the Conservatives were touting a white paper. It said that in addition to selling off Hydro One and OPG, the government should “move to wind down” the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. “and privatize its lotteries, casino assets and slots operations.” That’s the full quote.

Do the Conservatives still believe that Ontario’s lottery should still be privatized, or can the minister assure us that this is a bad idea and is completely off the table?

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: Again, Mr. Speaker, through you to the member: As was noted last week, there was no mention of any privatization of any crown corporation within the report.

What I would say is this, with regard to any privatization: What it did say was that if there is a good business case—and in my experience, if you get one-time savings but forgo lots of future revenues and prices go up, just like Hydro One, maybe that’s not such a good business case that we should be looking at.

The number one thing that we have to do is that we have to take care of the people. We have to make sure that our fiscal house is in order. The Parliamentary Budget Officer last week said that Ontario’s fiscal situation is not sustainable. How are we going to protect core services—hospitals, education, infrastructure and transit—if we don’t make sure we have sustainable funding?

Mr. Speaker, we are not pro-privatization; we are pro the people.

Greenhouse gas emissions

Mr. Jim McDonell: My question is for the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. On August 23, a letter to the editor was sent to the Ottawa Sun, advocating for the end of the pointless Drive Clean program.

In 2015, Drive Clean cost Ontario taxpayers $89 million. But did anyone bother to check that the program was actually working? Certainly not the previous Liberal government.

The Premier and the Minister of the Environment announced last Friday that they’re planning to scrap the Drive Clean program and save taxpayers money. Can the minister explain to the House why this government decided to cancel the Drive Clean program?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, our caucus has been calling for the elimination of the Drive Clean program for over six years. Norm Sterling, the former PC Minister of the Environment and the founder of the Drive Clean program in 1999, has also, for almost 10 years, been calling for the elimination of this program.

In fact, the previous Minister of the Environment, the Liberal Minister of the Environment, lauded our decision on Friday. He said in a tweet, “Drive Clean has little impact.” So even the previous Liberal environment minister was calling for the elimination of this program.

It was only under the leadership of our Premier, however, that this program was finally eliminated, saving Ontario taxpayers $40 million, saving two million Ontarians from the added hassle from a program that didn’t work. We cancelled Drive Clean because it wasn’t working. We will always balance a healthy environment and a healthy economy, and eliminate programs that do not support either.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Members take their seats. Supplementary?

Mr. Jim McDonell: Thank you to the minister for his answer and for standing up for the Ontario taxpayer. It is clear that this government respects the taxpayers by eliminating an ineffective and obsolete program. During the election, our plan for the people promised to put more money back in people’s pockets, and we are doing just that.

However, my constituents also care deeply about the well-being of our environment for future generations. Can the Minister of the Environment explain how we will ensure that the biggest polluters on our roads will continue to be penalized for polluting the environment?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member from Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry, who I know is an effective advocate on this issue and other issues: As we’ve been clear, one of the focuses of our government is going to be cracking down on the biggest polluters, cracking down on the areas where we can make a difference. While we’re balancing a healthy economy with a healthy environment, we’ll be focusing on those who are polluting the most.

As the University of Toronto engineering department study showed just this summer, it’s the big trucks—diesel trucks—that are currently contributing the most to the harmful emissions—nitrous oxide and others—that are really affecting our environment.

So, while our government is getting rid of the inefficient, ineffective and outdated Drive Clean program that the previous government sustained for so long, our government will be focusing on those significant polluters, making sure that they get value for money. We protect the environment while supporting the economy.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): That concludes our time for question period this morning. I want to compliment all the members. I could actually hear every question that was put and every response that was given for the first time since the 12th of July. Thank you very, very much.

Peter Adams

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Point of order: the member for Peterborough–Kawartha.

Mr. Dave Smith: I regret to inform the chamber that Peter Adams, who served in the 34th Legislature, passed away on Friday. There will be a memorial service held in Peterborough on October 13 at 2 p.m. at St. John’s Anglican church.

I’d like to have the thoughts and prayers of all of the members thinking of Peter’s wife, Jill. Thank you.

Indigenous relations and reconciliation

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Point of order: the member for Scarborough–Guildwood.

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: Thank you, Speaker, for the opportunity. I’ve been getting notes on the colour of my jacket today. I just wanted to say that I’m wearing orange today because yesterday was Orange Shirt Day. It’s an opportunity for us to reflect on the effects of residential schools and the reconciliation effort that is still ahead.

Flag-raising ceremony

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Point of order: the member for Richmond Hill.

Mrs. Daisy Wai: Today is the national day for celebrating the 69th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China.

There will be a flag-raising ceremony on the south lawn. I’d like to invite all the members to join us at noontime on the south lawn.

Deferred Votes

Time allocation

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We have a deferred vote on the amendment to government notice of motion number 8 regarding allocation of time on the appointment of a Select Committee on Financial Transparency.

Call in the members. This is a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1144 to 1149.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I hate to interrupt these friendly cross-party discussions, but we do have to vote. Members, please take your seats.

On September 27, 2018, Mr. Vanthof moved that government notice of motion number 8 be amended as follows: In the first paragraph, the words “there shall be one hour of additional debate with 30 minutes apportioned to the government, 20 minutes to the official opposition, seven minutes to the independent Liberal Party members and three minutes to the independent Green Party member. At the end of this time” shall be inserted following the number “6”; and

In the second paragraph, delete the words “9(

c) or”.

All those in favour of Mr. Vanthof’s motion, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Andrew, Jill

Arthur, Ian

Begum, Doly

Bell, Jessica

Bisson, Gilles

Bourgouin, Guy

Burch, Jeff

Coteau, Michael

Des Rosiers, Nathalie

Fife, Catherine

Fraser, John

French, Jennifer K.

Gates, Wayne

Gélinas, France

Glover, Chris

Hassan, Faisal

Hatfield, Percy

Horwath, Andrea

Hunter, Mitzie

Karpoche, Bhutila

Kernaghan, Terence

Lalonde, Marie-France

Mamakwa, Sol

Mantha, Michael

Monteith-Farrell, Judith

Rakocevic, Tom

Sattler, Peggy

Schreiner, Mike

Shaw, Sandy

Singh, Sara

Stevens, Jennifer (Jennie)

Stiles, Marit

Tabuns, Peter

Taylor, Monique

Vanthof, John

West, Jamie

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yarde, Kevin

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): All those opposed to the motion will please rise and be counted by the Clerk.

