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

April 11, 2016

41st Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2016-Apr-11 (PDF)

L158 - Mon 11 Apr 2016 / Lun 11 avr 2016

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Monday 11 April 2016 Lundi 11 avril 2016

Introduction of Visitors

Oral Questions

Fundraising

Health care funding

Fundraising

Fundraising

Wind turbines

Fundraising

Youth employment supports

Fundraising

Hospital funding

Municipal elections

Physiotherapy services

Child and family services

Aboriginal economic development

Highway improvement

Aboriginal programs and services

Notices of dissatisfaction

Visitor

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Parkinson’s Awareness Month

Special-needs students

Ontario film and television industry

National Volunteer Week

Hydro rebates

Community awards

Vimy Foundation

Olive Dodds

Terry Fox exhibit

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

International Day of Pink

Petitions

Privatization of public assets

Autism treatment

Child care

Prompt payment

Autism treatment

Caregivers / Aidants naturels

Health care funding

Gasoline prices

Child care

Ontario Retirement Pension Plan

Autism treatment

Orders of the Day

Municipal Elections Modernization Act, 2016 / Loi de 2016 sur la modernisation des élections municipales

The House met at 1030.

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

Prayers.

Introduction of Visitors

Hon. Michael Coteau: Mr. Speaker, as you know, I have Grenadian heritage. Joining us here today is the consul general and the ambassador for the Grenadian diaspora, Mr. Derrick James, and Geraldine Stafford. Welcome to the Legislature.

Mr. John Fraser: I’d like to take this opportunity to welcome a group of representatives joining us today from Parkinson Canada, a not-for-profit organization dedicated to improving the lives of Canadians living with Parkinson’s. They’re here today to meet with policy-makers and to celebrate World Parkinson’s Day. Please join me in welcoming them.

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: I would like to welcome several people from my riding of Barrie to the Legislative Assembly today. First I’d like to welcome Alicia Eliot and Margaret-Anne Gillis and their grade 10 careers and civics classes from Barrie Central Collegiate Institute.

I would also like to welcome John Adamich, a student from the University of Toronto’s faculty of medicine.

Mr. Todd Smith: This is Prince Edward–Hastings day here at Queen’s Park. We do have a reception planned from 5 until 7 this afternoon, so after the festivities we welcome you to committee rooms 228 and 230 to see some of the great things that are produced and manufactured in Prince Edward–Hastings.

I do have a number of guests here from the Belleville and District Chamber of Commerce that I’d like to introduce this morning, in no particular order: Derrick Morgan; Peter Kempenaar; Rosi Ouellette; Suzanne Hunt; Tim Farrell, who’s the president of the chamber; Luc Fournier; Susan Walsh; Racheal Sudds; Mike Hewitt; and Bill Saunders, who’s the CEO of the chamber of commerce. We welcome them to question period this morning.

Mr. Harinder S. Takhar: On behalf of MPP Brad Duguid, I would like to welcome the parents of Diluk Ramachandra, the page captain today; his mother, Ruwani Ramachandra; and his father, Mr. Ramachandra, who are going to be here today to see their son in action.

Mr. Bob Delaney: On behalf of all members, I would like—although he has not yet arrived to join us, to be embarrassed—to congratulate the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs on the indeterminate anniversary of his 39th birthday, which occurred while we were away.

Mr. Grant Crack: It gives me a great pleasure to wish a happy birthday to my executive assistant, Mr. Andrew Logan, who has been doing a wonderful job for us. On behalf of Andrea as well, she would like to say happy birthday.

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti: Good morning. I just wanted to introduce today, in the galleries, the mother and father of our page Jack Beverly, from the great riding of Scarborough Southwest. I think the mother, Karen Beverly, and the father, Rob Beverly, are in the gallery today. I just wanted to welcome them to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Sophie Kiwala: I would like to welcome to Queen’s Park today Haris Vaid, from the Ontario medical students.

Mr. Todd Smith: I neglected to introduce a very, very important person from Prince Edward–Hastings who’s here today. Sandie Sidsworth, from the Canadian Mental Health Association office in our region, is here. It’s great to welcome Sandie.

Also, he can’t make it down right now. He’s broadcasting from the Legislature today. Lorne Brooker will be joining us for question period from the Lorne Brooker Show on 800 CJBQ.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): You’ve kind of got that radio announcer style down pat.

The member from Parkdale–High Park.

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: I’m delighted that Runnymede Collegiate Institute is in the House today, watching question period. Be good.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I agree.

The member for Etobicoke Centre.

Mr. Yvan Baker: We have some special guests in the members’ east gallery that I would like all members to welcome. We have Krystina Waler, who’s a leader in the Ukrainian-Canadian community and with the Canada Ukraine Foundation.

We have Alla Nyzhnykovska and her son, Mykola. Mykola is a victim of the war in eastern Ukraine. He and his brother were playing in eastern Ukraine when they discovered a hand grenade that had not gone off. It did explode, and he lost both legs and a hand. He has since been receiving treatment from Canadian doctors in Ukraine and here in Canada. That’s thanks to the Canada Ukraine Foundation and the generous financial support of the Ukrainian-Canadian community.

Remarks in Ukrainian.

Please join me in welcoming Mykola to Queen’s Park.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Welcome.

Oral Questions

Fundraising

Mr. Patrick Brown: My question is for the Premier. Mr. Speaker, the Liberals just won’t stop. The Premier claimed that she’s interested in cleaning up the fundraising mess she created. Yet last week we learned that Apotex used a by-election loophole to donate nearly $10,000 to the Liberals, and what does the Premier do? She pops by for a visit at Apotex.

I wouldn’t be alarmed by a few small donations, but this is the same company that donated nearly $200,000 to the Liberal Party. Can the Premier guarantee this House that by taking Apotex’s money, it has never affected a government policy decision?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I am very much looking forward to a constructive meeting with the leaders of the opposition this afternoon. I’m not going to presuppose what will take place at that meeting, but this whole discussion about the fundraising rules is one that we need to have. I said last June that it’s something that needed to happen. I look forward to building on changes that we have already made, and I look forward to input from the leaders of the opposition on legislation that we will bring forward in the spring.

I think there’s a broad consensus that we need to make a transition away from corporate and union donations. I look forward to the input from the leaders of the opposition on what that transition might look like.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Patrick Brown: Again to the Premier—and my question on Apotex has not been answered. It’s one thing to receive a small donation, but the Liberals received nearly $200,000 from this one company. What does this get this company? How about $650,000 a year in drug purchases from the Ministry of Health?

Does this not merit a public inquiry? I don’t understand why the government is running from a public inquiry if they have nothing to hide.

I’ll ask again. To the Premier: Has this almost $200,000 that the Liberal Party has taken affected a government policy decision related to Apotex? Please answer the question: yes or no?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: No, it has not. In fact, political donations do not buy policy decisions in my government. The innuendo that—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Excuse me. The member from Haldimand–Norfolk will withdraw.

Mr. Toby Barrett: Withdraw, Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Any innuendo or suggestion to the opposite is false. That is the fact.

I’ve always been very clear that the decisions we make in my caucus and in my cabinet are made based on evidence. They’re based on the best interests of the people of Ontario, to the best of our ability.

