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

November 2, 2020

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2020-Nov-02 (PDF)

L203 - Mon 2 Nov 2020 / Lun 2 nov 2020

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Monday 2 November 2020 Lundi 2 novembre 2020

Indigenous affairs

Private Members’ Public Business

Protecting Vulnerable Persons in Supportive Living Accommodation Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 sur la protection des personnes vulnérables dans les logements supervisés

Members’ Statements

Curriculum

Cancer treatment

College standards and accreditation

Diabetes

Véronic DiCaire

Woman Abuse Prevention Month

Treaties recognition

Como Foundation

Veterans

Sikh genocide

Question Period

COVID-19 response

Long-term care

Education funding

Manufacturing jobs

College standards and accreditation

Long-term care

Law enforcement

College standards and accreditation

COVID-19 response

Mining industry

Flu immunization

COVID-19 response

COVID-19 response

College standards and accreditation

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

Crime Prevention Week / Semaine de la prévention du crime

Introduction of Bills

Harvey and Gurvir’s Law (Provision of Information Respecting Down Syndrome), 2020 / Loi de 2020 de Harvey et de Gurvir (fourniture de renseignements concernant la trisomie 21)

Petitions

Gasoline prices

Small business

Driver examination centres

Optometry services

Magna Carta Day

Telecommunications in correctional facilities

Optometry services

Waste reduction

Small business

Winter highway maintenance

Anti-vaping initiatives for youth

Long-term care

Orders of the Day

Soldiers’ Aid Commission Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 sur la Commission d’aide aux anciens combattants

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

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

This being the first Monday of the month, we will now have O Canada and the royal anthem.

Playing of the national anthem / Écoute de l’hymne national.

Playing of the royal anthem / Écoute de l’hymne royal.

Indigenous affairs

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the member for Kiiwetinoong, who I understand has a point of order.

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: Meegwetch. Mino-gigizheb. It’s a good morning.

Speaker, I seek unanimous consent of the House for me to make a brief statement in two minutes to speak about why I cannot stand for the singing of O Canada and God Save the Queen, which begin our months here at Queen’s Park.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Kiiwetinoong is seeking unanimous consent of the House to make a brief statement now, two minutes in duration, explaining why he is unable to stand for O Canada and the royal anthem. Agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: Meegwetch, Speaker. I am rising this morning to speak on why I cannot stand for the singing of O Canada and God Save the Queen, which begin our months here at Queen’s Park.

I’ve had a chance to tell many truths through telling stories of the people of Kiiwetinoong. I tell stories about the children who leave our communities every year at the ages of 13 and 14 to attend high school hundreds and hundreds of kilometres away from their families, their language, their homes and their way of life, because most of the First Nations in the riding don’t have high schools.

I tell stories of parents and grandparents who don’t get to grow old because they don’t have access to health care and their homes are filled with mould.

I tell stories about young people in their 20s, early 20s, who lived their whole lives in the communities without access to as basic a thing as clean drinking water. I tell stories of young people who have died by suicide because they felt they had no hope.

In those stories, Mr. Speaker, it is clear the promises of Ontario and Canada that are celebrated in anthems and written down in treaties are not being met.

Ontario was built on the foundation of Treaties 9, 5, 3, the Robinson Treaties, the Haldimand tract and others that cover what is now Ontario. So I will not stand in the Legislature and acknowledge these anthems until our people are treated equitably and our children have access to education, clean water and safe housing.

To my colleagues: I will stand when your governments honour these treaties they have signed. Until then, I will keep fighting for the future my ancestors imagined when they signed Treaty 9, knowing their spirits are with me as I work for the people of Kiiwetinoong and those who live in Ontario. Meegwetch.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much. On the same point of order, the government House later.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Let me just say good morning to all my colleagues. To the member opposite, let me—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): You’re rising on a point of order, I gather?

Hon. Paul Calandra: I’m rising on a point of order.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Okay, got it. Point of order.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Sorry—just to acknowledge what the member opposite has just said and to assure the member that we would, of course, always defend his right to do what he thinks is best for his community, even if that means, in this instance, that he chooses to make that decision through sitting through the national anthems.

In a week like this, Remembrance Week, we acknowledge the fact that so many fought so hard to ensure our rights, and that right includes the right of you, elected from your community, to—I don’t want to say “protest”; that’s perhaps a bad choice of words. But the appropriate word escapes me right now. We respect the decision that you’ve made.

As the government House leader—and I know all of my colleagues would feel the same way—although we feel differently, we would support and fight for your right to express your disappointment in how your community has been treated. I congratulate and commend the honourable gentleman for taking that step. Even if I disagree with him on this, I commend him and I can assure him that we will always stand up for you and your community and your right to express it in this House. That’s what we’re here for, so I commend you on that.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Technically not a point of order, but I thought it was appropriate to allow the government House leader to reply to the important statement that was made by the member for Kiiwetinoong.

Private Members’ Public Business

Protecting Vulnerable Persons in Supportive Living Accommodation Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 sur la protection des personnes vulnérables dans les logements supervisés

Mr. Burch moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 164,

An Act to establish a framework for the licensing of supportive living accommodation / Projet de loi 164, Loi établissant un cadre pour la délivrance de permis d’exploitation de logements supervisés.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Pursuant to standing order 101, the member has 12 minutes for his presentation.

Mr. Jeff Burch: Good morning. This bill requires persons who operate supportive living accommodations in specified circumstances to hold a licence issued by the minister. It provides a framework, to be supplemented by regulations, governing applications for and issuance of licences; the obligations of persons who operate a supportive living accommodation under the authority of a licence; inspections; and complaints.

I’d like to start today with a story from Karen Barry. In October of 2017, her father was discharged from a lengthy stay at Grand River Hospital. He was unable to return to his apartment and unable to live independently without assistance. Ineligible at that time for long-term care, he was placed in an unregulated group home in St. Thomas. The home assured Karen that he would be provided with support, trained staff, three meals plus refreshments and a snack daily. It sounded suitable for him until he could secure a room in long-term care.

What resulted was months of concern for his well-being, safety and security. Almost every cent of his pension was handed over to a for-profit supportive living organization that is operated by a “wilfully neglectful and absentee owner.” The home was owned by Vishal Chityal. At the time, he was operating under an alias of “Charlie Duke.” In this home, there were bedbugs, garbage piled up for weeks, and shortages of hot water. The basement beneath them was used for food storage but infested with rodents. Frequently, there would be shortages of food, and the list goes on.

In the words of Karen, “He lived in fear and neglect and he paid a significant amount each month to do so. What was supposed to be a supportive living accommodation for him ended up being a nightmare I can’t forget, I don’t think he can either.”

Just this month, I brought the story of Gerald and his wife, Lucy, to this House. They’re currently living in a supportive living accommodation also owned by Mr. Chityal. Gerald and his wife have major health issues, including dementia, and are pensioners on a fixed income. Gerald’s sister Loretta sent me a desperate email, along with pictures of unlivable conditions. Loretta said there have been bedbugs for at least a year, and the food that is served to residents is rotten. When Loretta raised the issue with management, the owners said this was the last time their management team would be dealing with the issues. If they had additional concerns, “feel free to move out.”

Many people who have complex needs but don’t qualify for or can’t get into long-term care end up in these supportive living homes. Supportive living accommodations provide low-rent accommodation to vulnerable tenants who are considered high-need. Many of them are seniors. These shared rental accommodations traditionally include any combination of room, room and board, or room and board with additional levels of support which are paid for.

In many cases, SLAs serve as an effective response to affordable housing shortages across the province, while catering to high-need adults who may not necessarily qualify for long-term care. Many people end up there simply because they fall through the cracks. However, the lack of regulation and oversight of these services for our most vulnerable citizens have in some cases resulted in physical harm and, tragically, even death.

David MacPherson lived in a supportive living home in the city of London called People Helping People. Like the home Karen spoke about, it appeared to be a group home with additional supports. Many of the adults and seniors who lived there suffered from severe mental issues and physical disabilities. Despite this, Keith Charles, the operator of the home, was racking up infractions from the local fire department: The home was filled with people, broken smoke detectors and emergency lights, clogged hallways and propped open fire doors.

On November 3, 2014, the same day that local fire officials were meeting to put in a call to the Ontario fire marshal to close the property because of increasing numbers of complaints, the home was set ablaze. As a result, 72-year-old David MacPherson tragically died. David’s death was completely avoidable and preventable.

Because these homes are privately run and operated, owners are accountable to no one and are free to operate the business however they please. Falling into a regulatory grey zone, their tenants are at an enormous risk. Over the past year, we’ve seen numerous reports of supportive living homes in my riding in Niagara being fined for non-compliance for fire-related charges. In November 2019, Beatrice Manor in Welland was fined $35,000 for non-compliance with the fire code. Chief Brian Kennedy said they had five years to make the required changes, but they chose not to do so. It’s the largest fine he’s ever seen.

Some municipalities have started to regulate these homes. Following the death of David MacPherson, the city of London put bylaws in place. However, municipalities are asking for provincial regulation of these homes. This bill provides a framework for operators and sets minimum standards that must be met so that vulnerable tenants no longer suffer from a broken system. The bill defines what a home is, requires home operators to be licensed—similar to retirement homes—and would set a framework for inspection and complaint protocols. Failure to have a licence is punishable for a fine up to $1,000 per day.

This is not the first time this legislation has been presented to this Legislature. In 2017, my predecessor, MPP Cindy Forster, brought a bill forward after hearing complaints about supportive living homes from support workers, tenants and families in the region. MPP Forster worked with Welland city councillor Bonnie Fokkens and many other municipal officials to address this dire situation. Forty-four municipalities have come forward with their concerns and their support.

In January of this year, Port Colborne reaffirmed their support of the bill, passing a motion stating, “There is a need for regulating private supportive living accommodations to protect individuals requiring special care.”

Beyond municipalities, numerous stakeholder organizations have joined the call for provincial regulation of supportive living homes. Shaun Baylis, the CEO of Pathstone Mental Health in Niagara, stated, “Our vulnerable people are entitled to supportive living accommodations that will provide a reasonably healthy lifestyle that includes a place to live, quality food, and proper care.”

The International Association of Fire Fighters Local 485 and the Welland Professional Fire Fighters endorsed the bill. In a letter to my office, Mark Biggins, president of the Welland firefighter association IAFF Local 481, stated:

“Our members frequently attend some of these residences and are often appalled at the living conditions.... The issues that some assisted living residences may not meet the definition of a ‘care occupancy’ as defined in the Ontario fire code, thus precluding those buildings from complying with provisions that are more stringent. If the assisted living residence is not regulated as a long-term-care home or a retirement home, and does not meet certain care occupancy

definitions, there is no oversight on how these homes are kept or operated.... Many residents who live in assisted living residences have cognitive disabilities and are incapable of living independently. Unfortunately, some assisted living residence owners/operations intentionally operate these residences in a manner that allows the homes to remain unregulated, likely done to avoid expenditures relating to maintenance. The WPFFA completely endorses this private member’s bill.... If there are those who are opposed to this bill, we encourage them to visit an unregulated assisted living home in their community.