Nays

Anand, Deepak

Baber, Roman

Babikian, Aris

Bailey, Robert

Bethlenfalvy, Peter

Bouma, Will

Calandra, Paul

Cho, Stan

Coe, Lorne

Crawford, Stephen

Cuzzetto, Rudy

Downey, Doug

Dunlop, Jill

Fedeli, Victor

Fee, Amy

Fullerton, Merrilee

Ghamari, Goldie

Gill, Parm

Hardeman, Ernie

Harris, Mike

Hillier, Randy

Hogarth, Christine

Kanapathi, Logan

Karahalios, Belinda

Ke, Vincent

Khanjin, Andrea

Kramp, Daryl

Kusendova, Natalia

Lecce, Stephen

MacLeod, Lisa

Martin, Robin

Martow, Gila

McDonell, Jim

McKenna, Jane

McNaughton, Monte

Miller, Norman

Mitas, Christina Maria

Mulroney, Caroline

Nicholls, Rick

Pang, Billy

Park, Lindsey

Pettapiece, Randy

Phillips, Rod

Piccini, David

Rasheed, Kaleed

Rickford, Greg

Roberts, Jeremy

Romano, Ross

Sabawy, Sheref

Sandhu, Amarjot

Sarkaria, Prabmeet Singh

Scott, Laurie

Simard, Amanda

Skelly, Donna

Smith, Dave

Smith, Todd

Surma, Kinga

Tangri, Nina

Thanigasalam, Vijay

Thompson, Lisa M.

Tibollo, Michael A.

Triantafilopoulos, Effie J.

Wai, Daisy

Walker, Bill

Wilson, Jim

Yakabuski, John

Yurek, Jeff

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 38; the nays are 67.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I declare the motion lost.

Motion negatived.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Are the members now ready to vote on the main motion? I heard some noes.

This matter will be placed on the Orders and Notices paper for further debate.

This House stands in recess until 1 p.m. this afternoon.

The House recessed from 1154 to 1300.

Members’ Statements

LGBTQ community

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: I rise in the House today to speak about this government’s treatment of the LGBTQ community. From the throne speech, where the word “lifestyle” was used, to the removal of LGBTQ families and voices from the health and phys ed curriculum, we seem to be going backwards.

Human rights are travelling back in time as well. Egale, a national LGBTQ-rights organization, were set to open a legal clinic to provide inclusivity training to 70-some legal clinics in Ontario, a worldwide first. But under this government, that funding now may be cut. Legal clinics in Ontario freely admit that they are not equipped to respond to the needs of their equity-seeking clients.

The legal system has always presented significant challenges for the gay community. In 1965, gay men were incarcerated as “dangerous sex offenders.” While, in 1969, homosexuality was decriminalized, it wasn’t until 1996 that sexual orientation became a protected ground. Until that time—and even to this day—my community endured harassment, discrimination, violence, physical abuse, psychological oppression and hate propaganda. Gays received the right to marry in 2005, but not surprisingly provincial and federal Conservatives have tried to revoke that right—note Alberta’s attempt to use the “notwithstanding” clause.

Simply put, now that LGBTQ individuals finally enjoy rights that heterosexual cisgender individuals have always enjoyed, they’re still being excluded from the legal system.

While this government proudly parrots their slogan, “For the People,” they certainly don’t include LGBTQ people.

Herbert’s Boots and Western Wear

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: This weekend, I was very excited to visit Herbert’s Boots and Western Wear in Innisfil to congratulate them on their 60th year of business. They had lots of activities and draws for their loyal customers and a great tent sale.

Herbert’s has been open since 1958, when Mr. and Mrs. Elsner opened in Alliston, Ontario, where they began selling boots; they then opened up a second location in my riding of Barrie–Innisfil. They used to sell clothing to local farmers and folks from Toronto, but people from all around Ontario were quick to discover that Herbert’s was the place to go to find the right pair of western boots. They now have the two locations, one just off Highway 400 and Innisfil Beach Road.

Mr. Speaker, I’m sure you’re wondering if I was able to find myself a pair of boots. I am excited to let you know that I bought a great pair of brown leather cowboy boots.

I encourage everyone to stop by Herbert’s to support our local business.

Muslim community

Mr. Faisal Hassan: October is the month we celebrate Islamic heritage in Ontario. The Muslim community has been present in Ontario and in Canada since the country’s founding in 1867. We celebrate together to inform, to educate and to share with our fellow Canadians the rich Muslim heritage and contributions to society. These are contributions in science, humanities, medicine, astronomy, architecture, history and other disciplines that have greatly benefited human progress. It is the month we recognize the important contributions that Muslims make in Ontario as part of the vibrant social, economic, political and cultural fabric of our province.

Islamic Heritage Month brings people from all backgrounds together and provides positive vibes, especially since there are so many misconceptions in society about Islam. Muslims have been contributing to all aspects of Ontario’s prosperity and diverse heritage for generations. Islamic Heritage Month is about creating positive understanding for the Muslim community and sharing this with our neighbours. I encourage every member to take

part in the events in your area.

Mid-Autumn Festival

Mr. Billy Pang: I would like to bring forward a celebration that is the second-most important one for the Chinese, after Chinese New Year. The Mid-Autumn Festival 2018 was last Monday, September 24. The Mid-Autumn Festival, to the Chinese, is celebrated when the moon is full. Chinese people believe a full moon is a symbol of reunion, harmony and happiness.

Also called the Moon Festival or Mooncake Festival, it is celebrated when the moon is believed to be the biggest and fullest of the year. That’s why mooncakes are the must-eat mid-autumn food in China. They are a traditional Chinese pastry, and Chinese people see in the roundness of the mooncake a symbol of reunion and happiness.

This past weekend, I had the chance to attend a few Mid-Autumn Festival celebrations and participate with friends, families and colleagues in the festivities and games. There was good food and lots of laughs.

Our government encourages family time as such, by putting money back into the taxpayers’ pockets in order to spend it, along with their time amongst family.

Social issues in Windsor and Essex county

Mr. Percy Hatfield: Last Friday, I joined the member from Essex and the member from Windsor West at a round-table discussion regarding social issues in the Windsor and Essex county region. It lasted more than three hours because of the number of the people who came to present to us.