I would say to the member opposite that again, I’m looking forward to our discussion this afternoon. I look forward to their input.

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

Mr. Patrick Brown: Again to the Premier: If this is all smoke and it’s not fire, then the Premier would embrace a public inquiry.

There are plenty of drug companies that receive money from the Liberal government, so what else may Apotex benefit from? In 2011, the government, led by then-Health Minister Matthews, appealed a court ruling that would allow pharmacies to have their own private labels. This would have allowed pharmacies to sell their own drugs for the same price, but not the drugs mandated by the province, like Apotex’s.

At the time, the Globe and Mail called the decision to appeal the ruling “a minor mystery.” They went on to suggest that perhaps the Liberals were “looking out for ... Apotex, the largest domestic manufacturer.”

Mr. Speaker, again to the Premier: Can the Premier assure us that these donations are not affecting the government’s decisions? Will she embrace a public inquiry to show she has confidence in the manner in which they have led this government—

Interjections.

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

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Deputy government House leader.

Hon. James J. Bradley: It’s interesting to see the newfound interest that the member apparently has in fundraising, because I have here a list of his donations during the leadership campaign. They’re absolutely astounding. He broke an all-time record.

He said, first of all, that as soon as he got here, he was interested in fundraising—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. Order. Thank you.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke, come to order.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke, it’s now the second time.

I’m going to ask the member to leave his list on his desk.

Hon. James J. Bradley: I’ll read it from here, Mr. Speaker.

An all-time record in fundraising for a leadership candidate was what was achieved by the leader of the official opposition, who said, when he got here, that he was astounded by the fundraising rules. Yet he took advantage of those fundraising rules to raise well over $1.6 million for his leadership campaign—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Time is up.

New question.

Health care funding

Mr. Patrick Brown: My question is for the Premier. While this government has been busy attending secret $6,000 fundraising dinners, I’ve been touring hospitals and meeting with front-line workers across this province. Just this past weekend, I was in Windsor. I was told first-hand—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I expect some civility here, and I’ll get it one way or another.

Finish, please.

Mr. Patrick Brown: I was told first-hand the impact of this government’s mismanagement on health care in Windsor: 120 nurses are gone because of this government, and $20 million cut to Windsor Regional because of this government. The budget promised one thing, but what we’re seeing in reality is very, very different.

I can tell you: I didn’t charge a single red cent to meet with nurses in Windsor. I wanted to hear their concerns; I wanted to hear their stories.

My question for the Premier: Will the Premier meet with the nurses in Windsor without charging them $6,000 a plate?

Interjections.

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

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I think that the Leader of the Opposition is fully aware that I meet with people all over the province—consistently, Mr. Speaker—from every sector.

We’re committed, on health care, to making sure that people in Ontario have the right care, that they have it in a timely way and that they have it in the right place. To that end, funding for Windsor hospitals has increased by $124 million. That’s a 47% increase during our tenure as government. In fact, just this fiscal year, $7 million was provided to help Windsor Regional Hospital with budget pressures and to help the transition process from a registered-nurse model to a registered-practical-nurse model.

That is work that is going on in other parts of the province. The focus of those funds was to ensure that the reduction of FTEs occurred through attrition and retirement and not through layoffs. So it’s a different model. There is a transition. There is, overall in health care, a transition going on. We are working with the health care sector in every community across the province.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mr. Patrick Brown: Back to the Premier: Those are talking points to justify a $20-million cut to Windsor Regional Hospital. But I can tell you, it’s not just Windsor. Last month, St. Joseph’s health centre in London was forced to cut 49 full-time positions and 12 transitional care beds. Just last month, LifeLabs announced they were closing 15 patient service centres. The CEO of LifeLabs said they had to close the centres because the demand for testing had increased but funding had not.

Patients will struggle to get the testing they need done. The government has created this situation, forcing communities to close clinics and doctors’ offices; they have fired nurses and front-line health care workers.

So my question is: Now that the Premier has demanded that the Minister of Health not have private, high-level fundraising dinners, will he now have the time to support physicians and nurses and stop closing labs?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Once again, let me just reinforce that the way we make policy decisions on this side of the House has nothing to do with political donations, even though the innuendo on the other side of the House would suggest that. It’s simply false.

Interjections.

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

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: What the Leader of the Opposition does not talk about is the rehiring of nurses. He doesn’t talk about what’s happening in one part of the sector. We’ve increased the percentage of nurses working full-time by 13.9% in our term of government—since 2003. There are now 26,300 more nurses working in nursing in Ontario since we took office. There has been a massive influx of nurses into the system, and we are working with communities around the province to make sure that service is delivered adequately.

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

Mr. Patrick Brown: Back to the Premier: Once again, if the Premier wasn’t petrified of a public inquiry, she would welcome this sunshine, this spotlight, on this topic.

We all know that doctors have been without a contract for two years. During that time, Liberals have unilaterally cut $815 million from physicians. Further, the Minister of Health won’t even meet with physicians. So my question is: Is it because the doctors didn’t ante up for the Liberal fundraising calls? How many $6,000 dinners will it take for the Premier and the Minister of Health to actually meet with our physicians in the province of Ontario?

Interjections.

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

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: The Minister of Health is very much engaged with the OMA. We would like very much to have an opportunity to sit down at the table and work out an arrangement with them.

The Leader of the Opposition may not remember, but this is the highest-paid group of physicians in the country. They have every right to earn a good wage, but the reality is that we need that opportunity to sit down with them. We’re open to that. We want to work this out, and the Minister of Health is engaged with them on a regular basis to try to get that opportunity to have the conversation with them.

Fundraising

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is for the Premier. New Democrats fully support the elimination of corporate and union donations, but we know there are a number of issues that need to be resolved. Later today, I’m going to be proposing to the Premier—and the Leader of the Opposition as well—that this Legislature initiate a transparent, independent and non-partisan process to make recommendations on new rules for financing political parties and the electoral process, and new rules for governing third-party advertising and elections as well.

Will this Premier actually support a process that will be truly transparent, independent and non-partisan?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I very much look forward to the conversation this afternoon, as I already said to the Leader of the Opposition. I look forward to meeting with both leaders.

We are going to be bringing legislation forward in the spring. We are going to propose that we have an extended period of consultation, that the standing committee that is working on that piece of legislation travel the province and there be adequate and ample opportunity for people in this province to have input, so we get that legislation right.

But I think there’s a high degree of agreement that we need to move forward. We need to catch up with other jurisdictions that have already changed the rules. I said last June that we needed to do this. I look forward to moving ahead with this and I look forward to the conversation this afternoon with the leaders.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Andrea Horwath: When Premier Bill Davis was faced with reforming how Ontario funded elections back in 1970, he asked a tri-partisan commission to make recommendations because he said he wanted to create “an atmosphere above and beyond public doubt, suspicion and cynicism.” But this Premier appears to want to have all the power to make these decisions in her office. Why is she pushing to create a system that’s open to doubt, suspicion and cynicism?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Quite to the contrary, the reason I’ve asked the leaders of the opposition to come in to have a meeting with me is to talk with them—and I understand that they’re very interested in the subject, and they have input that they can bring from their benches and beyond. We will then have a very full discussion of that legislation in the public realm. That’s what I will be proposing this afternoon.