Following this visit, we are confident they will change their position on this matter.”

Speaker, with the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a renewed importance to regulate these homes. Congregate living settings have been some of the hardest hit during outbreaks. Many vulnerable adults who are under the care of these private operators don’t have the capacity to advocate for themselves and are living in horrific conditions, receiving substandard care.

Reporting by Nora Loreto found that 82% of deaths from COVID-19 in Canada are linked to residential care facilities of various kinds. The difficulty with supportive living homes is that despite caring for the same clientele you would find in a group home or a long-term-care facility, they have no obligation to report outbreaks. They also have no method for complaints, inspections or regulation. We’ve heard reports of 30 residents or more sharing one bathroom in these facilities.

It’s estimated that Niagara has 19 supportive living homes—Niagara alone. The fear here is that there will be an outbreak, and there will be few options for containment and no ability for the public to know of the outbreak. It’s been very difficult, Speaker, for my staff and myself to monitor these homes during the outbreak, which underscores the need for a complaint protocol. We don’t know what’s been happening. It was horrific prior to the pandemic, and God only knows what’s been happening in these homes since COVID-19 began. Now is the perfect time to address this gap in policy and join other jurisdictions like Alberta in regulating these homes.

The last time this bill was voted on, it received all-party support. In fact, the now Associate Minister of Energy and the current Solicitor General spoke in support of this bill. Today we have the opportunity to fix a long-standing policy gap and join together to protect the most vulnerable in our communities. I hope this House will join me in this effort and pass Bill 164, bring it to committee and bring it into law.

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

Mr. Lorne Coe: I’m pleased to participate in the second reading debate on Protecting Vulnerable Persons in Supportive Living Accommodation Act. Certainly everyone in this Legislature wants to ensure that people have safe homes that they’re living in, and if the person who owns the property is saying that they’re providing them with services and support, that it can actually be enforced, Speaker.

I know from my 13 years of municipal experience that while there are licensed rooming houses and group homes which are properly regulated, there are also landlords who quite carelessly fill up their properties, whether it’s with students or vulnerable people, simply to collect the rent. Whether they claim that they’re offering some additional services or not, we know that these facilities are often not well maintained, that the living conditions in them are not very good, that they’re overcrowded and that they are in fact often quite unsafe from the perspective of fire safety and security.

This bill would ensure, Speaker, that there would be oversight, province-wide, potentially, to ensure that these people are protected, as they should be, in their homes. It’s not about taking away the ability from anybody to speak or to set up this kind of housing; it’s simply to ensure that the conditions within it would be regulated and that there would be an enforcement mechanism.

I know that our government is committed to ending homelessness and has made a number of investments towards good-quality supportive housing, investments that would fund supportive housing units that would, in some cases, take away from the need for vulnerable people to turn to these off-market housing situations. This bill, Speaker, requires these homes to be licensed and creates a framework for inspection and complaint protocols to protect some of the most vulnerable citizens.

I certainly know from my experience, both within the constituency office and again at the municipal level, that when a strategy is brought into place to help people who are homeless find a home with supports, it has an immediate impact. Because it’s not just good enough to say, “Here’s a room or an apartment,” Speaker, and leave them to their own devices if these people are people who need supports. These programs are incredibly successful and incredibly helpful programs, and in many cases, particularly at the municipal level, truly help them to turn their lives around. I believe that that’s what we all aspire to here in this Legislative Assembly.

Speaker, this piece of legislation could also assist to ensure that these people are not being taken advantage of, and that’s certainly a goal we can all support as well.

I’m also happy to see in this bill that it’s not meant to re-create licensing regimes which are already in place. I think that’s an important distinction going forward. Those types of homes that are already covered by other licensing regimes—municipal licensing—wouldn’t be subject to a secondary regime. With his own municipal experience, I know the MPP from Niagara Centre, who’s bringing forward this bill, understands that, and I know that’s why it’s reflected as it is.

Speaker, I do think that when this bill does make it to committee, there certainly are questions that need to be answered about what conditions the minister might impose on a licence and what the enforcement provisions would be. We need to get more clarity on that. We need to get feedback from a cross-section of stakeholders going forward. I think that our experience has been within that particular setting, and it serves to strengthen the legislation as it goes forward. I offer that particular opinion from my municipal experience as well, where broad consultation has taken place over the years on this particular subject.

We also have to be mindful that we should be encouraging our municipalities to actually allow for licensing and zoning of more facilities and homes like these. That’s going to take some discussion with the Association of Municipalities of Ontario at one level, particularly their policy group, but I think also with individual municipalities that comprise upper-tier government—I think it would also be helpful to engage with them, because not all of them are going to be able to participate in the standing committee forum.

So as much as we can engage with those particular organizations now, I think it will serve us well as we move forward with this particular proposed legislation. Also, I think it’s going to avoid creating barriers to creating this type of housing in various communities—because communities all have different pressure points across the province of Ontario, and I know those who have served in municipal government appreciate that distinction.

With that, I’d just like to conclude and say that the proposed legislation from the member from Niagara Centre is a good initiative, but we do need broader consultation on it in some of the sectors that I’ve discussed.

At the end of the day—and I said this earlier, and I believe this—we all aspire to protect the vulnerable in our society. I thank the member for the bill. I look forward to engaging in the committee setting.

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

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: It truly is an honour to rise on behalf of the constituents of London–Fanshawe to speak to Bill 164.

I’d like to tell a story of what happened in London, which the member from Niagara Centre highlighted.

There was an apartment building on Oxford Street in London, Ontario, that housed vulnerable people—people who had mental health issues and people who had addictions. I would say that the majority of them, if not all of them, were on ODSP or some form of OW. Housing is very difficult to find at the best of times, but when you combine health issues, addictions and mental health, it’s even more difficult. A gentleman named Keith Charles decided to run this apartment building like an assisted living facility, but he wasn’t capable of running it at the professional level that it needed to be.

In London, the fire department knew it was being operated that way; social workers knew it was being operated that way; ACT teams knew it was being operated that way; Fanshawe College knew, because they had co-op students go in to do their co-op job experience there. They did the best they could. The fire marshals were out there giving them constant violation infractions.

But I think the hesitant piece of why this wasn’t exposed and dealt with properly is, first of all, there were no regulations around this assisted living complex, and secondly, people were hoping that these problems would be fixed so that these vulnerable people—they had nowhere to go if they were to shut this building down. The conclusion of the story of what happened is there was a fire in the apartment building. David MacPherson, 72 years old, died in that fire.

The coroner didn’t instigate a coroner’s inquest; they didn’t feel it was necessary. But in other cities like Hamilton, they took the initiative to actually regulate assisted living around some bylaws. London tried to do that as well—not as strong as that could be. This is why this bill is very important: because it allows the province to do that work so that everything is the same. You go from one city across Ontario to another, and the assisted living homes are all treated the same, run the same, and the rules are the same. I think that’s something we need to understand.

When it’s affecting all of Ontario, we need to have consistent legislation to protect the most vulnerable so that they’re not taken advantage of.

Some of these people who run these assisted livings, they may have their heart in the right place, but we also need to have guidelines to protect the vulnerable citizens. Things can go wrong very quickly without anyone actually intending for that to happen.

I just want to end by saying there’s another complex in my riding on Hamilton Road. Again, they offer room and board. There are people who are on ODSP and OW. I was visited by a person who lives there, and ODSP doesn’t give the same housing allowance for someone if they live in a room-and-board situation. So she gets less housing benefit—accommodations—because she gets room and board,

whereas somebody else living individually, they receive more for that piece. I think that needs to be corrected as well, wherever you’re living. The ODSP and OW benefits do not help people living in poverty survive and have safe housing and have good food.

I’m going to end on that and encourage the government to support this bill and, like our member said, get it through the process and get it back here so that we can vote on this bill.

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

Mr. Mike Harris: This is the first time I have actually risen on a Monday to debate private members’ business. I just wanted to take a moment to recognize all the work our government House leader has done to prioritize private members’ business and make it possible to debate more bills and motions every week, like this bill that we have before us today from the member from Niagara Centre.

As I said, it is a pleasure to speak to the Protecting Vulnerable Persons in Supportive Living Accommodation Act. This is an important bill, and I want to thank the member for his work on it.

As we have all heard, this bill would require operators of supportive living accommodations that provide the activities of daily living to hold a licence issued by the Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services. Like long-term-care homes, hospitals and retirement homes, group homes provide essential care to the province’s most vulnerable. But unlike the facilities I mentioned before, not all residential living accommodations have a regulated licence.

Speaker, our Minister of Children, Community and Social Services is committed to improving the availability and quality of services in the developmental sector. Since taking on that role, he has been in constant communication with adults with developmental disabilities, their families and our service providers about what we can do to improve the current services. I know a key focus of his ministry’s work on behalf of those with developmental disabilities is protecting, growing and improving the current supply of residential services.

I have met with constituents who have told me about their family’s journey finding supportive living for their loved one. It is certainly a challenge, especially as parents who have been the primary caregiver for their child grow older and can’t give them that same level of care anymore.

I have also had a chance to connect with some of my local service providers, like Elmira District Community Living. I’ve chatted with executive director Greg Bechard a few times and toured their facility last year. Their homes support residents with intellectual disabilities in the townships of Woolwich, Wellesley and Mapleton.

I’ve also connected with Sunbeam Community and Developmental Services in Kitchener. Sunbeam has provided supports and service to children, youth and adults with developmental disabilities in Waterloo region since 1956. They currently offer a range of residential programs, including 17 group homes and two overnight respite sites. I had the pleasure of joining the minister on his visit to Sunbeam Centre in early September on International Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder Awareness Day.

During his visit, the minister made a great announcement of $3 million to increase resources, tools and strategies to support children with FASD. We also had a chance to meet with some of the board members and senior staff at Sunbeam, including those who work in the residential programs. The team there does great work caring for vulnerable people in our community, Madam Speaker.

But I know not all group homes out there provide the same high level of care that Sunbeam and Elmira District Community Living do. It’s hard to believe, but there are some people out there taking advantage of families trying to find care and support for their loved ones, which is why I will be supporting this bill, because it is important to catch the bad actors and make sure Ontario’s most vulnerable are taken care of.

But I also hope we can find a way to get those with ill intentions out of our system without overburdening those doing the good work in our communities. There needs to be a balance, so that those who provide a high standard of care can continue to do so and expand their capacity, instead of having to shift the focus of their staff to filling out paperwork and complying with duplicative regulations. I know in my community, capacity is a challenge, and it would be a shame to see service providers have to put additional money into administrative work, rather than supporting front-line services.

Thank you once again to the member from Niagara Centre for bringing this important bill forward. Protecting our most vulnerable, including those with developmental disabilities, is this minister’s top priority, and I hope he will work with the minister and his team to find a way to achieve that balance.