Hiatus House, for example, is a shelter for abused women. They handled more than 3,000 crisis calls last year. Their occupancy rate averages 95%. They’ve housed 309 women with 222 children. When they’ve been full, they’ve turned away 146 women and 118 children. To save money, they’ve already turned full-time positions into part-time contract jobs.

The Downtown Mission is ground zero for a growing homeless population. Their average stay is 53 nights and they house an average of 80 people a night.

The Unemployed Help Centre is busier than ever. Their food bank is seeing more people than in past years. We heard of a senior on a limited budget who came to the food bank for the first time a couple of weeks ago. Why? Because she had a dental emergency, which left her with little or no money to put food on the table that week.

Rents are going up. People are paying 70% and more of their income to remain housed.

The greatest fear we heard over and over again is that the new government will be making further cuts to social agencies and programs. This isn’t fear-mongering. This is the reality of what we’re hearing from the people on the margins of society.

Speaker, I agree with them: They need more help, not more cuts.

Waves of Changes for Autism

Mr. Stephen Lecce: As we mark the beginning of Autism Awareness Month in this country, I want to reaffirm our government’s commitment to restoring human dignity and respect to Ontarians with autism. They deserve to have a government that will give them hope, invest in their children’s future and enable them to achieve their full potential.

Last Thursday, I joined my colleague Minister Tibollo in Vaughan to raise critical funds for families with children with autism at the Waves of Changes for Autism fundraising gala. This organization raises funds to give a hand up to those families who need our support, to ensure that their kids can receive the therapy and the treatment they need for their loved ones.

Over $250,000 has been raised to date from this value-based charity, assisting over 70 families in need. Our community in King–Vaughan is blessed with deeply generous people who care about the most vulnerable in our society.

On behalf of our Premier and government, we express our heartfelt gratitude to the incredible volunteer team of Waves of Changes for Autism, including their founders, Ellen Contardi and Loredana Di Iacovo, and their entire dedicated committee for making a difference and leaving a legacy for these children. I’m eternally grateful for their compassion and generosity. Your government is grateful and everyone in this House says thank you.

Minimum wage

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: Today, October 1, 2018, the NDP government in Alberta makes history with their minimum wage of $15 per hour coming into effect. Here in Ontario, our $15 minimum wage is set to take effect on January 1, 2019. Over 1.7 million Ontario workers are counting on this government to honour the commitment. An overwhelming majority of Ontarians support a $15 minimum wage and better laws to protect workers. However, Premier Ford and the Minister of Labour are now saying they will cancel the minimum wage increase.

The Ford government is defending corporate interests over people’s interests. They are representing the interests of the 1%, not the millions of Ontarians who want fair and decent wages and to be able to live with dignity. It’s no surprise that the government is listening to big businesses like Loblaws, who, let’s not forget, recently admitted to being part of a 14-year scheme fixing bread prices, and others like the billionaires of Tim Hortons, who are all predicting doom and gloom. You know, we’ve heard this spin before—a decade ago, when minimum wage increased to $10 an hour. As expected, a minimum wage increase was actually good for Ontario’s economy.

Speaker, no one in Ontario should be working full-time and still live in poverty. At a time when big businesses and corporations are making record-breaking profits, we simply cannot ask hard-working Ontarians to accept a wage freeze. It’s time this government put people over profit.

Dipak Bhatt

Mr. Deepak Anand: Good afternoon, Speaker. Today I’d like to take this time to recognize one of my good friends, Dipak Bhatt, a Guinness world record holder and Limca Book record holder.

Dipak has a special trait: On a single grain of rice, Dipak can craft an image of many dignitaries. He has written as many as 389 letters on a single grain of rice and 148 letters on a single sesame seed.

Mr. Speaker, all this is completed with bare eyes and zero—and I say zero—use of technology. I applaud Dipak’s creativity and skill. Being a talented artist with a steady hand is an accomplishment, but to be able to execute his craft on such a small scale without the use of a magnifying aid is truly remarkable.

Today, through this statement, I’d like to take the opportunity to recognize all the artists who, of course, I believe, with the grace of God—and some people call it luck—have all this extraordinary talent. I truly believe that these artists, with their hard work, discipline and persistence, are creating memories for the generations to relish.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I would like to congratulate Dipak, who will be here soon and is currently stuck in traffic.

Mental health and addiction services

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: I rise today to recognize the Knights of Columbus Council 9612 from the St. Maximilian Kolbe Polish parish for their donation made to the Trillium Health Partners’ Credit Valley Hospital in my riding of Mississauga–Erin Mills last Saturday. Their donation was made towards the mental health care zone. Generous donations such as this help improve the experience of patients in Mississauga.

On behalf of the PC caucus and my colleague the MPP from Mississauga Centre, who worked closely with the Polish community and all Mississauga MPPs, I would like to thank the Knights of Columbus Council, Grand Knight Marek Ruta, the Polish community and all reverend fathers for their spiritual guidance, morals and support to Mississauga and Ontario.

Mr. Speaker, we made a promise during the election to make mental health a priority. That’s why this government and the Minister of Health have committed $1.9 billion in mental health, addictions and supportive housing, matching the federal government’s funding. That’s $3.8 billion, Mr. Speaker. This is the biggest provincial commitment to mental health in Canadian history. We will develop a comprehensive, system-wide strategy for mental health and addiction that provides services Ontarians need and deserve.

Introduction of Bills

Liability for Climate-Related Harms Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la responsabilité à l’égard des dommages liés au climat

Mr. Tabuns moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 37,

An Act respecting civil liability for climate-related harms / Projet de loi 37, Loi concernant la responsabilité civile à l’égard des dommages liés au climat.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Would the member for Toronto–Danforth wish to explain his bill?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: The people of Ontario face tens of billions of dollars’ worth of costs coming over the next few decades from climate-related damage. This bill provides businesses, individuals and governments a legal framework to sue the fossil fuel companies that have caused this damage through their products.

Motions

House sittings

Hon. Todd Smith: I move that the

schedule of the House for Tuesday, October 2, 2018, as set out in standing order 8(a), be revised by substituting “1 p.m.” and “1:05 p.m.” for “3 p.m.” and “3:05 p.m.,” respectively.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Smith, Bay of Quinte, is moving that the

schedule of the House for Tuesday, October 2, 2018, as set out in standing order 8(a), be revised by substituting “1 p.m.” and “1:05 p.m.” for “3 p.m.” and “3:05 p.m.,” respectively.