There are some specific issues in terms of transition into the ban on corporate and union donations, some of the timing and how we should manage those. I’m looking forward to hearing their input when we meet this afternoon.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: When new financing rules were passed in Ontario in 1975, an election finances commission was created. It had representatives nominated by political parties, non-partisan benchers from the Law Society of Upper Canada, the Chief Electoral Officer and a chair put forward by the Lieutenant Governor of the province. It created a system that was stable for almost 25 years.

Then, in 1998, an order to eliminate the non-partisan expert commission came right from the office of Premier Mike Harris. The Premier has acknowledged that she already is writing the new rules without any consultation. Why is she following the example of Mike Harris?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I am very interested in an open process. I’m very interested in moving ahead, but I believe that there is a fair degree of consensus in terms of the direction that we need to move. I also believe that to layer process on top of process and to delay the final decision does not make sense.

I think we need to move to make the decisions that have been discussed in public for some time and that other jurisdictions have already adopted. We need to take those steps to move expeditiously. I look forward to our meeting this afternoon so we can get started.

Fundraising

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier. When Mike Harris decided get rid of this non-partisan system by fiat from the Premier’s office, the current member for St.

Catharines called it an “anti-democratic strategy, hatched in the back rooms of the Premier’s office.” John Gerretsen, the former Liberal member for Kingston and the Islands, said, “What’s happening here is that the governing party that happens to be in power at any one time is going to have a distinct advantage above the normal advantages of incumbency.” Former Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty said that there are “simple rules of fairness.... You can’t change the rules of the game without the consent of all the players involved.”

So why is this Premier hatching plans in the backrooms of the Premier’s office instead of through a non-partisan process that gets Ontarians to buy in?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Well, I would say to the leader of the third party: Why is she not talking about the substance of the changes that need to happen? Why is she not putting forward ideas about how she thinks the system needs to change? Because that actually is the issue.

Instead of talking about how we can have more process that will actually delay the final decision, why is the leader of the third party not putting forward her ideas on what the transition should be between the current system and the changes, banning corporate and union donations? Why is the leader of the third party not talking about third-party advertising? Why is she not talking about the kinds of changes that she would like to see? Those are the subjects that I’m looking forward to having a conversation about this afternoon.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The Toronto Star weighed in at the time as well. They said, “The rules governing elections have been changed only when there has been a consensus among the three parties in the Legislature.” Maclean’s wrote: “For 25 years, election financing bills in Ontario have been tabled with all-party consensus, but Ontario Premier Mike Harris tossed aside that tradition.” And Richard Brennan, who at that time was working for my own Hamilton Spectator, wrote: “The government broke tradition yesterday by tabling proposed legislation affecting the Election Finances Act without first getting all-party consent.”

Why does this Premier believe that she alone should be writing the rules?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I don’t believe that. I don’t believe that for a minute. I think that there has already begun a broad public discussion. I think that there is a fair degree of consensus on where we need to go. I have heard from certainly the Leader of the Opposition where he thinks we need to go in terms of banning corporate and union donations. I’d love to hear from the leader of the third party the substance of her ideas.

I look forward to that conversation this afternoon, where perhaps we will be able to talk about the direction we should go so we can build some consensus among ourselves. We can then begin that public discussion as a result of the introduction of legislation into which there has been input from all sides of the House.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: It is definitely time to take big money out of politics. It’s time to get rid of corporate and union donations. But this Premier is actually choosing a partisan route that was begun by Mike Harris instead of our proud history of consensus. Can this Premier explain why she’s tossing out decades of tradition and deciding that decisions should be made in the backrooms of the Premier’s office?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: What I am doing is I am responding to a moment in time where there are other jurisdictions that have moved in a particular direction and have made changes that I believe we need to make. We are updating a system that has grown out of date. I said a year ago, in June, that we needed to make changes. I am looking for input from all sides of the House. There has been a public discussion in the last number of weeks that has been precipitated by the media, and it’s a welcome and important discussion.

So I look forward to hearing from the leaders of the opposition. I look forward to the public discussion that will ensue once we bring legislation to the House and it then goes to committee. Across the province, people can have input into how they think that legislation should change the rules under which we all operate.

Wind turbines

Mr. Todd Smith: My question this morning is for the Premier. On Friday, the Environmental Review Tribunal granted a stay of construction for the White Pines wind turbine project in Prince Edward county, an unwilling host community. Under the terms of the contract, this project has to be finished its construction and attached to the grid by mid-June of this year. If it isn’t, wpd has defaulted on the terms of their contract and the taxpayers can get out of it without a cost—that is, unless they get an extension, which only the Minister of Energy can give them.

My question is: Will the minister be granting an extension to wpd or will they have to be operational by June?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of the Environment and Climate Change.

Hon. Glen R. Murray: This is before the Environmental Review Tribunal right now. They have not made a ruling yet. They have issued a statement that they will be consulting with both parties to look at the consequences. We operate the ERT on the weight of convenience, which means that they look at harm about outcomes in making their decisions. As there can be an appeal to me and to this government, it’s very important that we, as the House, protect the integrity of that process and not pull it aside.

I would suggest that we allow the RT process to proceed as an independent process, and at the right and appropriate point when appeals can happen from the RT—but I don’t think we should be commenting on it in this House until that process is complete.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mr. Todd Smith: Back to the Premier: The people of Prince Edward county are watching this government’s every move. The IESO can uphold the current terms of the contract, but if wpd wants an extension, they can only get it from the Minister of Energy. Wpd have also contributed $15,000 to the Ontario Liberal Party, most of it since the environmental review process began.

Speaker, my question to the Premier is simple: Will she require the IESO to enforce the current terms of the contract, which would put wpd in default if they aren’t connected by mid-June? Or has wpd already bought themselves an extension?

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. This is the moment in which I’ve alerted all members that I will be listening carefully to this. I’m going to ask the member, if the theme is there, to be very cautious of how he impugns any motive. You will need to do some homework on that to ensure that it’s not happening.

Minister.

Hon. Glen R. Murray: I want to recognize that there are people here in the gallery from the local Prince Edward–Hastings business and tourism board. I want to recognize the efforts that they are taking to work through a democratic process.

But I also want to deal with the last point the member made—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): You’re not endearing yourself by repeating what I asked not to be repeated.

Carry on.

Hon. Glen R. Murray: I want to make one point here, Mr. Speaker. Through this process, our job—mine and the member for Hastings–Prince Edward county’s—is to protect the integrity of this process. I’m very clear and have no difficulties doing that. I find it deeply, deeply offensive that someone would suggest, in a process in which politicians are not allowed to interfere—he is actually suggesting I interfere in that process—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Prince Edward–Hastings will come to order.

You have one-sentence to wrap up, please.

Hon. Glen R. Murray: So shame on him, Mr. Speaker, because it sounds like the pot is calling the kettle black here.

Fundraising

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is to the Premier.

For 25 years, it was the practice to have consensus among Ontario’s political parties before changing the rules about election campaigns. Bill Davis established a multi-partisan election finances committee in 1975 that included the Chief Electoral Officer and non-partisan members of the legal community to ensure that there was fairness. David Peterson changed the rules, but only after extensive discussions with the other leaders and the same elections commission. But when Mike Harris changed the rules, it came straight from the Premier’s office.