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

M me France Gélinas: I’m so pleased to support the bill brought forward by my colleague from Niagara Centre. I want to also thank the previous MPP for this area, Cindy Forster, for making the House aware of what was going on. I hope that the second trial is a charm and it actually brings us results.

Protecting vulnerable people in supportive living accommodation—those are really often known as rooming houses. They fill a critical need in communities all over the province, including my community and all over the north, but leaving supportive living accommodation poorly regulated, with no minimum standard, has often resulted in suffering in deplorable conditions and sometimes even death, like the member shared with us. It is time to fix that and to make sure that supportive living accommodations are a safe option for people who need to live independently.

Before being an MPP, I was the executive director of the community health centre in Sudbury, and we ran the Corner Clinic. The Corner Clinic dealt with a way for people who experienced homelessness to have access to care. Often, the first thing we would do is to try to house them. You cannot be healthy if you don’t have a place to call your home. Most of the people suffered from severe mental illness, other health issues, physical disabilities; they often dealt with addiction, and they became very hard to house.

Those rooming houses were a place where we can get them back to health, and some of them do a very good job of this, but some of them are just taking advantage of vulnerable people who don’t have a voice, and taking advantage of them in every possible way. You can let your imagination go down a really dirty hole and it’s still not deep enough for what we have seen in some of those living accommodations.

All of this could change. We have the power right here in this House to change this by passing the bill from the member from Niagara Centre and putting things as simple as regulations, having minimum standards, having to report. Right now, most of the time, those people are thrown out of business through the fire department, because when all of the social agencies, when all of the health agencies, when everybody else—we know that what’s going on in this rooming house is not okay; there is absolutely nothing we can do. So we phone the fire department.

They will go in and do an inspection and find a way to shut them down through violation of the fire code. Really, Speaker, this is what we’ve come to in order to protect our most vulnerable? The government has a role to play. This is why we are in government: to make sure that we protect the most vulnerable in our community. For this area, there is nothing.

It is high time that we pass this bill from Niagara Centre, to thank the good operators and to make sure the other ones are out of business.

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

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Good morning. It’s always an honour to be able to rise here in the House on behalf of the residents of St. Catharines, and I’d like to congratulate my colleague from Niagara Centre for bringing this motion forward.

There’s rarely a week that goes by when a constituent doesn’t stop me and talk to me about a problem they’re experiencing within a nursing home in St. Catharines. Every so often, I have to pause the conversation to issue a point of clarification: “Long-term care” is used interchangeably with “retirement home” or “hospice” or, in some of the more shocking examples, the deplorable conditions from some of the supportive living accommodations. That is why I’m happy my colleague from Niagara Centre is bringing this legislation forward with Bill 164, protecting vulnerable persons.

This legislation is shining a light on a housing issue during a time when we know all too well the risk of leaving vulnerable people in deplorable conditions. You see, sometimes people can get caught up in this congregate care language.

We know in this chamber that when referring to nursing homes, we are referring to homes regulated by a particular set of rules—a particular piece of legislation, actually, with a particular minimum standard of care—except my constituents don’t care about the difference or the language or the legislation. What they want is what we all want: a minimal standard for living conditions for older adults and vulnerable people, to ensure they are kept safe and with dignity, Speaker.

No one wants to see suffering, deplorable conditions and even death due to a person’s housing or care situation. You know what, Speaker? It’s time to fix that. The solution to dignity for all vulnerable people is to take the lesson of the pandemic and apply it. Private companies administering care to under-regulated or loosely regulated markets with little oversight is problematic. It doesn’t work, which is why I support the member from Niagara’s protecting vulnerable persons bill that sets a minimum set of standards for supportive living accommodations.

Speaker, I’m going to end with this note. The lessons of COVID-19 have shone a light on the travesties in long-term care: understaffing, homes with bedbugs and no cooling spaces during a heat wave of 40 degrees, to name just a few. If we still have problems with nursing homes that are being given the most attention right now, what does that mean for the other parts of the housing sector—think about that—like supportive living accommodations that are being given the least amount of attention?

Politics aside, this is not about private versus public or ideology or even money. This is about doing the humane thing, common-sense things to protect all vulnerable people in Ontario. This is about ensuring a minimal standard of care across this province and learning from a hard-taught lesson of the pandemic in the shadow of a difficult summer in Ontario. This is about doing the right thing.

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

Mr. Mike Schreiner: It’s my pleasure to rise and speak in support of Bill 164, protecting vulnerable persons in supportive living accommodations. I want to thank the member from Niagara Centre for bringing this bill forward. I’m reminded that last week we all came together and voted in support of legislation to provide a minimum standard of care for elders being cared for in long-term care.

I think today is an opportunity for us to all come together and ensure that elders and adults with disabilities in community living living congregate care settings also have a minimum standard of care, are regulated, and are inspected to ensure that the most vulnerable in our society receive the care they deserve.

Speaker, I think many Ontarians would be shocked to learn that these congregate care settings are currently not regulated. While many of these congregate care community living spaces are well cared for, there are those that are not. Those bad actors should be held accountable. We should take preventive and proactive action to ensure that proper regulations, proper minimum standards of care, and proper inspections are in place to ensure that all vulnerable people in our society have a safe place to live and a safe place to be cared for.

Unfortunately, I was reminded of this very early in the pandemic, in the spring, during the first wave of COVID, when I started receiving calls from people who lived in some of these community congregate care settings, saying that while the virus was spreading, they had no access to personal protective equipment, the staff coming in to provide care in these settings did not have access to personal protective equipment, and the proper public health measures were not in place. That is something, Speaker, that we cannot allow to happen again.

I believe Bill 164 is an important step to preventing those types of conditions and that type of situation from ever happening again. I’m hoping one of the lessons that we learn from this pandemic is that a society is measured by the way we treat the most vulnerable in our communities, that a society is measured by the dignity, care, standards and regulations that we provide the most vulnerable in our communities. We have to decide as a society what kind of values we uphold. For me, those values ensure that the most vulnerable in our society are cared for.

I hope we can stand together again and unite all parties in this House to establish a basic standard of care for the most vulnerable: elders and adults with disabilities in congregate care settings in our community.

Speaker, I just want to conclude by once again thanking the member from Niagara Centre for bringing this bill forward. I’m hoping all members of this House vote in favour.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): I now return to the member for Niagara Centre for his response.

Mr. Jeff Burch: Thank you to all of my colleagues on both sides of the House for their support. The member from Whitby mentioned his municipal experience; we have that in common. As he will know, at the municipal level, the partisanship really melts away. I want to assure him that I’m looking forward to working in committee. There is a lot of work to do on the bill, obviously, but I think it’s doable, and I hope that we reward all the work that my predecessor, Cindy Forster, did and get this bill passed.

Thank you to my colleague from London–Fanshawe for relaying the story of the tragedy in London. I know the city of London and the fire services there will be very happy to see this bill moving forward.

The member from Kitchener–Conestoga: Thank you for mentioning the support of the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services, and for speaking to your own constituents about the bill.

The member from Nickel Belt mentioned her experience with the community health centre in Sudbury. I’m very grateful to have her as our critic for health care, and thank her for her support.

My friend from St. Catharines: As always, I know she’ll be working with me on the issue in Niagara, where there are many supportive living homes.

And the member from Guelph: Thank you for reminding us that this is also a long-term-care issue and connected to the issue of dignity for seniors.

So thank you to all of my colleagues for their support. I look forward to working on this bill in committee and moving it forward.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): The time provided for private members’ public business has expired.

Mr. Burch has moved second reading of Bill 164,

An Act to establish a framework for the licensing of supportive living accommodation. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? That’s carried.

Second reading agreed to.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Pursuant to standing order 101(i), the bill is referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. Jeff Burch: General government, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Is the majority in favour of the bill being referred to the Standing Committee on General Government? Agreed. The bill is referred to the Standing Committee on General Government.

Orders of the day? I recognize the member for Barrie–Innisfil.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: No further business.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): There being no further business, this House stands recessed until 10:15 this morning.

The House recessed from 0951 to 1015.

Members’ Statements

Curriculum

Ms. Jill Andrew: Education is a human right. It is through education that we learn about ourselves, our history, and we begin to envision our futures.

Black children have systematically been exposed to an erasure of their identity in Ontario’s school curriculum. This is anti-Black racism upheld by the Ontario government. Black lives cannot be #BlackedOutHistory any longer. Black history curriculum must be mandatory in every Ontario school from K to 12.

The Ontario Black History Society sent the Minister of Education a copy of a 2016 grade 8 history textbook used to teach grade 8 students across Ontario. Of 255 pages, when non-Black history is blacked out, only 13 partial pages remain that mention Black history—13 mentions for 400 years of Black lives here.

The OBHS has asked the Minister of Education to immediately commence a review of the social studies, histories and geographies, and Canadian and world studies curriculum; work with Black educators and scholars to conduct the review and identify topics, themes and content to be integrated into the curriculum; include Black history and Black experiences as mandatory learning in the SSHG and CWS curricula from K to 12 and in all subjects from K to 12; and provide consistent supports and resources to enable educators to effectively teach Black histories.

As a proud member of the Ontario Black caucus and the MPP for Toronto–St. Paul’s, home to Little Jamaica and Nia Centre for the Arts, which is building Canada’s first professional multidisciplinary Black arts centre, I wholeheartedly support the Ontario Black History Society’s call to action. Will this Minister of Education do the same, yes or no?

Cancer treatment

Ms. Donna Skelly: I’m proud to rise this morning in the House to speak about our government’s $25-million investment in the stem cell transplantation unit at Juravinski Hospital and Cancer Centre in Hamilton.

I spoke at the official opening of the unit on Friday. This is wonderful news for the world-class cancer care team at Juravinski and, of course, for their patients. It allows more cancer patients to receive treatment closer to home. This means that patients will receive care in the right place at the right time.

The investment will support a 15-bed in-patient unit for patients undergoing stem cell transplants and other complex malignant hematology cancer treatments. There will be additional treatment bays for oncology day services and a renovated pharmacy to support the growth of the expanded stem cell transplant program.

Hamilton Health Sciences is renowned for its work in life-saving cancer care and stem cell transplant. The stem cell unit builds on the extraordinary history of cancer treatment in Hamilton. This investment also builds on our government’s commitment to reduce wait times for critical cancer treatment.

The talented and dedicated professionals at Juravinski should be proud of their many achievements; I certainly am.

College standards and accreditation

Mr. Chris Glover: As the critic for colleges and universities, this morning I sent an email to all members of this House urging them to not support the accreditation of Canada Christian College.

In Bill 213, the government is granting the college and its owner, Charles McVety, the ability to offer arts and science degrees in Ontario. This is despite Mr. McVety being well-known for espousing hateful and bigoted views.