I understand that the member for Timmins would like to speak to this motion.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Mr. Speaker, I just can’t believe the government and the way that they’re running this House. If I was a small business person, or if I was Placer Dome or Kidd Creek or a paper mill—

Mr. John Vanthof: A dairy farm.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: —a dairy farm or the mill up in Kapuskasing, and I was to run my business the way these guys run the House, I would lose all my employees and have to close my doors.

First of all, I want to say for the record that New Democrats don’t mind sitting in the House. We will be here every time that you call the House. If you want to have the House sit whenever, we will be here.

But, literally, to be given a motion two minutes before—I guess we got it sometime around—I don’t know. I bet you I got this—

Interjection: Where’s your sense of humour?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Where’s my sense of humour? That’s a good question.

We got this 15 minutes ago. The government is changing, yet again, when the House is going to sit tomorrow. So now, rather than sitting at 3 o’clock, and all of us, as caucuses, going to our weekly caucus meetings, we’re now going to cancel the weekly caucus meetings at the last minute in order for the government to get more time to debate a particular bill that they want to be able to call.

Hello? The Legislature has been running by the same rules for long enough, and everybody else managed to get their agenda through the House by planning what you want to do in a very good way, where you say, “Here’s a calendar. When do I want to have my bill passed? This is the amount of time I need at second reading,” and if you do time allocation, for time allocation, and committee at the third reading. You plan it out and you get it done.

These guys would be like my friend John Vanthof, a dairy farmer of great success for many years, the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane, saying, “Well, I think I may milk my cows at a different time today.” You’re supposed to milk cows at a certain time every day, and it has to be done repetitively. How many times a day? Three times a day? Twice, depending?

Interjections: Twice.

Mr. John Vanthof: Three times, sometimes.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: It’s three in some, two in others. I know that because I talk dairy a lot with my good friend.

Imagine a dairy farmer saying, “Well, you know what? We’re just going to change the way that we milk the cows today.” Well, it won’t be very long until your cows won’t be much good to you—

Mr. John Vanthof: And we don’t tell the cows or the employees.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: “We don’t tell the cows or the employees.” Good one.

You can’t run the House this way. You have a parliamentary calendar. You should follow the parliamentary calendar. If you have a problem with time to put legislation through the House—I want to explain something to the government side of the bench: There’s a House leaders’ meeting every Thursday, if you haven’t noticed, and that’s a meeting where—

Hon. Todd Smith: I was there last week. Where were you?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: I was having my Remicade infusion. I have psoriatic arthritis.

Hon. Todd Smith: So do I.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Oh, you do too? We’ve got something in common. Oh my God.

Interjection: You guys should talk about that at House leaders’—

Mr. Gilles Bisson: We’re going to have to talk about that at House—are you a four-week or a five-week infuser? But anyways, that’s a whole other story.

My point is that the government could have come to the House leaders’ meeting last week and said, “You know, we have certain bills that we want to be able to pass. We’re going to be ordering up the agenda of the House in the following way,” and we have a discussion about how long we’re going to be at second reading and what we’re going to do at committee etc. The government, like every other kind of government since the creation of this House—work your parliamentary calendar, work your agenda by way of the parliamentary calendar.

Instead, you come to us literally minutes before and you say, “Oh, well, I guess we’re going to change everything.” So now all of your caucus members, all of my caucus members and all of the caucus members of the other parties now have to change all of their schedules tomorrow. No more caucus meeting. It probably means to say our Wednesday is also muffed because we’re going to have to move our caucus meetings to Wednesday or do something.

We’ve all got things to do. It’s not as if members have other things that they can’t be doing. All my argument to the government is: You’re proving yourselves to be very bad managers of this House.

Ms. Sandy Shaw: Inept.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Inept. You cannot pretend to be a party of the business class who knows how to run businesses when you can’t even run the House. So I just say to you guys across the way: You’ve got to get your act together. At one point, you’ve got to get your own house in order—

Interjection.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Thank you. That was a good line.

You’ve got to get your own house in order and you’ve got to run—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Through the Chair.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: I will go through the Chair but, Mr. Speaker, it was a very good line from my colleague so I had to use it. I do borrow from other people every now and then. I’m not going to debate this for the full 20 minutes, because that’s not the intent of slowing things down here. But I want to say to the government that this is not the way to do things. You know very well what your legislative agenda is. You know what bills you want to pass through the House.

Every government since this Parliament has started has figured out ways of being able to get their agenda through within the time allotted by way of the standing orders. For you guys to come in and change your mind literally minutes before and give us yet another motion—this is, what, the third time we get such a motion? I think it’s two or three times.

Hon. Todd Smith: Four times.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Four times? The government House leader is telling me four times. I’ve lost count somewhere. It is just not the way to do things. And I say to the government across the way that New Democrats will always be here when the Legislature is sitting to debate, yes, to oppose when necessary; and to propose, as well, what we think should be done to make bills better. That’s our job; all of us in this House, not just the official opposition.

But you’re not proving yourselves to be good managers. You’re not living up to the mantra, “Conservatives know how to run government because we’re really good at running things.” Well, you couldn’t run a dairy farm the way that you run this House. You couldn’t run a paper mill and you certainly couldn’t run a mine in the way that you’re running this House because—it would be like you couldn’t get your employees to come in.

Can you imagine? You, my good friend from Nickel Belt, as I do in Timmins and as my friend does in Timiskaming–Cochrane—we have a lot of shift workers that live in our communities who work in the mines or the paper mills or the sawmills.

Can you imagine–my good friend from Algoma–Manitoulin who worked in sawmills and knows this quite well; worked shift, I would imagine—all of sudden your employer calls and says, “Oh, you’re supposed to be in at 6 o’clock tonight but it’s 5 o’clock so you should come in at 12 o’clock tonight instead.” Well, you’ve arranged your babysitting, your parenting responsibilities, you’ve made all kinds—you can’t do that to people. People have lives. People have to be able to know and to plan what they’re going to do during their workday.