Is this Premier going to be following in the footsteps of Bill Davis and David Peterson, or will she keep all of the decision-making power in the Premier’s office, just like Mike Harris?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I think the only person who would be more agitated about me being compared to Mike Harris is Mike Harris, because, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, we didn’t see eye to eye on anything, including on this.

I think it’s very important that there be a public process. I think it’s very important that we look for the consensus along the political continuum. I think that moving to where other jurisdictions, including the federal government—it’s a process that began under a Liberal government and continued under the Conservative government: that we move to that consensus position that other jurisdictions have taken.

I look forward to the conversation with the leaders of the opposition. I have said that we will be introducing legislation that has many of the components that other jurisdictions have already adopted, but I look forward to the conversation with the leaders of the opposition parties because there may be some issues in terms of transition and so on that they would like to share with me.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Catherine Fife: I think it’s important for the Premier to understand that Ontarians, and most of the people in this House, don’t think that you’re going to get this right on fundraising.

Ontario’s New Democrats want to see a process that ensures that the new rules are developed through an independent and transparent and non-partisan process and, once passed into law, have the broad support of Ontarians required to ensure their legitimacy and their respect.

Will the Premier commit to taking this process out of her backrooms and make this a non-partisan and transparent process led by consensus among Ontario’s political parties?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I think what the third party is asking for is more process that will delay the decision. That is not what we are going to do. What we are going to do is put in place a process whereby there will be broad input from people across the province. There will be broad public discussion. We will extend the hearings and make sure that there is a longer period for that consultation.

In the interim, the input that I’m looking for from the leaders of the opposition parties—yes, I’m having a meeting today; I look forward to that. But as we draft the legislation, if there is input that they would like to give us, we look forward to that, and then we will be able to get on with that broad public discussion that I think is necessary.

Youth employment supports

Mrs. Cristina Martins: My question is to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Minister, the young people in my riding of Davenport often find trouble navigating the barriers to getting involved in the process of finding a job. I often hear that they lack the direction and guidance they need to make informed decisions and find good jobs that will contribute to their growth as a professional. This is especially the case for young people who face multiple barriers to employment resulting from some combination of complex, challenging life circumstances.

Minister, I understand that you recently announced the launch of a new summer program aimed at helping young people overcome challenges and barriers to finding suitable, meaningful employment. Can you please inform the members of the House on how this new program will help our most vulnerable youth access the necessary training and employment services to find meaningful jobs?

Hon. Reza Moridi: I want to thank the member from Davenport for that very good question. Early last week, my ministry was pleased to launch a summer component of Ontario’s Youth Job Connection program. Youth Job Connection is a key component of our government’s youth jobs strategy. I am proud to say that through this strategy, our government is investing an additional $250 million over two years to help roughly 27,000 of Ontario’s students to find part-time and full-time jobs.

The Youth Job Connection summer program will provide part-time and after-school job opportunities to high school students aged 15 to 18 who face challenging life circumstances and may need support transitioning between school and work. This is one of the two new programs we announced last week.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mrs. Cristina Martins: Thank you to the minister for the answer. Minister, when youth face barriers to opportunity based on background or circumstance, it is the responsibility of this government to make sure that they have access to the training they need to help them grow their skills and join the workforce. It is reassuring to the young people in my riding that the summer component of Youth Job Connection is now in place to help them gain access to the labour market.

I understand this program is part of our government’s commitment to strengthening Ontario’s Youth Jobs Strategy, which will help support a comprehensive suite of new youth employment programs.

Many constituents in my riding of Davenport would be happy to know more about another program that launched last week to help young people with fewer barriers to access services that are available year-round. Minister, could you inform myself and the members of the House on Youth Job Link, another new program that is now in place to support young people across our province?

Hon. Reza Moridi: Again, I want to thank the member for that question. Helping youth of all abilities and backgrounds access the most effective employment and training is part of our government’s economic plan to grow the economy and create jobs in this province.

With that goal in mind, last week Ontario also launched Youth Job Link, which is helping young people aged 15 to 29 plan their careers, prepare for the labour market and connect to job opportunities. The Youth Job Link program will be available year-round to youth and students at more than 320 locations across our province. It will offer information on career options, help with resumé writing and preparing for interviews, and assistance to match their skills with employers’ needs.

With Youth Job Connection’s summer component as well as the Youth Job Link program in place, Ontario has the right combination of programs in place to help youth with a broad spectrum of backgrounds, abilities and needs get the training they need to actively participate in our economy.

Fundraising

Mr. Steve Clark: My question is to the Premier. The Sudbury by-election allowed the Liberal Party to raise $2.2 million. That’s just shy of the $2.6 million they raised in the last general election. Some may ask: How could they do that? Well, they had prolific Liberal bagman Gerry Lougheed Jr. up there in Sudbury—a man notorious for making promises in exchange for favours, a man who is under investigation and facing corruption charges.

Mr. Speaker, how many promises did Gerry Lougheed Jr. make in exchange for donations to the Liberal Party?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Deputy government House leader.

Hon. James J. Bradley: It’s interesting; I have a favourite Biblical quotation for the member, and it comes from the New Testament. It’s John 8:7. I’ll paraphrase: Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

If you and your leader were so interested in reforming fundraising in this province, you’ll be wondering about that $5,000-a-person dinner at Barberian’s and whether you’re going to cancel it; or that $10,000-a-person dinner at the Albany Club with an exclusive 10 in the province; or that your leader’s dinner donors are encouraged to pay $25,000 for a victory table—$10,000 more than the normal table—for an opportunity to host a caucus member.

Your party is living, sir, I say through the leader, in a glass house. I advise you not to throw stones.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Interjections.

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

Start the clock.

Supplementary.

Mr. Steve Clark: I’m not sure, Speaker, if that was an admission of guilt, with that dodge and deflection from the government. But I’m sure that the member opposite will agree with me: We know Gerry Lougheed Jr. can fundraise. He once raised $115,000 in a single night for Justin Trudeau at a swanky $1,300-a-plate dinner in—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Easy.

Finish, please.

Mr. Steve Clark: Gerry Lougheed Jr. is facing corruption charges. He allegedly promised a job to Andrew Olivier in exchange for stepping down. How do we know, Speaker, that he didn’t make promises as part of those donations in the Liberal by-election in Sudbury?

The member opposite likes to make a number of quotes. I’ll make a quote today: “The best indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour.” That’s why we, on this side of the House, are asking for an inquiry.

Mr. Speaker, does the Premier have anything to hide, with the millions of dollars raised—

Interjections.

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

Deputy House leader.

Hon. James J. Bradley: I think if the member would go through the list of donations, he would find out that none other than the Progressive Conservative Party has received donations from Gerry Lougheed. So I ask the question: Did that have any influence on anything that is done by the Conservative Party?

Mr. Speaker, when I read about a fundraiser, such as the $10,000-a-person fundraiser at the Albany Club, I watch carefully the next day or at the next House sitting to see what questions are asked in the House, because one might draw the conclusion, when one sees who is at that dinner and then listens to the questions in the House or the stance taken by the opposition—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Leeds–Grenville, second time.

Mr. Steve Clark: I just want an answer.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Leeds–Grenville is warned—next comment.