Mosques in Toronto have received threats and called on this government to combat Islamophobia, yet this Premier supports a man who is vocally anti-Islam.

The LGBTQ2+ community has fought hatred for years, yet this Premier supports a man who has made absolutely vile statements against the LGBTQ community.

The Premier states that this is an independent decision, but if that were the case, he would not be using this bill to bypass the independent accreditation process.

It’s been revealed that Mr. McVety and his son have taken personal loans from the college of over half a million dollars, and his wife, a vice-principal of the college, awarded herself the title of doctor despite having no credentials.

Regulatory authorities have consistently challenged the academic integrity of the college and rejected graduates due to suspicious academic transcripts and degrees being conferred before coursework was completed.

Bill 213 attacks Ontario’s communities and undermines our accreditation process. I strongly urge all members of this House to vote against Bill 213.

Mr. Lorne Coe: We want everyone, especially people with disabilities and seniors, to be able to fully participate in everyday life in communities.

The government is continuing to work with stakeholders like the Abilities Centre in Whitby, partner ministries, broader public sector organizations, businesses and other non-profit organizations to achieve these goals, and in the process, help people of all abilities participate fully in their community’s recreational, social and economic life.

Diabetes

Ms. Peggy Sattler: November is Diabetes Awareness Month, and on Saturday, people around the world marked 100 years since Sir Frederick Banting’s remarkable 25-word idea scribbled at 2 a.m. in his small bedroom above his medical practice on Adelaide Street in London, now the home of Banting House National Historic Site. That idea would lead to one of the greatest triumphs of modern medicine, the discovery of insulin in 1921, saving millions of lives and making Banting the only Canadian and the youngest person ever to win the Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine.

While amazing progress has been made in the century since Banting’s idea, COVID-19 has reinforced how much more we have to do. It has revealed the urgency of addressing poverty, food insecurity and other key health inequities to improve health outcomes. Ontarians most at risk of COVID-19 are often those most at risk of diabetes: those who struggle with poverty, who are racialized or Indigenous, who are food-insecure, who live in crowded conditions, who work in low-wage essential jobs.

They also face a significant economic burden, with high deductibles for the Trillium Drug Program, unable to afford proper foot care, unable to access continuous glucose monitoring systems, unable to pay for essential diabetes supplies, lacking private insurance plans or with limited coverage.

This centenary, what better way to honour Banting’s legacy than by implementing a comprehensive provincial diabetes strategy, one that includes universal pharmacare and provides funding for all necessary supports.

Véronic DiCaire

M lle Amanda Simard: Une de nos plus grandes fiertés chez nous à Embrun c’est notre chère Véronic DiCaire, notre chanteuse-imitatrice à nous, reconnue sur la scène internationale et admirée partout à travers le monde—et oui, elle aussi, originaire d’Embrun. En fait, nous avons grandi dans le même rang, le bon petit rang Saint-Joseph.

C’est notre superstar, Véro, et la semaine dernière, elle a remporté un prestigieux prix Félix au Gala de l’ADISQ, son tout premier, tout un accomplissement.

For my colleagues and Ontarians who do not yet know our Véronic, she’s an international sensation, and for good reason: an incredibly talented impersonator, singer, actress and TV host. She’s well known to re-create with outstanding accuracy the greatest voices of Canada, the United States and Europe.

She rose to international fame after being discovered by Céline Dion, who’s also my distant cousin—small world, I know—and René Angélil in 2008. She performed the opening act for Céline’s Taking Chances tour for the Montreal and Quebec City shows, and the rest is history.

Félicitations, Véronic, pour ton prix, mais surtout pour tout ton succès. Tu nous rends si fiers. Continue d’être la best des best. Comme de vrais groupies, on te suit, on t’aime, on t’appuie. Félicitations.

Woman Abuse Prevention Month

Mr. Stephen Crawford: It’s an honour to rise today in the House and bring attention to an important virtual event that is happening in my riding as we speak. November is Woman Abuse Prevention Month.

Abuse can either be a threat of violence or an actual form of violence. Sadly, many women experience the most common form, which is physical and sexual violence. In my riding, we have dedicated organizations to help women overcome their experiences with violence. Women who need help can rely on services and resources provided by SAVIS of Halton or Halton Women’s Place. Both SAVIS and Halton Women’s Place have changed the lives of many women here in Oakville and Halton, and they will continue to for the years ahead.

Today at 10 a.m., in honour of the victims who have suffered intimate partner violence, the Halton Women’s Place and Halton regional police board are joining together to host a virtual event to unveil a beautiful memorial that will be located at the headquarters of the Halton regional police. The Halton police, under the great leadership of Chief Stephen Tanner, go above and beyond to keep the residents of Oakville safe. They are working diligently within Halton to protect women from human trafficking and domestic violence.

Even though I cannot attend this virtual event, it’s still important to recognize the victims of partner violence, especially during Woman Abuse Prevention Month. We all have a role to play and need to take a stand to end violence against women. No woman should have to live in fear about whether they will face abuse. Education, prevention and early intervention are critical in putting an end to women’s abuse.

Treaties recognition

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: This week is Treaties Recognition Week in Ontario. I would like to stand here and say good words about how Ontario respects and honours treaties, but I cannot. We have a problem. Ontario continues to fail to live up to the terms, agreements, spirit and intent of the treaties. So today, I recognize just a couple of failures.

Neskantaga continues to be under a boil-water advisory, as it has been since February 1995. Ontario signed treaty number 9 with Neskantaga and the crown.

Multiple First Nations across Ontario are taking legal action against Ontario to uphold their treaty rights under Bill 197. The signatories of the Robinson Superior and Robinson Huron treaties of 1850 are also in court with Ontario. Ontario has failed to increase the annuity payments for the use of lands and resources, as was written in the Robinson Treaties. There has been no change in the annuity since it was set at $4 per person in 1874. In the Six Nations territory, they have asked for a process to address the historical land claims with the federal and the provincial governments, with no answer.

Most importantly, I recognize and honour the resilience of those who are speaking up to make our communities better and the justice that they work towards. We’ve been here for generations. We are here today. We will be here tomorrow. Honour the treaties.

Como Foundation

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: Last week, the Premier and I had the privilege of welcoming Sarah and Max from the Como Foundation to Queen’s Park to thank them for their hard work during this difficult time. This September, we were honoured to attend a ribbon-cutting ceremony at their new 9,000-square-foot facility. This facility, owned by CEO Bob Murray from McRae Imaging, has now moved most of their operations to making masks. By collaborating with the Como Foundation, they were able to produce the mask that I wear every day for the deaf and hard-of-hearing community.

As the Premier has mentioned, their operations all started back in March on their dining room table. A few weeks later, the Como Foundation announced a $5-million donation to Trillium Health Partners. The donation is part of a total commitment of $25 million over the next five years, providing a meaningful step closer to building a new hospital for Mississauga–Lakeshore.

This collaboration and generosity reflect the true character and spirit of Ontario. It makes me proud to be their MPP and makes me proud to be Canadian. I hope that it will inspire us as we confront the second wave of COVID-19, because it is only through the creativity and generosity of ordinary Ontarians like Max and Sarah that we will win this battle and ensure Ontario comes back stronger, more prosperous and more united than ever.

Veterans

Ms. Amy Fee: This morning, I rise as we begin our month of remembrance and want to acknowledge just how grateful we are for the immense sacrifice that tens of thousands of brave women and men have made to ensure that we have the freedoms we have today.

This weekend, Canadians across the country felt the pain of the loss of a 29-year-old soldier who died in a live-fire training accident at the Canadian Forces base in Wainwright, Alberta. Corporal James Choi of BC has been described as one of the most dedicated members of his unit and was well respected by all of his comrades.

Like many families, many of my relatives died in service for our country. My mom’s aunt, Lena Forestell, was a Silver Cross Mother at the National War Memorial in 1958. She lost three of her sons in the war effort: Warrant Officer Class II Daniel Forestell died in 1943, and her sons Warrant Officer Class II Thomas Forestell and Flying Officer Robert Forestell both died in 1944. My great-uncle Lieutenant William Dall also died in 1962 when his plane went down on a training mission just outside of CFB Trenton. My cousin Paul Trimble retired this past summer after 28 years of service with the Royal Canadian Navy.

He and his family have scars that will last a lifetime—the months spent apart, the nights worrying, and losing numerous close friends in Afghanistan.

It is for these amazing men and women and their families that we are modernizing the Soldiers’ Aid Commission in Ontario to expand assistance to veterans of all ages and their families who are in need of financial support. Mr. Speaker, may we honour them and may we remember them every day.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much. That concludes our members’ statements for this morning.

Sikh genocide

Mr. Gurratan Singh: I rise today to ask for the unanimous consent of this House for a moment of silence to remember the thousands of Sikhs who were murdered by the Indian government in the November 1984 Sikh genocide. Lest we forget.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Brampton East is seeking unanimous consent of the House for a moment’s silence. Agreed? Agreed.

The House observed a moment’s silence.

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

The member for Timmins has informed me he has a point of order.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: I would seek unanimous consent in order to stand down our leads to wait for the Premier’s arrival.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I would have thought that by now we wouldn’t be making reference to the absence of any member, for obvious reasons.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: This has been done since I’ve been here.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Timmins is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to stand down the lead questions of the official opposition. Agreed?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Agreed.

The member for Orléans, I think, has a point of order maybe.

Mr. Stephen Blais: On a point of order, I’m seeking unanimous consent of the House to withdraw

schedule 2 of Bill 213 to stop the preferential treatment of one of Ontario’s most well-known bigots, Mr. Charles McVety.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): That’s not a point of order.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Speaker made a mistake. There was not unanimous consent to stand down the leads of the official opposition.

But I’m once again going to remind all members, especially in these current times, when we can see what’s happening and what we have to do in this House to maintain physical distancing, to please stop making reference to the absence of other members.

The member for Orléans is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to remove a

schedule from—schedule what?

Mr. Stephen Blais:

Schedule 2 from Bill 213.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Agreed? I heard several noes.

It is now time for oral questions.

Question Period

COVID-19 response

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My first question this morning is for the Premier. Last Wednesday, in his daily campaign news conference on COVID-19, the Premier claimed, “We see the curve going down.” Since then, health officials have reported three of the worst days that Ontario has ever seen in terms of new cases of COVID-19, and today the Ontario Hospital Association is sounding the alarm bells because acute care wards are already operating above capacity in dozens of hospitals in our province.

It’s clear to everyone that we are still dealing with the consequences of the Ford government’s failure to prepare properly for a second wave. Does the Premier think that declaring victory is going to have the thousands of new cases appearing daily just disappear?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Deputy Premier and Minister of Health.

Hon. Christine Elliott: What I would say to the leader of the official opposition is we have prepared. We have a comprehensive fall preparedness plan that anticipated an increase in the rise of COVID cases, and we’ve prepared for that and we’ve prepared our hospitals for that as well.