This Legislature is the same thing. Members have to be able to plan their workday. We’re meeting with community groups, as you do—the stakeholders who come in and meet with us all the time. We have things that we need to do internally. When you change the

schedule of the House, it proves you to be terrible managers and you’re not living up to your mantra of being Conservatives who know how to run anything, because so far I don’t think you’d be able to run anything by the way we see you running this particular House.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Further debate?

Mr. Michael Coteau: It’s not often we’re given an opportunity to speak on issues, so I want to take advantage of this opportunity. I share the position of the House leader for the NDP. I think that if this House wants to elevate itself to a place where we’re taking on concerns and voicing the opinions of Ontarians, there has to be some type of planning put in place.

I understand, maybe, for the first time, if the House leader comes in here from the government and says to this body, “We’ve made a mistake in our schedules. We haven’t put a lot of time into planning.” Maybe in the first few weeks I’d understand this. But this is the third time now that the government has come into this House and changed the

schedule last minute. When you think about the collective here, over 100 members, and when you take two hours of misused time or rescheduled time, we’re talking about hundreds of hours being reallocated in one day on personal time. That’s not fair to members in this House.

I’d also remind the NDP that we did receive a million votes as Ontario Liberals—over a million votes, 1.14 million votes here in Ontario. We do represent a large group of people in the province, and we are limited to what we say in this Legislature. And I’d just remind all members that the spirit of co-operation should take place on behalf of Ontarians and the way they cast their votes to support different political parties. We’re here representing those voices, over a million people in Ontario who supported us, and I’d ask the House leader to work with us as well to make sure that, at the end of the day, those voices are captured and that all Ontarians are represented in this Legislature.

Again, to the House leader on the government side: We would welcome those conversations. We would meet any time to look at ways to better

schedule so it accommodates all people. And I’d like to put that request in not only to the government but also to the NDP.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Further debate?

Mr. Smith, Bay of Quinte, has moved that the

schedule for the House for Tuesday, October 2, 2018, as set out in standing order 8(a), be revised by substituting “1 p.m.” and “1:05 p.m.” for “3 p.m.” and “3:05 p.m.,” respectively. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard some noes.

All those in favour of the motion will please say “aye.”

All those opposed will please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it. Carried.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: On division.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): On division.

Motion agreed to.

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

Seniors

Hon. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: Before I start my little speech here, I’d like to introduce very important people to Queen’s Park: Sue Hesjedahl, executive director of Older Adult Centres’ Association of Ontario; Cathy Barrick, CEO, Alzheimer Society of Toronto; Lilian Wells, president, Ontario Association of Councils on Aging; Elizabeth Macnab, Ontario Society of Senior Citizens Organizations; Graham Webb, Advocacy Centre for the Elderly; Cathy Hecimovich, CEO, ORCA; Kari Cuss, director of communications and public affairs, ORCA; Gilles Fontaine, executive director, FARFO; Gail Thompson, Care Watch; Dr.

John Puxty, Ontario Interdisciplinary Council for Aging and Health; Lesley Brown, Ontario Public Service Quarter Century Club; and Sue Graham-Nutter, AdvantAge Ontario. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

I’m honoured and privileged to rise today to recognize the United Nations International Day of Older Persons. We are proud in Ontario to pay tribute to the women and men who helped to build our province and our country, and we are proud of the many valuable contributions that seniors continue to make in our society. They enrich our families and our communities. They enrich our workplaces. And they enrich our lives.

Being treated as valuable members of society tells seniors their wisdom and experience matter. Treating seniors with respect will be at the heart of everything we do as a government. But there is so much to do, and success will only be possible as a result of the continued efforts of many of our stakeholders.

Thank you, stakeholders.

Their outstanding leadership and tireless work have greatly contributed to making this province safer, more age-friendly and more respectful for older persons in Ontario.

Right now, there are more than two million seniors in Ontario. In 25 years, there will be about four million. There are now more Ontarians over the age of 65 than there are children in Ontario under the age of 15.

Our goal is to keep seniors safe, connected, active and engaged members of our society.

This year’s United Nations International Day of Older Persons celebrates, in particular, seniors who champion human rights. This is a cause close to my heart. Not only am I a senior; I also consider myself a human rights advocate. I was a social worker for many years. During that time, I began advocating for human rights in North Korea. I found that work very gratifying.

Allow me at this time, Madam Speaker, to also acknowledge the sacrifices made by the Canadians who served in the Korean War. They fought for democracy in the country of my birth—516 Canadians made the ultimate sacrifice and lost their lives. I do not think I would be here today if it were not for them. Those veterans still with us are now seniors, and to them I offer my heartfelt gratitude and my sincere thanks.

Applause.

Hon. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: Thank you.

Today, let us honour, respect and celebrate Ontario’s more than two million seniors. In fact, let us do this every day. It is our collective responsibility, as elected members of this Legislature, to work harder for an Ontario where older persons are proud, respected, live with dignity and are able to contribute to society.

Let’s continue to work together to make this beautiful province a great place for seniors today and every day. It is the least we can do and should do.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Responses?

Mr. Joel Harden: Speaker, it’s an honour to rise today, given what the minister had mentioned. This is National Seniors Day, and I appreciated the words the minister just spoke.

I also appreciate being the critic for a minister who considers himself a human rights advocate in the work you named that you did. Minister, it’s impressive. Thank you for sharing that information with us.

I also want to acknowledge that I wouldn’t be here today, personally, without seniors in my life. I think of people like Erma Davison, my grandmother, a fearless—and people in my grandparents’ church would say at times a ruthless—parishioner who made sure that our church was engaged in building our community and helping the most vulnerable.

I think of my grandfather Walter Russell Davison, who served in the Second World War, in Normandy, and taught me every day the value of fighting for freedom and the need to speak up against hate and intolerance. He told me about his comrades who paid the ultimate sacrifice.

I think of my mother, who is now a senior, Rosemary Harden. Soon we’re going to be celebrating her 70th birthday. All of my siblings and I are going to get together and remember mom, an arts teacher, a chorister, a private piano teacher who, as the previous speaker had indicated, builds our community up through the arts; my father, Reg Harden, who had a successful small business in Hawkesbury, Ontario, in jewellery retail, who sent me to school and gave me a successful lot in life.

I celebrate all of these seniors who made my life special.