Wrap up, please.

Hon. James J. Bradley: One always wonders, when there’s a fundraiser and the questions come in the House and the stance is taken, whether people at that fundraiser had any influence on Conservative Party policy.

Hospital funding

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: My question is to the Premier. Hospitals in London are grappling with another year of deep cuts under this Liberal government. In the past two weeks, we’ve learned that St. Joseph’s and London Health Sciences are both cutting the equivalent of 60 full-time positions. Budgets for supplies are being cut, and 12 crucial transitional care beds will be shut down this October.

People in my community want to know: Why is this Premier forcing hospitals in London to cut patient care, lay off front-line staff and shut down even more beds?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I know that the member opposite, when she is in conversation with constituents, will remind the constituents that the budget actually puts $1 billion more into health care in this province, including $345 million for hospital funding.

In terms of the number of nurses in this province, in terms of the number of doctors, there have been thousands more nurses and doctors in this province in our term of government: 26,300 more nurses in this province as a result of our policies.

We will continue to support the health care system. We will continue to work with individual health care systems and hospitals around the province, including in London, and make sure that people get the health care that they need in a timely manner.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: When I’m speaking to constituents, they’re reminding me about the health care policies that this Liberal government is causing to fail the services in health care.

Again to the Premier: Hospitals in London have revealed just how deeply this Liberal government is cutting health care. St. Joseph’s has seen effectively a $36.5-million cut to its total budget over the past four years. London Health Sciences says that the year 2016-17 marks the fifth straight year that funding will not keep up with rising costs. And we all know who pays the price for these cuts. It’s patients who wait longer for care they need; it’s families who are forced to deal with more worry and more stress; and it’s the front-line health care workers who don’t deserve a pink slip from this government.

How can this Premier once again slash funding to hospitals in London and expect patient health care not to suffer?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: We recognized in this budget that there was a need to increase funding to hospitals. That’s why there’s a $345-million increase to hospitals in the province.

I had talked with CEOs of hospitals. The Minister of Health and Long-Term Care had talked with hospital CEOs. We understood that there needed to be an increase. That’s why there’s $1 billion more in health care overall and $345 million for hospitals.

St. Joseph’s Healthcare—that’s the Hamilton St. Joseph’s Healthcare—system received $395 million in 2015-16 in base funding, and that’s a 48% increase since 2003. So over that period of time, a 48% increase, and that’s just one hospital across the province. There have been increases, and $345 million in this year’s budget.

Municipal elections

Mr. Peter Z. Milczyn: My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. After each municipal election cycle, it’s regular practice for the ministry to conduct a review of the rules governing municipal elections. Last week in the House, the minister introduced proposed changes via Bill 181, the Municipal Elections Modernization Act.

We’re all aware that our local communities are critical hubs of democratic activity and an important entry point into Ontario’s governance system. That’s why our municipalities and local leaders need to be supported by strong, clear and modern rules.

Mr. Speaker, these are important goals. Through you, can the minister explain how these goals are going to be reflected in this bill?

Hon. Ted McMeekin: I want to thank the honourable member for his question. I’ll certainly do the best I can to answer it. He’s correct: After each election we do a consultation. This time around, we had 3,400 submissions from councils, citizens and staff in municipalities. In turn, based on that, we looked closely at changes to campaign finance rules; regulating third-party advertising; challenges and barriers to making elections accessible; increasing, of course, transparency and accountability and allowing more local choice; the length of the campaign period; and whether municipal election rules are effectively enforced.

Mr. Speaker, if this bill should be fortunate enough to be passed, there will be improvements in all those areas, and I look forward to the bill moving through the House.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Peter Z. Milczyn: As a former municipal councillor, I very much appreciate the changes that have been proposed to make our elections more effective and more transparent.

But in addition to those goals, the minister has put in place a new objective, and that is to give our municipalities the option to have ranked ballots in the 2018 municipal election. This is a new frontier in Ontario, and this goal has garnered a lot of attention throughout the province. Our municipal partners have been asking us whether we could move forward with these for 2018 for their communities.

Can the minister share what he and his team have been hearing and working on with respect to ranked ballots?

Hon. Ted McMeekin: Mr. Speaker, I can do that. The majority of feedback we received during our consultation, in fact, had to do with ranked ballots, which is why we proposed to make that an option for our municipal partners. The sense was, in the letters that we received, with voter turnout going down and seemingly less interest in municipal elections, that we needed a way to help engage more voters in the process and, also, one that would enhance the process itself by having it be more substantive in terms of debate and what have you.

We think we’ve done that in a number of ways, ranked ballots being one. Of course, it will be optional, and our hope is that it would get us away from some of the negative campaigning that so often happens in political arenas.

We look forward to continuing to work with communities. They deserve the best possible municipal leadership, and we think the changes in Bill 181 will help ensure that.

Physiotherapy services

Mr. Lorne Coe: My question is for the Premier. A year ago, the Minister of Health was asked by Christine Elliott to expand full stroke recovery services for those individuals between the ages of 20 through 64. She referenced the circumstances of a local Durham resident, Jim McEwen, who has championed changes to the legislation. Unless covered by private insurance, post-stroke survivors cannot receive the essential rehabilitation services that are needed for recovery. The minister responded at that time, “My ministry for some time has been working on the precise issue that she has raised.” Mr.

Speaker, one year—one year—after that statement was made in this House, nothing further has been forthcoming to help post-stroke survivors.

When will the Premier and her government start to satisfy not only the expectation of Ontario residents, but their actual commitments?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

Hon. Dipika Damerla: I thank the member opposite for the question and his ongoing advocacy. I just want to say, as we all know, that Minister Hoskins is absolutely committed to putting patients first and making sure Ontarians get the health care they deserve.

That’s why, Mr. Speaker, in this budget we’ve increased base funding for Ontario’s hospitals by $345 million, including a 1% increase to base funding. This is an investment that will keep not only hospitals open across our system, but also ensure that Ontarians get the care they deserve.

We are making investments across the health care sector. Let me just give you an example: On Friday, I was up in Cochrane only to announce the redevelopment of 69 new beds. These are the examples of the investments we continue to make in health care.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Lorne Coe: Again to the Premier: Will the Premier now admit that she has been unable to implement this essential reform because of the inability of her government to adequately manage the health care system?

Is this not simply further evidence of the systemic problems inherent with a government mired in its own scandal, waste and mismanagement, or do post-stroke survivors have to attend $6,000 Liberal dinners to get their voices heard?

Hon. Dipika Damerla: I just want to talk a little bit about some of the rehab services that we have been investing in. For example, with our changes, we have doubled the number of publicly funded physiotherapy clinics in Ontario. In total, 200,000 additional seniors will have improved access to high-quality physiotherapy. By the end of 2014, CCACs provided in-home services to an additional 35,000 clients. Mr. Speaker, we have set no limits on physiotherapy sessions, to ensure that Ontarians get the rehab services that they need.

I can assure this House that when the minister is back he will be able to speak at length about some of the investments we continue to make. I can assure this House that our minister and our Premier are committed to ensuring Ontarians get the services they need and deserve at the right time.

Child and family services

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is for the Premier.

Supervised access sites are a way for families going through often adversarial family matters where children are involved to have a neutral and, as the name suggests, supervised visit between a non-custodial parent and their children.