What I would say is, first of all, we’re very grateful to them for stepping up and the incredible front-line workers that show up to work each and every day. The hospitals have even gone above and beyond what their normal capacity is, and many of them have gone into our long-term-care homes when they’ve needed assistance. But we have provided them with expansion availability. Right now, they are close to 100% capacity because they’re dealing with COVID-19 cases, but they’re also trying to catch up on the backlogs of surgeries and procedures that we had to postpone during the first wave.

We don’t want to have that happen again. We want to be able to keep those surgeries happening as well, because as terrible as it is to lose someone to COVID, it’s equally terrible to lose someone to cardiac or cancer problems, so we have to keep that moving forward.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, after the first wave of the pandemic, labs and health units were left begging for funding to prepare for the second wave, and now we’re in a situation where, in the city of Toronto, we don’t know where 65% of cases are actually coming from, while hospitals are facing huge deficits and operating above capacity.

Will the Premier stop pretending that this pandemic is going to go away on its own, and start making the investments needed to catch up to where we should be?

Hon. Christine Elliott: The reality is that we have been investing money. We have since the beginning of the COVID pandemic, both in terms of case and contact management. We’re investing over $1 billion in testing facilities and case and contact management facilities so that we are able to trace where these contacts are coming from, and when someone comes down with COVID, that we can contact-trace and find out who they’ve been in contact with. Right now, we’re at about 85% to 90% of contact management within 24 hours of someone being diagnosed with COVID.

But we’ve also made significant investments in our hospital sector. We’ve invested $935 million in additional money in the sector this year. It’s a 5.5% increase—the biggest increase in a decade—and we’ve made hundreds of millions of dollars in additional investments since then, which I can discuss in the next supplemental.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Parents, seniors, small business owners and all Ontarians are paying the price now for the Premier’s failure to prepare for the second wave. The Premier could admit that and make the overdue investments that are necessary to get testing and tracing to where it should be and to ensure that our hospitals, schools and small businesses have the support that they need to get through these next couple of months, but instead, the Premier is ignoring the evidence—and apparently, so is the minister—while members of his own caucus are ignoring public health advice.

When will the Premier stop making things up as he goes, start making sure his caucus members are following the rules and start making the investments that should have been in place months and months ago?

Hon. Christine Elliott: In fact, we do have a comprehensive plan, one that is called Keeping Ontarians Safe. It anticipates all of the issues that the leader of the official opposition has just mentioned: case and contact management; making sure that we can be prepared for surges in COVID cases, as well as keeping our surgeries and procedures going to keep Ontarians healthy.

We’ve invested $341 million to create an additional 500 acute care beds and 100 critical care beds. That was at the beginning. It was supplemented by more money that went into 139 more critical care beds and 1,349 additional beds and, recently, by an additional $116 million that created an additional 766 beds in 32 hospitals across the province.

As things stand now, since the start of this pandemic, we have created 3,131 new hospital beds to deal with the increase in both patients with COVID, with flu—

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

Long-term care

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is actually for the Premier as well. The government’s failure to prepare for the second wave is especially devastating in long-term care—and I think we all know that—where, now, at least 509 residents currently have COVID-19. In the face of this unprecedented disaster, the Ford government has dithered and delayed on action that was needed to save lives in long-term care. We know that’s the case; that’s what the commission heard in terms of testimony.

Why is the Ford government moving so slowly, Speaker, and when will they start moving quickly, because we all know that the lives of seniors in long-term care are truly at stake here?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Long-Term Care.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the member opposite for the question. I can tell you that all of us feel very concerned about our long-term-care-home residents and staff. That is why we have acted swiftly since the very beginning, making sure we created the regulatory flexibility for our long-term-care homes with the regulatory amendments for emergency orders, $243 million to make sure that our staffing had support and infection control, ongoing measures to make sure there were rapid deployment teams from their hospital, integrating that response to our homes.

The vast majority of our homes, 94% of them, right now have no resident cases. There are outbreaks, but I want to remind everyone that an outbreak means one resident case or one staff case as a minimum, and that staff case can be isolating at home.

We are making sure that all the measures, including the $540 million to back up our homes a few weeks ago—making sure that every measure is taken. We will continue to—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. And the supplementary question?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: It’s unfortunate that the minister’s talking points don’t include that 509 seniors are infected, as we speak, with COVID-19.

In new testimony that’s happening at the long-term-care commission, government officials were struggling to try to explain why staffing studies sat on the Premier’s desk, literally for months, while seniors died during the second wave.

At one point, the lead commissioner raises the issue of the urgent need for four hours of daily hands-on care. Here’s what he said: “We’re in the middle ... of Wave 2.... There is an immediacy to this, a sense of urgency....

“But what you’re describing doesn’t seem urgent.”

With so many lives at stake, how can this government fail to appreciate the urgent need for action on four hours of hands-on care?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you again for the question. The sense of urgency has been consistently there, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Even as we started as a new ministry in summer 2019, to understand the staffing capacity, we created the expert advisory panel to give a comprehensive understanding of what needed to be done, and that report will be completed with a strategy. The report has been received; the strategy will be in December. We have committed to doing that.

Not only have we been doing that, we’ve been working urgently to shore up the staffing in our homes, using every measure possible, whether it’s looking at the Red Cross, community paramedics, the integration with the hospitals and the acute care sector, the IPAC teams. This has all been ongoing with a sense of urgency from the very beginning, and we will continue with that same sense of urgency—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much. Final supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, that is certainly not what the commissioner said, so something doesn’t add up here.

It’s literally a matter of life and death we’re talking about, and the Premier’s response quite clearly has been to dither and delay. In testimony at the long-term-care commission, made public late Friday, the government admits that, “It isn’t government policy that there can’t be three and four residents in a room.” It isn’t government policy.

Well, we know that for-profit homes with massive outbreaks, like Extendicare Starwood in Ottawa and many others, have had three residents sharing a room. The government promised to change that, just like they promised to change the staffing levels. They promised action, but everybody is asking for urgent action. People don’t want the government to delay any longer. It’s time to fix the problem.

When are they going to get around to banning more than two residents per room in long-term care?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you once again to the member opposite.

Making sure that we were absolutely transparent about the ward room issue as soon as that was identified in wave 1, we have been working with Public Health Ontario, Ontario Health and medical officers of health within the public health units, looking at measures we can take to address the ward rooms using every possible measure—and all the while understanding the balance that must be had in the acute care sector to create capacity in long-term care and create measures that allow our hospitals to stay functional and serve those individuals who have cancer, who have heart disease and who require urgent treatment.

All of this has to be an integrated effort.

I want to thank the commissioners for hearing the testimony. They did hear about the staffing issues. Those, of course, have been ongoing. We as a government have acknowledged that and are working feverishly to address that. And I want to thank the thousands of people who are working around the clock all during this terrible, unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic. Those people are making a difference—

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

Education funding

Ms. Marit Stiles: This question is for the Premier. Throughout this pandemic, parents have tried to make the right choices to keep their kids safe while also making sure they aren’t set back a year in their learning. But thanks to a staggered and piecemeal approach that left class sizes too big and buses too crowded, thousands of students across this province never returned to school at all. In Toronto, 5,500 students didn’t return; in London, a thousand. In Hamilton, the public board reports it’s missing 1,756 kids.

Speaker, we all know the way education is funded in Ontario, and that means that dollars follow students. Enrolment has been completely disrupted by the pandemic and by this government’s inconsistent policies. The corresponding drop in funding for those students will mean millions of dollars budgeted for schools will vanish unless the Premier acts. Will he?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: I appreciate the question from the member opposite, but the member opposite knows that the Minister of Education and the Premier have committed significant—in fact, historic—amounts to education. Obviously, this is a challenging time, not only for the people of the province of Ontario and for our students, but for school boards who have done, frankly, a spectacular job in helping assure that the funding that we have set aside for schools during the pandemic is getting to the students.

I know from my own experience in my board and with my kids—one in the Catholic system, one in the public system—the experience has been nothing short of spectacular. I want to—I guess opposite of what the member is saying—congratulate the teachers and the two boards that I have been fortunate enough to work with. They’ve done a great job. Students are learning. It is certainly different, Mr. Speaker, but they’re getting the job done. I want to thank our educators for that.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: If boards and schools are doing such a great job, keep the money there. Give them the assurance they need.

Speaker, Ontario’s COVID cases are breaking records every few days. We can no longer wait to see how this will all pan out. We need urgent action to protect our students and keep schools open as long as possible. Will the Premier take action now?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Of course, we have continued—right from the beginning of the pandemic, we took very swift action to ensure that our students were safe. We did that by working with not only our school boards, but with our education partners, the union leaders, to make sure that we rolled out a system that worked as best as it could for the students in the province of Ontario.

Will we continue to invest in students? Absolutely. We’ve done that right since our first budget. We are the only government to make significant investments in education in such a short period of time, and I’m quite proud of that.

This is a very challenging time, obviously. Surely to goodness, the member opposite can appreciate how difficult it has been to bring forward online learning, to bring forward protection for our students, those who want to go to school, and for the teachers. We’ve been able to do that. It has been a success. Does that mean that we stop? No. Of course, we redouble our efforts, because parents will want different things and students will want different things. This government will be prepared for whatever our parents and whatever our students want by working with our teachers and our educators to make sure we get it right.

Manufacturing jobs

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: My question is to the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade.

Last week, the minister joined me, the Premier and the MPP for Barrie–Springwater–Oro-Medonte to meet with Wolfgang, a German tool-and-die maker, and his wife, Ingrid, who co-founded Napoleon in the late 1970s in Barrie. As we heard, they are now North America’s leader when it comes to manufacturing quality fireplaces, grills, furnaces and air conditioners, all because Wolfgang tried to impress his father-in-law by making a wood stove.

That led, of course, to them stepping up to the plate like so many manufacturers when, during COVID-19 and as we’re still in it, Napoleon workers put the grills on hold and they started to make medical equipment. They’re an example, along with their sons, Christopher and Stephen, of manufacturers that have really stepped up to the plate.

I’m looking for the minister to tell us in this House how we’re supporting manufacturers like Napoleon and what our government is doing to help manufacturers thrive.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you to the member from Barrie–Innisfil for her question.

Let’s start with a shout-out to Ingrid, Wolfgang, Stephen and Chris Schroeter for hosting us at Napoleon Home Comfort. Their 1,100 employees prove that Ontario is indeed a manufacturing powerhouse.

In September alone, Ontario saw an increase of nearly 52,000 manufacturing jobs. That means that 17,000 more people work in manufacturing now than did pre-COVID-19. That proves that even in times of pandemic, we can make anything right here in the province, and we should be proud of that. By purchasing Ontario-made products, we can put billions of dollars back into our economy and lead our province down the road to recovery.

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

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Thank you, Minister, for that answer.

As stated in Plant magazine, “Not even COVID-19 can douse the sizzle at Napoleon.”