When I think about the legacy seniors gave us—particularly the class of 1946, the veterans who came back from the Second World War—I think about the Canada they wanted to build, a Canada with public health care for all, a Canada where everybody who was able and willing could find themselves decent employment, a Canada that made sure we looked after people with disabilities and people who are marginalized through no fault of their own. When I think about that legacy, I can’t help but reflect on things I’ve seen in this House in the last three months.

Specifically, Speaker, I arrived in this building late today because I spent the morning in a courtroom in Ottawa. I was in a courtroom in Ottawa bearing witness and friendship to Norman Traversy. Norman Traversy was a firefighter in the city of Mississauga who, for 12 years, has been fighting for WSIB coverage for five diagnoses of post-traumatic stress. We’ve had a lot of platitudes expressed in this place about respect for police, firefighters, paramedics and crisis workers.

But my friend Norm was in a courtroom today—a personal civil suit he’s had to launch against the city of Mississauga—because his post-traumatic stress has not been diagnosed. Next month, Norm will be 63. Most firefighters retire at the age of 60. It’s a difficult job that bears considerable mental and physical duress.

I think it’s high time for us to celebrate what the minister has said, to celebrate seniors every single day, but into the record today I want to acknowledge that we’re dealing with a government right now, in this place, which has lowered safety and insurance premiums for employers by 30% in January.

Mr. Will Bouma: Hear, hear.

Mr. Joel Harden: I want to ask you, as you cheer yourselves on, are you happy lowering premiums for some of the wealthiest employers in this province while people like Norm can’t get benefits? How do you sleep at night? How do you sleep at night while people who we thank for their courageous work, in Ottawa for the tornadoes, or here in Toronto when the subways flood, or when shootings happen and people rush to the scene, when people get hurt in the line of duty—people who are seniors, in this case.

It shouldn’t be the job of government to figure out ways to pad profits for some of the wealthiest employers in this province. It should be the job of government to stand by people who stand by us. That’s what Norman Traversy did every day of his life, and for the last 12 years he has been through hell. He’s a senior. He has my undying respect.

I know the Speaker, Mr. Arnott, supported him when he was a constituent of his. I’ve asked the Premier, I’ve asked the Minister of Labour, I’ve asked every single official I can find in this government to help out Mr. Traversy. That is my personal pitch to you, my friends. This is a man who, right now, finds himself in a very dire health situation. He is not alone. Many other first responders are suffering from mental health right now because the way in which we’ve changed presumptive diagnoses of mental health injuries is not ambitious enough.

On seniors’ day, I rise to thank the elders who have helped me in my life, but I also rise to call our attention to Norman Traversy and every single senior suffering like him.

Petitions

Long-term care

Mr. Percy Hatfield: To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas quality care for the 78,000 residents of (LTC) homes is a priority for many Ontario families; and

“Whereas the provincial government does not provide adequate funding to ensure care and staffing levels in LTC homes to keep pace with residents’ increasing acuity and the growing number of residents with complex behaviours; and

“Whereas several Ontario coroner’s inquests into LTC homes deaths have recommended an increase in direct hands-on care for residents and staffing levels and the most reputable studies on this topic recommends 4.1 hours of direct care per day;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

“Amend the LTC Homes Act (2007) for a legislated minimum care standard of four hours per resident per day, adjusted for acuity level and case mix.”

I fully agree, and I’m going to sign it and give it to Justine to bring to the table.

Employment standards

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: This petition is titled “Don’t Take Away Our $15 Minimum Wage and Fairer Labour Laws.”

“Whereas the vast majority of Ontarians support a $15 minimum wage and better laws to protect workers; and

“Whereas last year, in response to overwhelming popular demand by the people of Ontario, the provincial government brought in legislation and regulations that:

“Deliver 10 personal emergency leave days for all workers, the first two of which are paid;

“Make it illegal to pay part-time, temporary, casual or contract workers less than their full-time or directly hired co-workers, including equal public holiday pay and vacation pay;

“Raised the adult general minimum wage to $14 per hour and further raises it to a $15 minimum wage on January 1, 2019, with annual adjustments by Ontario’s consumer price index;

“Make it easier to join unions, especially for workers in the temporary help, home care, community services and building services sectors;

“Protect workers’ employment status, pay and benefits when contracts are flipped or businesses are sold in the building services sector;

“Make client companies responsible for workplace health and safety for temporary agency employees;

“Provide strong enforcement through the hiring of an additional 175 employment standards officers;

“Will ensure workers have modest improvements in the scheduling of their hours, including:

“—three hours’ pay when workers are expected to be on call all day, but are not called into work;

“—three hours’ pay for any employee whose shift is cancelled with less than two days’ notice; and

“—the right to refuse shifts without penalty if the shift is scheduled with fewer than four days’ notice;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to honour these commitments, including the $15 minimum wage and fairer scheduling rules set to take effect on January 1, 2019. We further call on the assembly to take all necessary steps to enforce these laws and extend them to ensure no worker is left without protection.”

I fully support this petition and will be affixing my signature to it as well.

Employment standards

Mr. Faisal Hassan: The residents of York South–Weston have asked me to table this petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly.

“Don’t Take Away Our $15 Minimum Wage and Fairer Labour Laws.

“Whereas the vast majority of Ontarians support a $15 minimum wage and better laws to protect workers; and

“Whereas last year, in response to overwhelming popular demand by the people of Ontario, the provincial government brought in legislation and regulations that:

“Deliver 10 personal emergency leave days for all workers, the first two of which are paid;

“Make it illegal to pay part-time, temporary, casual or contract workers less than their full-time or directly hired co-workers, including equal public holiday pay and vacation pay;

“Raised the adult general minimum wage to $14 per hour and further raises it to a $15 minimum wage on January 1, 2019, with annual adjustments by Ontario’s consumer price index;

“Make it easier to join unions, especially for workers in the temporary help, home care, community services and building services sectors;

“Make client companies responsible for workplace health and safety for temporary agency employees;

“Provide strong enforcement through the hiring of an additional 175 employment standards officers;

“Will ensure workers have modest improvements in the scheduling of their hours, including:

“—three hours’ pay when workers are expected to be on call all day, but are not called into work;

“—three hours’ pay for any employee whose shift is cancelled with less than two days’ notice; and

“—the right to refuse shifts without penalty if the shift is scheduled with fewer than four days’ notice;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to honour these commitments, including the $15 minimum wage and fairer scheduling rules set to take effect on January 1, 2019. We further call on the assembly to take all necessary steps to enforce these laws and extend them to ensure no worker is left without protection.”