In Hamilton, supervised access has been provided professionally and compassionately for years by the downtown YWCA. But the Y has not received an increase in base funding for eight straight years and has now had to cut back on the hours, the days—the access—that struggling families desperately need. It is so bad that the Y has now been forced to remove five families from the wait-list that already stretches into years.

Does the Premier think it’s okay that her government is preventing children from seeing their parents?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Children and Youth Services.

Hon. Tracy MacCharles: I want to thank the member of the third party for her question.

Of course, it’s always the intent, on the government side, to keep families intact wherever possible, to keep families with their children where possible, where they can be safe and secure and healthy. If that’s not the case, we want to make sure that all of our partners in the sector who are mandated to look after children achieve that objective, whether it’s a children’s aid society or a partner agency.

I’d be very happy to talk to the leader of the third party about the specifics of this case, recognizing that I can’t comment on individual children or their family situation. But our goal remains the same: We are resolute in ensuring that children receive their supports and the services they need to be protected and to reach their full potential.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: With all due respect to the minister, that’s exactly the opposite of what’s happening here in Hamilton. Supervised access isn’t even a choice for struggling families; it is a court-ordered process.

Supervised access centres place the focus on children. As one Hamilton mother described it to me, the supervised access site at the Y helps “keep families together in a healthy way,” which “leads to well-adjusted children turning into well-adjusted adults.”

What does the Premier and her minister say to this mother and to all families who are desperate for supervised access for the sake of their families but who can’t get it because the government refuses to adequately fund it?

Hon. Tracy MacCharles: I am open to the advice of the third party. Obviously, we do respect and uphold court orders when it comes to the care and protection of children in our province. I’ll be pleased to speak to her, as well as my colleague ministries who provide funding for local community groups.

At the end of the day, it is about what’s best for our children; it’s about what’s best to help them reach their full potential.

Of course, we want to recognize and respect the court orders. Each situation often has its own circumstances.

As I said, I’d be happy to hear from the leader of the third party or my critic about the case in general, and then we can respond, perhaps, more specifically to her.

Aboriginal economic development

Ms. Sophie Kiwala: My question is for the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.

The minister has recently announced a number of investments targeted towards driving economic development and creating jobs in indigenous communities.

Just last month, I had the opportunity to announce funding for two programs in my riding of Kingston and the Islands that provide support for aboriginal students: St. Lawrence College’s project Kickstart College; and the Self-Identification Project at Queen’s University, developed and run by Four Directions Aboriginal Student Centre.

These investments reflect the government’s commitment to work with indigenous partners and indigenous youth to create a better future for everyone in the province.

Can the minister please elaborate on the steps our government is taking to create economic opportunities for indigenous communities in Ontario?

Hon. David Zimmer: The Ontario government wants to ensure that indigenous peoples have the opportunity to succeed and to fully participate in the economy. Our government is moving forward on many fronts by creating initiatives that are supporting business growth and providing economic development opportunities, jobs and skill sets for aboriginal peoples.

That’s why we’re doing the following four things: $322,000 for the Timmins Native Friendship Centre through the aboriginal community grants program; $175,000 to support a new welcome centre in Akwesasne; $200,000 for Miziwe Biik to develop employment and training opportunities for indigenous peoples here in Toronto; and $481,000 for a Kagita Mikam aboriginal employment and training centre to attract, hire, train and retain indigenous apprenticeships in skilled trades.

This is good for aboriginal economic development. It’s good for Ontario’s economic development.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Sophie Kiwala: It’s clear that our government is committed to working with indigenous partners to create good jobs and economic opportunities in indigenous communities, because we all recognize that creating economic opportunities for indigenous peoples strengthens Ontario’s economy. When indigenous people prosper, all of Ontario prospers.

I understand that these recent announcements are part of larger initiatives to promote economic development opportunities for indigenous peoples. Through initiatives such as the Aboriginal Economic Development Fund and the Aboriginal Loan Guarantee Program, our government is creating stronger, more effective partnerships with indigenous communities.

Mr. Speaker, could the minister please tell us more about how the government is working to ensure that indigenous people have the opportunity to succeed and fully participate in the economy through the AEDF?

Hon. David Zimmer: Our government introduced the Aboriginal Economic Development Fund in the 2014 budget. It was to help aboriginal businesses, communities and organizations create, diversify and collaborate in their economic development. As a result, to date Ontario has funded 44 projects with indigenous partners through this fund.

Partnerships like these reflect the government’s commitment to work with indigenous partners to create a better future for everyone in the province. That is why our government launched the Aboriginal Economic Development Fund: to create these initiatives that support economic growth, and provide opportunities for jobs and skills for aboriginal people.

Supporting economic development for indigenous communities through this fund is just one of the many, many steps on Ontario’s journey of healing and reconciliation with indigenous peoples.

Highway improvement

Mr. John Yakabuski: My question is to the Minister of Transportation. Last month, the minister met with me and a delegation from Renfrew county to go over the frequently-talked-about continued twinning of Highway 17. While the project will reach Scheel Drive this year, the next phase has yet to make it into the ministry’s five-year plan.

The minister knows that this project is vital to the economy of Renfrew county as a transportation corridor. It connects Canadian Nuclear Laboratories and Garrison Petawawa to the nation’s capital, and is a major artery for commercial truck traffic.

Given how crucially important this roadway is, will the minister commit to putting the further twinning of Highway 17 into his ministry’s five-year plan?

Hon. Steven Del Duca: I want to thank the member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke, not only for his question but also for his advocacy on this issue. He was good enough to join the municipal representatives from his community who I had the pleasure of meeting with. We had a fantastic conversation.

Both the ministry and myself recognize the importance of this particular highway project and the impact that it will have as we continue to four-lane through the county of Renfrew. I can assure that member that I will continue to work closely with his community. The ministry understands the importance of this particular artery in eastern Ontario, and we’ll continue to have conversations as we go forward.

The member should also know—I believe he does, Speaker—that the environmental assessment for the next phase is being completed, and the ministry will continue to work with his community on this project.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. John Yakabuski: I say to the minister that we appreciate the work that has been done up until now, but we cannot stop.

The minister’s predecessors asked the county government to make the case for the continued twinning of Highway 17, and I believe they have made that case over and over again in spades. It’s now up to the minister.

He would also know that the federal government has made favourable overtures regarding infrastructure investments. Given that this is a Trans-Canada highway, I would ask that the minister take advantage of the federal infrastructure commitment and place the highest priority on this project. Four-laning will be a boon to Renfrew county both economically and socially, as well as making the route safer for everyone who travels it.

Speaker, I’ll ask the minister again if he will commit to putting the next phase of twinning Highway 17 into his ministry’s five-year capital infrastructure plan.

Hon. Steven Del Duca: I thank the member opposite for his follow-up question. I also want to thank him for acknowledging that we now have a federal government in Ottawa that understands the importance of investing in crucial infrastructure.

I believe that member also knows that in this year, 2015-16, the Ontario Liberal government has committed more than $2.4 billion to expand and rehabilitate roads, bridges and highways right across the province of Ontario. Budget 2016 included a number of these crucial projects.