Our government continues to be a leader and champion when it comes to highlighting and supporting Ontario-made businesses. Several months ago, of course, we launched the Ontario Made program that helps support manufacturers, through the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters, by highlighting our businesses and, of course, creating the Ontario Made logo, which you can proudly support—onto our Ontario-made products so that people know, when they go to the stores, what products they can buy that are made in Ontario.

In a recent poll, we have seen that 73% of Ontarians want to buy local-made product and, in fact, 56% of Ontarians wish they could purchase more domestic products.

So I’m asking the minister if he could share with my constituents and all Ontarians what new developments we have for the Ontario Made program.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: The Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters launched the Ontario Made program, but that was only the beginning. Today, we’re excited to announce the launch of the second phase of Ontario Made. So when you see that Ontario Made logo, it’s easier for shoppers to tell what products are actually produced right here in Ontario. To date, 4,600 products are registered with that logo, from 1,200 Ontario manufacturers. That’s 4,600 quality Ontario Made products supporting local jobs.

It was great to see the Ontario Made logo on Beauti-Tone paint when I dropped by the Ferris Home Hardware in North Bay this weekend. So, we urge people to go to supportontariomade.ca for a complete directory of these 1,200 companies.

College standards and accreditation

Mr. Taras Natyshak: My question is to the Premier. Speaker, we all know that the Premier has a close personal relationship with Charles McVety. He is even trying to grant him his own version of Trump University North; I cringe at the thought of what an ethics degree from McVety U would look like.

But Speaker, it appears that he’s not McVety’s only friend in the PC Party caucus. In now-deleted photos from McVety’s lavish birthday party last November, we see a special video greeting from the Premier and also appearances from the chief government whip, the Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions, and the Minister of Finance. Mysteriously, these photos have all disappeared from their website as of last Thursday night.

Speaker, do any of the ministers who attended that party know if Canada Christian College’s accreditation was discussed, and if so, why have those photos disappeared?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To respond for the government, the Minister of Colleges and Universities.

Hon. Ross Romano: I am glad to have this opportunity to rise and address this important matter. Any time any organization or any individual applies for any type of a licence or a designation, it’s incumbent upon legislators—people in quasi-judicial functions—to ensure that there is fairness and there is accountability in the process.

The main way to ensure accountability is through transparency, things like having bills debated openly in this House. The main way to ensure fairness is to ensure that there is a process.

There are three ways for any designation of this nature to be granted: one, through a private bill. It goes directly to committee, tabled by any member this House; it does not come into this House for open discussion. It’s a very sheltered process. The second option is through ministerial consent; I’ll speak about that in the supplemental. The third option is through a legislative process, once again, that gets debated in this House.

What we chose to do, Mr. Speaker, was to blend a ministerial consent and a legislative process to ensure transparency, to ensure accountability, to ensure fairness, and to ensure a process.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question?

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Speaker, despite concerns coming from his own PC Party members, the Premier has spent weeks defending his favour to Charles McVety by claiming it’s all above board and following due process. But we now know that McVety had unrestricted access to the Premier’s cabinet ministers and closest advisers at this event. Nobody can know for sure what was said at McVety’s birthday bash, but I don’t think anyone would believe that government business never came up.

Speaker, were any of the members of the Premier’s cabinet who were present at that party lobbied at the party, or are they just really such good close allies of Charles McVety?

Hon. Ross Romano: Again, to ensure a fair and accountable process, what we have done, and what we have endeavoured to do, and we will always do on this side of the House, is making sure that fairness, process and accountability are adhered to. These are principles of the rule of law that I certainly take very seriously, and we on this side of the House take very, very seriously.

If you look at the private bill option, which I discussed in the earlier question, that option goes directly to a committee. It’s a very sheltered process. It would not have been debated in this House; it would not have been a very transparent process.

Ministerial consent, Mr. Speaker, is something that is traditionally done in a minister’s boardroom and signed off on. We converted that in the last red tape bill last October, where two other universities, OCAD University and Algoma University, were part of that as well. We ensured that that process went directly to an independent review board, being PEQAB.

What we’ve done here with this particular legislation—the same as we did before; the same as we’ll do again—is we made sure that it was all combined in a blended, open, transparent process.

Long-term care

M me Lucille Collard: My question is for the Minister of Long-Term Care. Speaker, I need to keep on asking these questions because I keep on hearing from people in my riding that the situation in our long-term-care homes is far from being resolved.

I receive updates from the administrators of these for-profit long-term-care homes. While they’re trying to be reassuring, it’s really easy to read between the lines. In fact, they are trying to tell us that everything is under control by saying they have a very comprehensive infection prevention and control program, and say in the same letter that they are working with the hospital team to develop procedures to manage the outbreak because they can’t control anything.

I have heard from family members and caregivers, and there are still delays in getting tested and getting results while the virus continues to spread.

My question is: Will the minister ensure that testing is improved and prioritized in the long-term care homes?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thanks again to the member opposite for the question. This is something I want to emphasize is ongoing: making sure that our homes are getting the staffing they need and the PPE support that they need. There are no critical situations with the homes. There are no critical staffing shortages. The homes are working—in some cases it’s voluntary management contracts or mandatory management orders with the hospitals involved. In the Ottawa area, there are four homes that have resident cases. The others do not, even though they are considered in outbreak, and that’s because of the definition that I keep mentioning.

Also, making sure that there’s communication with families: I think that that is something that is one of those lessons learned, that we are making sure that those homes have the ability to communicate with their loved ones. Looking at making sure that we have the infection prevention and control measures in there, these homes are all partnered with hospitals across the province to make sure that they have the necessary expertise.

I thank you for your question.

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

M me Lucille Collard: Again to the Minister of Long-Term Care: I do want to congratulate the minister on the paramedicine program that I’ve heard of. Based on the consultations that I’ve done around long-term care and based on my own experience of having my mother living with us, I believe this can go a long way in helping our loved ones and those who look after them. Essential caregivers are indeed a very important part of the solution for providing much-needed support to the system, and it’s really important that they have access to their loved ones in long-term-care homes, to provide much-needed support.

We need to realize that more often than not these essential caregivers are seniors themselves, looking after a relative or a spouse. The Champlain family council reached out to me and to the minister to make us aware that the obstacles to getting tested have undermined their role as caregivers.

My question on behalf of all the family members who are taking care of loved ones in long-term care is: Will the minister ensure that rapid testing will be given ongoing priority in long-term-care settings and that it includes caregivers?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Health.

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank the member very much for the question. Testing is very important for caregivers, because we recognized through wave 1 how important these caregivers are. They provide in some cases up to 80% of the care that their loved ones receive in long-term care. It’s very important for their mental functioning and physical functioning. We have allowed for that with opening up pharmacies for asymptomatic testing. It can be family members who can go in to pharmacies, receive a quick turnaround and receive a quick answer about not having COVID and being able to see their family members.

But we’re also looking at the new strains of testing that are coming forward, some of which are point-of-care testing. We’re going to give them in priority to both residents of long-term-care homes and staff members, as well as essential caregivers, because you’re absolutely right: These essential caregivers are truly essential to be there with the ones they love during COVID-19.

Law enforcement

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: My question is for the Attorney General. Constituents in my riding need to know that their government supports local efforts to prevent and fight crime in their community. They appreciate the work our government is doing to support the work of local police, prosecutors, victim services organizations and other community partners who are working together to stand up for law-abiding citizens, support victims of crime and dismantle the criminal network that preys on the profits of young and vulnerable people in our community.

Speaker, we know human trafficking has targeted Ontario communities, and our government has established a comprehensive and province-wide approach to fight these crimes. What is the government doing to hold criminals accountable and keep communities safe from human trafficking?

Hon. Doug Downey: I thank the great member for Mississauga–Lakeshore for the question and for the opportunity to tell Ontarians what our government is doing to support victims of crime. Just last week, I announced that our government is reinvesting cash seized from criminals to help fight heinous crimes like human trafficking across Ontario. Our government is investing a total of $2.5 million through the Civil Remedies Grant Program to support 33 local crime-fighting projects that will make communities safer. This year, we focused on investments in helping communities fight back against human trafficking.

Money collected from proceeds of crime will be reinvested into support programming and will also go towards crisis counselling and public education.

In fact, in the member’s riding, we invested nearly $100,000 in Project Haven with the Peel police service. Project Haven will use technology and surveillance equipment to locate and support victims of human trafficking and ensure those responsible for exploiting them are identified and prosecuted.

We are taking money out of the hands of criminals and putting it directly back in the hands of those who will make an important contribution to support victims of crime.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question? The member for Sarnia–Lambton.

Mr. Robert Bailey: My question is to the Attorney General, as well. Minister, while the news of funding is welcome, Ontarians need certainty that the government is providing resources to get at the roots of criminal activity like human trafficking so that there are fewer victims. Ontarians and the constituents in my riding need to know that, unlike the Liberals and the NDP, this government will support our law enforcement so they can do their job and prevent crime like human trafficking from occurring.

Can the Attorney General commit to this House that this funding is more than a band-aid solution to a problem that impacts so many and that it will, in fact, provide direct support to law enforcement in the prevention of crime?

Hon. Doug Downey: I’d like to thank the member from Sarnia. Let me make it clear to all members: Under our government, crime will not pay. Much of the $2.5-million investment in the Civil Remedies Grant Program will go directly to funding law enforcement programs that fight back against human traffickers, by supporting the efforts of local police and prosecutors to dismantle the criminal networks that prey on and profit from young and vulnerable people in all of our communities.

In fact, in the member’s riding, we’re providing over $75,000 to the Sarnia Police Service to ensure they have the training and surveillance equipment they need to locate and prosecute those involved in human and drug trafficking, as well as aid the victims of crime.

I’d also like to highlight that our government has made it harder for criminals to hold onto proceeds of their crimes through the Smarter and Stronger Justice Act passed in this House. It was passed just this summer.

By strengthening the civil forfeiture laws and catching up with the rest of Canada, we’ve taken real action to hold offenders accountable, support victims of crime and build safer communities.

College standards and accreditation

Ms. Jill Andrew: This is to the Deputy Premier. The Deputy Premier went to great lengths to try to distance herself from Charles McVety. On Thursday, she told the media she was uncomfortable with the suggestion that this government stands for racist or homophobic behaviour. The Deputy Premier is more worried about the reputation of her government than the lives of queer and trans people, and of Muslim Ontarians and others attacked on a constant basis by Mr. Charles McVety.

Why is the Deputy Premier more worried about the brand of her party than the lives of queer and trans people constantly attacked by the hateful and bigoted Charles McVety?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Colleges and Universities.

Hon. Ross Romano: Thank you, Speaker. I’m very happy to rise and address this question. We believe in the rule of law. I’ve indicated that. We believe in the charter. Perhaps my background—as a lawyer myself, I dealt with issues around the charter all the time:

section 7 of the charter, which guarantees fundamental freedoms to us all;

section 15, guaranteeing equality under the law—guaranteeing equality for all.