I fully support this petition, add my signature to it and give it to page Deven.

Employment standards

Mr. Kevin Yarde: “Petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly:

“Don’t Take Away Our $15 Minimum Wage and Fairer Labour Laws.

“Whereas the vast majority of Ontarians support a $15 minimum wage and better laws to protect workers; and

“Whereas last year, in response to overwhelming popular demand by the people of Ontario, the provincial government brought in legislation and regulations that:

“Deliver 10 personal emergency leave days for all workers, the first two of which are paid;

“Make it illegal to pay part-time, temporary, casual or contract workers less than their full-time or directly hired co-workers, including equal public holiday pay and vacation pay;

“Raised the adult general minimum wage to $14 per hour and further raises it to a $15 minimum wage on January 1, 2019, with annual adjustments by Ontario’s consumer price index;

“Make it easier to join unions, especially for workers in the temporary help, home care, community services and building services sectors;

“Make client companies responsible for workplace health and safety for temporary agency employees;

“Provide strong enforcement through the hiring of an additional 175 employment standards officers;

“Will ensure workers have modest improvements in the scheduling of their hours, including:

“—three hours’ pay when workers are expected to be on call all day, but are not called into work;

“—three hours’ pay for any employee whose shift is cancelled with less than two days’ notice; and

“—the right to refuse shifts without penalty if the shift is scheduled with fewer than four days’ notice;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to honour these commitments, including the $15 minimum wage and fairer scheduling rules set to take effect on January 1, 2019. We further call on the assembly to take all necessary steps to enforce these laws and extend them to ensure no worker is left without protection.”

I fully endorse this petition, and I will be signing it and handing it to page Molly.

Gasoline prices

M me France Gélinas: I would like to say a special thank you to Jody O’Daisley, who is from Hanmer in my riding, for this petition. It reads as follows:

“Whereas northern Ontario motorists continue to be subject to wild fluctuations in the price of gasoline; and

“Whereas the province could eliminate opportunistic price gouging and deliver fair, stable and predictable fuel prices; and

“Whereas five provinces and many US states already have some sort of gas price regulation; and

“Whereas jurisdictions with gas price regulation have seen an end to wild price fluctuations, a shrinking of price discrepancies between urban and rural communities and lower annualized gas prices;”

They petition the Legislative Assembly as follows:

“Mandate the Ontario Energy Board to monitor the price of gasoline across Ontario in order to reduce price volatility and unfair regional price differences while encouraging competition.”

I support this petition and will affix my name to it. Je vais demander à Simon de l’amener à la table des greffiers. Merci, Simon.

Indigenous affairs

Mr. Michael Mantha: I want to thank the good people of Batchewana First Nation of the Ojibways for the following petition:

“Stop the Cuts to Indigenous Reconciliation.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Ontario is situated on the traditional territory of Indigenous peoples, many of whom have been on this land for at least 12,000 years;

“Whereas reconciliation must be at the centre of all government decision-making;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

“—continue reconciliation work in Ontario by implementing the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission;

“—reinstate the Ministry of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation;

“—work with First Nations leaders to sign co-operative government-to-government accords;

“—support TRC education and community development (e.g. TRC summer writing sessions);

“—support Indigenous communities across the province (e.g. cleaning up Grassy Narrows).”

I wholeheartedly support this petition, endorse it and present it to page Derek to bring down to the Clerks’ table.

Employment standards

Ms. Doly Begum: I’d like to thank the good people of Scarborough for bringing this petition, and especially Mr. David Harris for bringing it to me.

This petition to the Ontario Legislative Assembly is titled “Don’t Take Away Our $15 Minimum Wage and Fairer Labour Laws.”

“Whereas the vast majority of Ontarians support a $15 minimum wage and better laws to protect workers; and

“Whereas last year, in response to overwhelming popular demand by the people of Ontario, the provincial government brought in legislation and regulations that:

“Deliver 10 personal emergency leave days for all workers, the first two of which are paid;

“Make it illegal to pay part-time, temporary, casual or contract workers less than their full-time or directly hired co-workers, including equal public holiday pay and vacation pay;

“Raised the adult general minimum wage to $14 per hour and further raises it to a $15 minimum wage on January 1, 2019, with annual adjustments by Ontario’s consumer price index;

“Make it easier to join unions, especially for workers in the temporary help, home care, community services and building services sectors;

“Make client companies responsible for workplace health and safety for temporary agency employees;

“Provide strong enforcement through the hiring of an additional 175 employment standards officers;

“Will ensure workers have modest improvements in the scheduling of their hours, including:

“—three hours’ pay when workers are expected to be on call all day, but are not called into work;

“—three hours’ pay for any employee whose shift is cancelled with less than two days’ notice; and

“—the right to refuse shifts without penalty if the shift is scheduled with fewer than four days’ notice;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to honour these commitments, including the $15 minimum wage and fairer scheduling rules set to take effect on January 1, 2019. We further call on the assembly to take all necessary steps to enforce these laws and extend them to ensure no worker is left without protection.”

I fully support this petition, will put my signature to it, and give it to page Simon.

Social assistance

Ms. Suze Morrison: I’d like to present a petition entitled “Reverse Doug Ford’s Cuts to Low-Income Families.” It reads:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Doug Ford eliminated the Basic Income Pilot project and slashed the new social assistance rates by 1.5%, and did so without warning;

“Whereas cuts to already-meagre social assistance rates will disproportionately impact children, those with mental health challenges, persons with disabilities, and people struggling in poverty;

“Whereas the decision to cancel the Basic Income Pilot project was made without any evidence, and leaves thousands of Ontarians without details about whether they will be able to access other forms of income assistance;

“Whereas the independently authored Income Security: A Roadmap for Change report, presented to the government last fall, recommends both increases to rates and the continuation of the Basic Income Pilot project as key steps towards income adequacy and poverty reduction;

“Whereas the failure to address poverty—and the homelessness, hunger, health crises, and desperation that can result from poverty—hurts people, families and Ontario’s communities;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately reverse Doug Ford’s callous decision to slash increases to social assistance rates by 50%, and reverse his decision to cancel the Basic Income Pilot project, decisions that will undoubtedly hurt thousands of vulnerable people and drag Ontario backwards when it comes to homelessness reduction and anti-poverty efforts.”