Not that many days ago, I joined with a number of my colleagues. We were down in the community of Puslinch, where we announced funding support in that community, in Wellington, for the Morriston bypass, which I know is of crucial economic importance to that part of our province.

Speaker, as I said in my initial answer, I’ll continue to work with that member and with his community to make sure that, going forward, perhaps in partnership with the new Liberal government in Ottawa, we’ll get this done.

Aboriginal programs and services

Mr. Gilles Bisson: My question is to the Premier. Premier, you would have heard, like all Ontarians, the tragedy that is taking place in Attawapiskat as we speak.

Unfortunately, this is not the first time that we’ve seen a rash of suicides on the James Bay. In fact, about five years ago, we had a similar situation going on. Myself, Payukotayno, and others from the James Bay, along with then-Grand Chief Stan Louttit, went to your government and asked for money for Payukotayno in order to put in place the staff necessary to deal with this on an ongoing, long-term basis—and your government did it; I’ll give you some credit. But two years later, you took that money away.

We got over $1 million in order to hire staff to be able to do the work that helps prevent these types of things from happening. My question to you is, if you make a commitment to do something this time, will you take the money out once the media has gone away?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I’m very worried and very concerned about what’s happening in Attawapiskat and, quite frankly, in other remote northern communities as well.

The member opposite knows that I’ve been to Attawapiskat. I know that there are myriad concerns within the community, whether it’s housing or whether it’s counselling and support, as the member opposite has said.

We’ve assured Chief Bellegarde that our government is convinced of and committed to supporting First Nations communities in their times of need. In fact, Minister Hoskins will be travelling to Attawapiskat this week. But in the interim, as we speak, there is assistance leaving from our government’s resources to go to Attawapiskat right now.

We will do everything we can to put the supports in place. I know the member opposite knows that the concerns are multi-faceted. There’s not just one thing that has to be done. There are a number of concerns, and we’ll be working with the community.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: I agree with you, Premier: It is a multi-faceted response that’s needed to a very complex issue, and there’s not enough time in question period to go through it.

But what I want to know, and I think what the people of James Bay and Attawapiskat want to know, is that there is a long-term commitment to what is a huge problem in our communities. When you have 11 people in one day, from age 11 to age 71, who try to take their life because of the situation in their community, I think people need to know that the response on the part of our provincial and federal governments—because we’re the ones who do social services in those communities—whether it’s child and youth services—we’re the ones who run the hospitals that provide the services in those communities.

We need to have an assurance that whatever we do going forward from here is going to be an ongoing and long-term commitment, and we’re not going to pull it away once the cameras have moved away from the story.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Mr. Speaker, I agree with the member opposite, apart from the innuendo at the end that somehow this is about the lights and the cameras. That’s not at all what this is about. This is about long-term, sustained support that we are working to put in place across the province, working with the federal government.

The Minister of Children and Youth Services will also be going this week to make sure that the resources that we are sending and the resources that are in place are adequate. Where they need to be enhanced, we need to figure out how to do that, and we have to work in partnership with the First Nation and with the federal government.

I agree with the member opposite. I think he knows that. I think he knows that my concern—and it’s not solely in response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, although that is a new part of the context within which we’re working. We will continue to work with the umbrella organizations, with NAN and with the AFN but, most specifically, with the communities, each of which has a particular set of concerns. My ministers will be going this week to make sure that we are sending the right resources that can be there to support in the short and the long term.

Notices of dissatisfaction

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Pursuant to standing order 38(a), the member from Prince Edward–Hastings has given notice of his dissatisfaction with the answer to his question given by the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change concerning the granting of an extension of wpd’s wind turbine project in Prince Edward county. This matter will be debated tomorrow at 6 p.m.

Also pursuant to standing order 38(a), the member from Whitby–Oshawa has given notice of his dissatisfaction with the answer to his question given by the Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care concerning post-stroke services. This matter will be debated tomorrow at 6 p.m.

Visitor

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The government House leader on a point of order.

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Thank you, Speaker. I just wanted to extend my warm welcome to Sprague Plato, who is the board chair of the Parkinson Society Ottawa. Sprague was in the House earlier, and I want to thank him for the amazing community service he delivers in our great city of Ottawa.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): There are no deferred votes. This House stands recessed until 1 p.m. this afternoon.

The House recessed from 1142 to 1300.

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Arthur Potts: I have the great pleasure to introduce Ms. Olive Dodds and her daughter, Catherine Parley, and her friends and fellow volunteers at Michael Garron Hospital—Margaret Langmuir, Marianne Boivie and Eric Sigurdson—as well as MGH representatives Denny Petkovski and Justin Van Dette. They’re here in the members’ gallery today. I welcome you to Queen’s Park.

Speaker, I also have the pleasure of introducing Kelly Doctor and Nadine Blum, who are here today to witness the reading of a petition they started on daycare wait-list fees. Welcome, Kelly and Nadine.

Members’ Statements

Parkinson’s Awareness Month

Mr. Jeff Yurek: I’m rising today to highlight Parkinson’s Awareness Month and the wonderful work that the Parkinson Society Canada accomplishes day in and day out.

Parkinson’s is a neurodegenerative disease occurring when the transmission of dopamine decreases. Signs and symptoms relating to the development of Parkinson’s disease can include tremor, slowness and stiffness, impaired balance, rigidity of the muscles, fatigue, soft speech, problems with handwriting, stooped posture, constipation and sleep disturbances. Diagnosing Parkinson’s can take time, and our family doctors are most likely to catch the signs and symptoms first.

As there is currently no cure for this disease, one can live with Parkinson’s for years before realizing that something is wrong. Those suffering from Parkinson’s disease can benefit from certain medications and therapies designed to target areas of discomfort.

There are 55,000 Canadians aged 18 or older living with Parkinson’s disease. The average age when signs and symptoms are first experienced occurs roughly around 64 years old. There’s an increasing amount of Canadians—43%—who feel embarrassed by their condition. Close to two thirds of those suffering from Parkinson’s also report out-of-pocket expenses associated with the disease. Spouses tend to be the primary caregiver in most cases, placing strain on family relationships.

Until a cure is found, I wish continued strength to those fighting this terrible disease and commend the Parkinson Society Canada, the health care professionals and family members who look after their loved ones with Parkinson’s disease. I hope someday we can be here at the Legislature and report that a cure has been found for this terrible disease.

Special-needs students

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: This month, the government announced that it will require all students from grades 1 to 8 to have at least 60 minutes of math instruction a day, starting in September. While progress in math is measured by standardized testing, progress in subjects like arts, science, geography and citizenship is much harder to quantify.

Students with exceptional learning and language needs, like those who attend specialized provincial and demonstration schools, must also be recognized and supported. These schools provide students with the opportunity to excel in subjects like reading, writing and arithmetic.

For months, families with children who attend these schools have pleaded with the government to recognize their importance and commit to keeping these schools open. Rather than commit to the long-term viability of these schools, the government capped enrolment, announced consultations and has now closed enrolment for next year.

Consultations have ended, and parents want to know: Will this government listen to families and education workers by keeping these schools open or will they turn their backs on our most vulnerable?

Ontario film and television industry

Mr. Peter Z. Milczyn: We have some very important guests from Comcast and NBC with us today: Rick Smotkin, Brian O’Leary and Randi Richmond. Because we have these special guests here, I thought I’d take a moment to discuss film and television production in Ontario.