We want to ensure that we have fair processes for all; fair processes that ensure that any individual, any organization, when applying for any kind of a licence or a designation, has a fair and transparent process. It is not for any one individual to determine how a single individual will be weighed in these processes. What’s important is that we have a fair process. We have that.

We have taken a ministerial consent process, we’ve taken a legislative process, and we have married those two processes together. We’ve done it before. We did it with Algoma University, we did it with OCAD U, and we’ve done it with three institutions in this legislation right now.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

The supplementary question.

Ms. Jill Andrew: Again to the Deputy Premier, hoping she’ll answer this time. Charles McVety claimed in 2010 that sex education would lead to queer adults preying on children. He said, “they want to proselytize your children and mine, our grandchildren and turn them into homosexuals.” He suggested every queer person is a pedophile, and he spewed all of that vile hate while taking for himself and his son nearly $1 million from his college.

If the Deputy Premier is really worried about the brand of her party, she should be worried with the fact that Charles McVety’s college requires members to sign a form proving that they’re homophobic and transphobic.

Will the Deputy Premier vote against this legislation to give Charles McVety an even bigger platform to spew his hatred and bigotry against queer and trans people, yes or no?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’ll ask the members to please take their seats.

The Minister of Colleges and Universities to respond.

Hon. Ross Romano: Again, Mr. Speaker, I can respect the question; I can respect where it comes from, because we can all respect the importance of equality. We can all respect the importance of ensuring that we have processes that are free of hate.

But processes, when any individual is applying for licences or designation, require procedural fairness. They require that the rule of law be adhered to. They require a process that everybody can have an opportunity to have a

part in, state their beliefs, state how they feel about it. That gives us the opportunity to make good, judicious decisions.

We are here, Mr. Speaker, following a process. We are following the most transparent process there possibly is: open debate in this House. We are following an independent review process. There is no other process that exists that is more fair and accountable than the process we are following.

COVID-19 response

Mr. Stephen Blais: Mr. Speaker, about a month ago, the Premier said that his plan was working, while the medical officer of health in Ottawa was saying that there was an impending health care crisis in the nation’s capital. A week later, of course, the Premier put Toronto, Ottawa and Peel into enhanced social and economic restrictions.

Last week, the Premier told Ontarians that we would see new modelling and that modelling would show good news: that cases were going down, that the curve was going down, Mr. Speaker. Of course, his medical team the next day showed us that, in fact, cases are going up.

How can Ontarians trust what is said when every time the Premier speaks on the status of COVID-19 in Ontario, he is almost immediately disputed by his own medical experts?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Deputy Premier and Minister of Health.

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank the member very much for the question. The reality is that COVID has taken many turns in the province of Ontario. We’ve gone through wave 1; we’re clearly in wave 2. Our numbers are high. For a period of time, it looked as if the numbers were lowering somewhat, in the Ottawa area in particular, but the numbers have gone back up. That is what happens. The Premier spoke at the time, and that’s the way that it was. But the numbers have gone back up.

All we can ask of Ontarians is to please continue following those important public health measures: maintain physical distancing, wear a mask if you can’t do that, make sure you follow complete hand hygiene and stay home if you’re feeling ill. That is the number one rule for dealing with COVID. Make sure that you do everything that you can to follow that. That’s how we’ll truly get the numbers down, and that’s what we’re asking all Ontarians to do.

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

Mr. Stephen Blais: My supplemental is also for the Minister of Health.

Clear and concise information from the government is paramount during an emergency, Mr. Speaker. In some cases, the Premier tells us he’s taking his advice from medical experts; at other times, he takes his advice from elected MPPs and mayors. One day he is telling us that cases are going down; the next day his own medical experts are saying, “No, cases are going up”—one day later, Mr. Speaker.

There doesn’t seem to be any objective measure, criteria or basis for some of the decisions the Premier is making. There’s no strategy, there’s no thought, and it seems that he’s just whacking away at problems: “I’ll do something over here today, something over here tomorrow.”

When will the government come clean with the people of Ontario, become transparent in their decision-making and how they’re choosing winners and losers in this economy, and stop taking a whack-a-mole approach to COVID-19?

Hon. Christine Elliott: In fact, there is a very comprehensive, measured approach that we’re taking to dealing with wave 2 of COVID-19. It’s all part of the fall preparedness plan that has been available to all members of this House and the members of the public for weeks now. It has six pillars, and we’re following each one of those pillars. We want to make sure that people follow the health measures. We want to make sure that people can still have their procedures and surgeries done. We’re ready for an increase in COVID cases or in flu cases. We’re ready for all of that. That is the path that we’re following. We are sticking with the plan, because it is working.

We haven’t had the huge mass upticks in COVID, as we witnessed around the world, but our numbers are still higher than I think any of us would want to see. We’re taking the public health approach that we need to take to deal with that.

The Premier has been very clear from the beginning of this pandemic that he’s going to take the advice of medical experts, Dr. Williams, the public health measures table and the many other people who are providing advice, giving clinical advice, scientific—

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

The next question.

Mining industry

Mr. Vincent Ke: My question is for PA Smith. The COVID-19 pandemic has brought uncertainty to many industries across the province. In Ontario, the mining sector employs over 72,000 workers at mining sites, as part of the mining supply chain, and here in Toronto, the mining investment capital of the world. Can PA Smith tell this House how our government is supporting the critical mining and mineral development sectors during this difficult time?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The parliamentary assistant and the member for Peterborough–Kawartha.

Mr. Dave Smith: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and through you, I’d like to thank the member from Don Valley North for that question. In 2019 alone, our mining industry produced more than $10 billion—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I hate to interrupt the member. It’s inappropriate to direct a question to a parliamentary assistant. Did you intend to give it to a minister or—

Interjections.

Mr. Vincent Ke: Minister of energy and mining.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Okay. So you intended to put the question to the minister responsible for mining, and the parliamentary assistant, the member for Peterborough–Kawartha, will reply on behalf of the government.

Mr. Dave Smith: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I was saying, in 2019 alone, the mining industry produced more than $10 billion worth of minerals, almost a quarter of all that was produced in Canada. Time and time again, Ontario’s exploration and mining companies have led the way in corporate social responsibility and sustainability. This has never been more apparent than during COVID-19.

I want to thank the entire mining industry for its rapid and compassionate response to the pandemic, for sharing our commitment to protecting the health and safety of everyone. Because of their commitment, we were able to act quickly and decisively to designate the mining and minerals industry as essential during COVID-19.

Protecting the health and safety of those workers while protecting those important jobs will continue to be our priority.

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

Mr. Vincent Ke: Thank you to PA Smith for the answer. I also want to appreciate all of Ontario’s corporate champions who share our commitment to protecting the health and safety of workers during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Can PA Smith elaborate on other initiatives our government is taking to support the mining and mineral sector at this time?

Mr. Dave Smith: Ontario is continuing down a path of economic recovery by reducing administrative burdens on industry. The latest iteration of our red tape reduction bill, the Better for People, Smarter for Business Act, if passed, will improve the administrative efficiency of the Mining Act. The proposed changes will clarify and update the mining lands administration system to fill gaps and create a better user experience for proponents. These proposed changes will also ensure the minister can respond swiftly to future global or provincial crises.

While our work is far from over, I’m confident that Ontario will continue to take our rightful place as a leading jurisdiction for global mining innovation and investment, helping to fuel our economic recovery while supplying the world with critical minerals that will power the technology of tomorrow.

Flu immunization

M me France Gélinas: Ma question est pour la ministre de la Santé.

The request for flu shots from Ontarians is really great. We all understand that we have our part to do to get rid of this virus, and to get a flu shot is a step in that direction. Unfortunately, the government seems really ill-prepared. I have an email that Caroline Family Health Team sends to their patients on the wait-list for a flu shot:

“We placed an order for 1,500 shots with public health. This request has been declined....

“Supply was, and continues to be, the major impediment at this time. Unfortunately, this is completely out of our control. Public health has not given any confirmation of future flu shot supply, if any.”

This is the same thing all over, Speaker.

I agree with the minister that vaccines have always been delivered in batches, but we knew when the next batch was coming and we knew how many doses we would get. What’s happening?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Health.

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you very much for the question. In fact, we started this flu season wanting to have the largest flu campaign in Ontario’s history, and it’s happening. I’m very, very grateful to the people of Ontario who have gone out to get their flu shots. Last year, long before the pandemic ever was thought of, we ordered 5.1 million doses, which was 700,000 more than we had ordered the year before. We were then able to obtain another 350,000 doses with the assistance of the federal government: 5.45 million doses.

I can tell you that as of today, just at pharmacies, over one million doses have already been given to people,

whereas this time last year it was 150,000, and we almost had to beg people to come in to get the flu vaccine. Over one million doses already. So this is a very successful flu campaign. As I said, I’m very grateful that the people of Ontario are coming forward to get their flu shot.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): And the supplementary question.

M me France Gélinas: Caroline Family Health Team is not the only one. In my riding, City of Lakes Family Health Team wrote to the minister: “Our family health team was notified by public health that flu shots would be quite limited this year and that pharmacies would be getting more than in previous years. So we phoned” the pharmacies.

For Shoppers Drug Mart in Hanmer, their flu shot tool “says, ‘Flu shot not available,’ so we” called the pharmacist. “She advised us that they do not have any.”

Guardian pharmacy in Chelmsford: They do not have any. Same thing with the high-dose.

IDA pharmacy in Levack: They do not have any and do not know when they will get more.

Rexall is cancelling booked flu shot appointments.

What is going on, Minister? We both know that if access to flu vaccines is too difficult, people will simply stop trying and a pillar of our pandemic response will collapse with the consequences we all fear. How can things that Ontario always did well in the past go so wrong?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Actually, things are going right. As I indicated, a record number of Ontarians have come forward to have the flu shot. We also prioritized our most vulnerable populations: people in long-term-care homes and retirement homes, other places of congregate living. We want to make sure that those people can be protected, and people who are in hospitals, as well.

We’ve also, as part of our fall plan, set aside another $28.5 million in the event that we needed to purchase more flu shots. I can advise you that I have already been in contact with the federal Minister of Health, Minister Patty Hajdu, to inquire about their flu shot reserve. They do have a reserve of shots. We are trying to procure some from that. We’re also dealing with those global manufacturers directly to procure more supplies from places around the world.

Because people still want to get the flu shot, we are working to get those additional shots that people have indicated they want. But this is the biggest flu campaign Ontario has ever had in its history.

COVID-19 response

Mr. Randy Hillier: My question is to the Minister of Health. There’s a difference between theory and practice. Last week, Dr. Paul Roumeliotis, eastern Ontario medical officer of health, complained to the media, “I’m getting” too much “criticism from doctors who are experts in infectious diseases, epidemiology,” immunology “and intensive care.”