I fully endorse this petition. I will be affixing my signature to it and providing it to page Meagan to deliver to the table.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): I just want to remind the House again that when reading petitions we cannot use members’ names, only titles and ridings. Even if the petition comes worded with someone’s name, please adjust it so that it’s a riding or title. Thank you.

Private members’ public business

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): I beg to inform the House that, pursuant to standing order 98(c), a change has been made to the order of precedence on the ballot list for private members’ public business such that Mr. Kanapathi assumes ballot item number 94 and Mr. Harris assumes ballot item number 36.

Orders of the Day

Time allocation

Resuming the debate on the motion for allocation of time on government order number 6 regarding the appointment of a Select Committee on Financial Transparency.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Further debate?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Let me, first of all, start off the top of this debate to say, as I was saying earlier in the motion dealing with the House sitting tomorrow at 1, I could move an amendment right now. I said to the government, no. But my God, you keep on doing this kind of stuff and it just throws this whole place into a tizzy.

I’m going to use my time in order to outline what I think the government should do with this committee, but I’ve just got to say off the top, as I said earlier, the government can’t keep on running the House the way that it is. No business in Ontario would run their business the way that you guys are running this House. To change when this House meets at the last minute in the way that you’ve been doing is just disrespectful of the process and it says to me that the government is not able to plan its agenda, as every other government in the history of Ontario was able to do.

The Legislature has been here for over 160 years and—is it 160 years? I’m looking at the Clerks. It would be pretty close to that, 160 years, the Ontario Legislature. Yes, we’re close to that.

We’ve been running essentially by the rules of Westminster since that time. There is a thing called a parliamentary calendar, and a government plans backwards. They say, “By when do we need the bill done?” and then they call the bill in time to be able to get their agenda through. To come into this House and to change things at the last minute constantly in the way that you’re doing tells us that you’re lurching from crisis to crisis. You can’t do House management any better than—you’re probably the worst government I’ve seen for House management, and I’ve been here for a long—

Hon. Steve Clark: Oh, come on now.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Oh, you have. I’m telling you I have never seen a government of any stripe run the House as badly as you are. You make it up as you go along. They can’t plan when they’re going to get their legislation through the House, so all of a sudden, they figure out there’s something that they need to do. Is it a “notwithstanding” clause last minute? Is it changing the seats in the city of Toronto last minute? Is it cannabis? “Oh, my God, we did it too late. We should have done that earlier.”

You’re the government. You have all of the people behind you when it comes to being able to plan what you’re going to do. So I just say to the government that you’re proving to be very, very bad House managers, and I think that reflects badly on what the government is doing overall.

As for the select committee the government is trying to create, we generally support anything that brings transparency. We understand that. There are a lot of decisions that the government made previously that were quite questionable. We spoke to that earlier, that the government did things and then tried to make it look as if they didn’t cost as much as they did.

I remember, for example, sitting on the committee struck by this House in regard to the prima facie case of contempt that was found against the government in the case of the closure of the gas plants. The Minister of Energy of the day, Mr. Bentley, decided that, when requested by the committee to provide documents—which he had to do by law, because as we all know in this place, the Legislature has the authority to call for persons and things and documents, and if you say no, you’re in contempt of that committee and, by extension, of the House.

The government tried to say up front, “Oh, it’s only a $50-million problem.” Then it was some 100-million-odd dollars. Then we did this committee and we found out it was actually over a billion dollars that the government wasted on the cancellation of those two gas plants.

We saw the previous government deal with air Ornge. There was real inefficiency in the way that the place was being run. Not that air Ornge is a bad idea; I think the government was right. I think the government decided that it wanted to move all its air ambulance service under one roof, and they wanted to not only dispatch but deal with having the planes and helicopters to deal with what is our air transport system—our air ambulance system, as we call it. So the government did what wasn’t, I think, a bad idea: They tried to put everything under one roof.

Well, the person running it, my God, couldn’t have done any worse if they had tried. We ended up wasting all kinds of money on procurement of things, and the way that they did it ended up costing us far more money than it should have.

We looked at eHealth. It was a boondoggle. I agree with the government. Is eHealth a bad idea? It’s a great idea, a wonderful initiative. I have no problem, and I don’t think members on any side of this House have a problem, with the government having in place an electronic system of medical records. That just makes sense in this day and age. Why wouldn’t the government, when you go to your emergency or your doctor’s office or the lab, have everything done electronically? Nobody argues that.

But my, my, my, Madam Speaker: The government, in order to help their friends out, who had all kinds of contracts—if that’s what the motivation was; I don’t know, but maybe—in order to do whatever they did, ended up wasting all kinds of money.

So is there a need to shed a light on what happened in the past? I would agree. I hope we don’t make this a witch hunt. I hope it doesn’t become just an exercise of going after the previous government and scoring political points. We’ll see. I would be very much surprised if the Conservatives went that way. But on the basic question, “Should we have transparency?”, I don’t think anybody on this side of the House, including the independent Liberals and Green, would have a problem with shedding a light and being transparent about what we do.

The problem with what you’re doing is, you’re saying all of these decisions, which you now have to live with as a government—because let’s remember, all of the decisions that were made by the previous administration fit into what you are doing now. You’re having to manage all of those things, and how you adjust on those things that you think were bad in the previous government also has to be subject to what the committee looks at.

We have an amendment as New Democrats that was put forward by Andrea Horwath, our leader—in my name, but it’s nonetheless from our leader and our caucus—that says, “You can’t just look backwards. You have to be able to look at today.” So if you disagree that the government’s policy on X is wrong and it cost us a whole bunch of money and that was a waste of dollars, fine; let’s look at that. But how are you adjusting? What is the government doing in order to be able to adjust on that particular issue? Are you doing things that are going to make it better, or is this just a political witch hunt?

I really worry that that’s where this is going to end up. But you can’t not want this motion to go forward, because it is about transparency, and I get that. Our leader and our caucus understand that.

The other thing that we put forward as the second part of the amendment is the ability to call witnesses. We all understand how the rules of this House work. Normally in committee you have a committee sit and you do a rotation by which you call witnesses. That’s what we normally agree to. Sometimes it’s, “You pick one