Real doctors, those who treat patients, disagree with this dangerous theoretical experiment you and your overpaid public health doctors are practising. Tens of thousands of doctors in Ontario and around the world are using science, facts and their first-hand experience to challenge the lockdown narrative from public health.

Minister, you can delegate authority, but in a democracy you cannot abdicate responsibility. When will you acknowledge, like all those doctors, that your lockdown experiments are doing far more harm than they are good?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you for the question, but we have from the very beginning indicated that any decisions that are made with respect to COVID-19 are going be to be based on science and facts, as you refer to it, and that’s what we’re using: clinical evidence. What is going to respond to this epidemic? How are we going to keep the people of Ontario safe? That’s what we’ve done every step along the way.

Now, there are many doctors out there. There are other public health doctors. Not everyone is going to be of the same opinion. However, we have a very competent Chief Medical Officer of Health, Dr. Williams, and very competent people at Public Health Ontario and around the Public Health Measures Table. Those are the people who provide us with recommendations, based on the facts, based on the science, on what’s going to keep the people of Ontario safe. That’s the advice we’ve been taking throughout this entire pandemic.

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

Mr. Randy Hillier: Again to the Minister of Health: You stated that you’re using clinical evidence, but that’s not quite true, is it? You’re using bureaucratic opinion.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Please withdraw the unparliamentary comment.

Mr. Randy Hillier: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Place your question.

Mr. Randy Hillier: It’s not just practising doctors and specialists who see that your approach is causing damage and injury. Ontario’s and Manitoba’s former public health officers, Dr. Richard Schabas and Dr. Joel Kettner, are opposed to these dangerous lockdowns as well. Real doctors, who treat patients, and specialists oppose this as well, but you don’t listen. You don’t even listen to the caucus and other—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Make your comments through the Chair.

Mr. Randy Hillier: You only listen to Dr. David Williams.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Make your comments through the Chair, or I’ll cut—

Mr. Randy Hillier: When will you start to listen and stop the suffering?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’ll remind all members to make their comments through the Chair.

Minister of Health to reply.

Hon. Christine Elliott: I would invite the member—through you, Speaker—to consider what would have happened if we didn’t do anything in Ontario. We could very well be in the same situation that Europe is in right now—hundreds and hundreds of thousands of cases, with our emergency departments, with our hospitals being overwhelmed. We had to take some action.

We know these measures will work. We’re seeing the numbers starting to go down—not to the level that any of us would like to see, but they are maintaining at a plateau. I would like to see them go lower, as would you, but we don’t have—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I apologize to the Minister of Health.

The member for Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston will come to order.

The Minister of Health can reply.

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you, Speaker.

We are relying on the evidence of front-line doctors. There’s Dr. Williams, there’s the Public Health Measures Table—but there are many, many doctors behind that who give them their response as well. It’s not just one or two doctors. We are consulting with many doctors across the province—

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

COVID-19 response

Mr. Faisal Hassan: My question is for the Premier.

Last week, Canada’s top public health doctor released a report on community COVID-19 outcomes outlining what we in York South–Weston already know and have been speaking about for months now: When it comes to getting hit with COVID-19, your postal code matters as much as your genetic code. Data shows that socially and economically disadvantaged groups—with seniors, women, disabled people, immigrants and marginalized workers who deliver essential services bearing the brunt of the pandemic.

Will the Premier finally recognize the regional inequities like those that exist in Toronto’s northwest seriously and deliver the resources and support our community so desperately needs and has been asking of this government?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Health to reply.

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank the member very much for the question.

You’re absolutely right: There are some regional areas where there are inequities, where there are a number of people who aren’t coming forward to be tested. We know that when we started taking testing by appointment at the assessment centres, many of these groups weren’t coming forward. So what we are doing is going to them. We have opened up some pop-up centres, some mobile testing units. Some of the hospitals are doing a great job in reaching out. Michael Garron Hospital is doing a great job. Unity and UHN are already reaching out through some of the community partners that are already providing services.

They’re the people many recent people to Ontario trust. They go there for their other health services. So this is a really important, trusting relationship. They can go and be tested. When we have a vaccine, that’s also going to be important, when we come forward with that—to have those trusted relationships so that people will get the vaccine, too, when it’s available.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question. The member for Humber River–Black Creek.

Mr. Tom Rakocevic: My question is to the Acting Premier.

Again, Toronto’s northwest neighbourhoods continue to be amongst the hardest hit in our province. My neighbourhood is one of them. So is the Premier’s. The reasons are socio-economic, they are structural, and we need targeted solutions.

Something that would help would be the establishment of community liaisons, to fight COVID-19 on the ground, to address language barriers by working with different communities in their own languages, making sure the information that could save lives is heard and followed by everyone. Their strategies would be tailored to each neighbourhood. I raised this at the Select Committee on Emergency Management Oversight, and the Solicitor General said this request was indeed reasonable.

Acting Premier, our communities are counting on us. Will you commit to funding the establishment of community liaisons to help the neighbourhoods that have been hardest hit?

Hon. Christine Elliott: What I can definitely commit to is that we recognize the issues that exist in some neighbourhoods. We are providing that support. We are making sure, first of all, that people can be tested, and that when the vaccine comes forward, they will be able to get the vaccine as well.

But I think that overall, what we’re trying to do—very similar to what you mentioned—is making sure that we can wrap around people with their health care services. That’s why we undertook the transformation in the first place: the creation of Ontario Health and the local Ontario health teams that contain not just the local health service providers, but the social service providers as well so that they will know if they are dealing with a patient who has some health needs, that maybe they also have a food security problem or are having a problem paying rent.

A lot of the socio-economic factors that we keep talking about wanting to bring into health, that’s what we’re trying to do with this transformation. And that is going to be of the greatest help to these communities in need.

College standards and accreditation

Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Minister of Colleges and Universities.

Speaker, Charles McVety has demonstrated over the years his Islamophobic, homophobic and transphobic views. These hateful views are really well documented. I’m not going to recite them now because we all know them. And yet, under the COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act, this government is returning favours and about to give Mr. McVety a special deal, a very special deal indeed.

Supporting Mr. McVety’s special deal is an endorsement—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member knows full well he can’t impute motive. I ask him to be very careful with his language.

Mr. John Fraser: Thank you, Speaker. I’ll withdraw.

Supporting Mr. McVety’s hateful views I see as a direct endorsement, and it says a lot about our Premier and his party’s priorities during this pandemic.

Speaker, through you to the minister: Can the minister explain why he thinks that Mr. McVety’s hateful views have any place in any Ontario school?

Hon. Ross Romano: The member opposite knows very well that our Premier and our entire government’s number one priority throughout this entire pandemic has been the health and safety of every single individual in this province. We have done an exceptional job combatting this pandemic. I am personally very proud of the work of our Premier, of our Minister of Health and all of our caucus and all of our colleagues in cabinet in the work we have done during this pandemic. Do you know what, Mr. Speaker? I believe the people of Ontario also feel the same way about that. We’ve done an exceptional job, and that is just an inappropriate reference from the member opposite.

With respect to the issue that has been canvassed here today and over the last few weeks, this has absolutely everything to do with fairness and transparency, accountability and the rule of law, making sure that when any individual, any organization makes an application for some type of a licence or designation, that there is a fair and transparent process. That’s what we have here. Thank you.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question.

Mr. John Fraser: It’s not about process, not at all. It’s not about process. The whole thing just stinks. We all know it. I can see it when I look over there. You know too. You all know, and the Deputy Premier said as much last week in a scrum. You know.

Quite frankly, I’m surprised that the government is hell-bent on moving forward with this. Given the financial revelations of last week, it kind of looks like it might be a bit of a piggy bank.

I don’t understand why you are so fixed on moving forward with this. Case counts are rising. Serious outbreaks are happening in long-term care. Testing and tracing is not where it needs to be. So I don’t understand why this is such a priority for this government. There are so many other things we should be talking about right now.

Quite frankly, I’m embarrassed—Speaker, embarrassed—that I have to ask this question in 2020: Will the Minister of Colleges and Universities do the right thing and tell the Premier to withdraw

schedule 2 of Bill 213?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Again, I would ask all members to make their comments through the Chair.

The Minister of Colleges and Universities to reply.

Hon. Ross Romano: Under the former government—that member, who was a part of the former government—a process to obtain this type of a designation would take over three years in some cases.

Last year, in our fall red tape bill last October, we introduced a simplified ministerial consent process where applications went directly to PEQAB, an independent reviewing agency. Additionally, we put in legislation for OCAD University and Algoma University, to bring it forward into legislation, along with that independently reviewed PEQAB process.

Now, in this particular legislation we have here, three institutions are coming forward in the exact same process: a transparent, open, accountable process; one that is being followed to a T; one that we followed in the past; and one that ensures that people have fairness—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. That concludes question period.

This House stands in recess until 1 p.m.

The House recessed from 1136 to 1300.

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

Crime Prevention Week / Semaine de la prévention du crime

Hon. Sylvia Jones: It is my distinct privilege to rise in this House today in recognition of Crime Prevention Week. Crime Prevention Week is an annual event held during the first week in November, in partnership with the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police. It provides us with an opportunity to highlight the successful partnerships our dedicated police have been able to create with local community organizations across the province to prevent crime and increase the safety and well-being of our communities. This year, Crime Prevention Week runs from November 1 to November 7.

Crime Prevention Week also serves as an important reminder about what we can do individually and collectively as citizens to keep ourselves and our neighbourhoods safe.

2020 has been an incredibly challenging year for everyone. The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected our lives, creating new challenges and placing an enormous strain on every member of our society unlike any seen in many generations. But even through these difficult months, and like the thousands of other essential front-line workers we are so fortunate to count on, our police have kept working relentlessly to serve and protect Ontarians.

They have played and continue to play an essential role in supporting the enforcement of the public health measures our government has put in place to curb the spread of COVID-19 while also continuing to face the unrelenting pressures of gangs, organized crime and individuals exploiting the COVID-19 situation. Online fraud and door-to-door scams, or porch pirates, as well as acts of hatred towards members of our communities are only some of the threats that our police and our communities have had to deal with during this pandemic.

We also know that the pandemic has changed the nature of criminal activity across Ontario. Our partners in policing have told us that while most people are staying home to stop the spread of COVID-19, many criminals are not. Stunt-driving and street-racing have increased on our streets, creating dangerous conditions for all of those on our streets and within our communities. That is why our government recently announced an investment of $6 million over three years to help expand CCTV surveillance systems throughout the province.

This investment will further support our police in their efforts to combat aggressive driving, which has been linked to gun-and-gang-related violence and organized crime activities.

There have also been increasingly concerning reports of an uptick in domestic violence. To combat these heinous crimes and provide support to victims and survivors, our government announced an investment of more than $6 million over three years through the Proceeds of Crime Front Line Policing Grant. This investment helps police services target local actions and makes our communities safer.

Crime prevention is a substantial part of what our police services do each and every day to protect us and our families from these and many other types of criminal activity. In