Our government has combined superb talent and stateof-the-art infrastructure with competitive financial incentives that support Ontario’s continued success as the number one film and television production centre in Canada and the third largest in North America. I’m pleased to say that the latest statistics for film and television production in Ontario reinforced this.

Earlier this year, the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport announced that 2015 was the best year ever for film and television production in Ontario. Last year, film and television production supported by the province contributed $1.5 billion to the economy, the fifth consecutive year they’ve hit the billion-dollar mark. These statistics also show an increase of almost 4,500 jobs over the previous year, for a total of 32,500 full-time and spin-off jobs.

In Etobicoke–Lakeshore, the global HQ of William F. White and Cinespace studios also support these jobs and this success. This steady growth has led to a dynamic television and movie sector. Mr. Speaker, that’s money going directly into Ontario’s economy, money that is helping to build Ontario up.

National Volunteer Week

Mr. Randy Pettapiece: This week marks National Volunteer Week, a week to celebrate and thank all of our local volunteers. In Perth–Wellington, we are lucky to have many outstanding volunteers whose contributions are invaluable.

Last week, I was pleased to recognize some of them at the United Way’s Perth-Huron Spirit of Community Celebration. Thanks to generous community donations and the hard work of our volunteers, the United Way raised a record $1.2 million.

Earlier in March, I had the privilege of attending the volunteer service awards in Stratford along with my colleagues the MPPs from Huron–Bruce and Oxford. I presented scrolls to 147 hard-working volunteers.

Many organizations across Perth–Wellington are hosting special events this week to thank their volunteers. The Huron Perth Healthcare Alliance has over 400 volunteers who provide more than 42,000 hours of service. They are hosting a volunteer lunch to thank them. The Volunteer Centre of Guelph/Wellington is planting a volunteer garden and hosting the Time to Give Breakfast, honouring employer-supported volunteerism. Many of our local municipalities are also presenting special awards of long-serving volunteers.

To all of our local volunteers in Perth–Wellington, I say thank you. Your time, service and dedication are very much appreciated. This week, I encourage everyone to celebrate our volunteers and consider volunteering for a local organization.

Hydro rebates

M me France Gélinas: My constituent Mr. Pete Leduc came into our office when he got a notice from Hydro One encouraging him to apply for the Ontario Electricity Support Program, which he did. Like most people in Nickel Belt, he had no idea that Hydro One was offering low-income customers a rebate. He found out when his March Hydro One bill came in the mail with a flyer about the program in the bill.

It takes six to eight weeks for the people to find out if they qualify; that means this program, which started on January 1, may not be helping my constituents until May or June. I think this isn’t fair.

Mr. Leduc—and I agree—wants his rebate to be retroactive to January 1, and I think that’s right. Not enough was done to make people aware of this program. We did a search of news stories related to this rebate; there weren’t enough to fill a page and most were related to how complicated the program is and how little uptake there has been from consumers so far.

Low-income families in Nickel Belt are not scanning the Hydro One website to find discounts. They’re just too busy trying to make ends meet. I have two questions for the government: Why was a flyer for a program that started in January in our March Hydro One bill and not before? And second, will the government do the right thing and backdate this rebate to January 1 for everyone that applies before the end of April?

Community awards

Ms. Indira Naidoo-Harris: I’m delighted to rise today to speak about the many wonderful community leaders we have in Halton.

The Milton, Oakville and Burlington chambers of commerce recently held their community awards celebrations. I was fortunate to be able to attend the Milton event. It highlighted some of the passionate and hard-working people in our community. The evening showcased Milton’s appreciation for our hard-working residents and business people who contribute so much to our community and economy.

This year, the chamber awarded several deserving people awards, recognizing their tireless efforts to build our community up. Some of these remarkable individuals are Brian Penman, Rebecca Hunter, and Denise and Peter Mule.

In addition, several important businesses were also recognized, including Pasqualino, Dean DeFazio with snapd, iDrinkCoffee.com, C.F. Crozier and Associates and J. Currie Plumbing. In Burlington and Oakville, other members of the community and businesses included Geotab, Surround Integrated, El Spero Family Restaurant, the Oakville Hospital Foundation and many others.

I want to congratulate all of the award recipients and nominees. You are some of our region’s finest, and we are grateful for your tireless efforts, dedication and vision. Thank you to all of our chambers for organizing these wonderful events.

Vimy Foundation

Mr. Michael Harris: On April 2, I was pleased to attend an event in support of the Vimy Foundation, whose mission is to preserve Canada’s First World War legacy.

Today, I stand with Canadians across our nation to commemorate the 99th anniversary of the victory at Vimy Ridge, where, for the first time in history, the four divisions of the Canadian Corps fought together, attacking the French ridge and succeeding in capturing it from the German army.

In order to ensure Canada’s heroic history is forever memorialized, the Vimy Foundation develops education programs to help youth and Canadians of all ages learn more about the sacrifices made by an entire generation, when Canada truly came of age—the moment where, many historians agree, our nation was born.

This time next year, Canada will be celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge, and the Vimy Foundation is working tirelessly to commemorate that battle. The Vimy Foundation believes that the key to a successful future lies in knowing one’s past. To that end, next year, we look forward to their unveiling of a state-of-the-art visitor education centre and centennial park located near the Canadian National Vimy Memorial in France.

It’s always a privilege to recognize our troops, veterans and their families, and it’s my honour to stand here today to recognize those who support them. Thank you to the Vimy Foundation, and I wish you nothing but success in your upcoming centennial celebration.

Olive Dodds

Mr. Arthur Potts: National Volunteer Week is upon us, and today I would like to take the opportunity to recognize a very special volunteer from my riding of Beaches–East York. Her name is Olive Dodds, and, as I mentioned in the introduction, she’s in the east gallery with some family and friends. The theme of this year’s Volunteer Week is “Volunteers are the roots of strong communities.” I truly believe that Mrs. Dodds embodies this theme in her regular work at Michael Garron Hospital.

Olive began volunteering at Michael Garron in 1985, while it was still named Toronto East General Hospital. She started when she was 75 years old, and is believed to be Ontario’s longest-serving hospital volunteer. Now, do the math, Speaker: Olive is well past her 100th year.

Over the past 30 years, Olive has contributed to growth in our community through her commitment and dedication to volunteering her time and expertise at MGH. Olive and her group of volunteers have knitted a countless numbers of dolls that are sold to raise funds for the hospital and have helped bring smiles to many of our hospital’s smallest patients.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Olive Dodds and the thousands of other volunteers across our province for their commitment and their service to their communities. I would ask my fellow members to join me in congratulating this exceptional volunteer and all those like her who selflessly commit themselves to serving our communities. She’s a shining example for all of us to follow.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I did the math, and, yes, you are right: She is very young.

Terry Fox exhibit

Mrs. Kathryn McGarry: This past Saturday, in my community of Waterloo region, the museum had a special opening of an extraordinary exhibit. “Terry Fox: Running to the Heart of Canada” opened in Kitchener. Several Cambridge residents were on hand to hear the opening, including my twelve-year-old son, Declan McGarry.

David Marskell from the museum introduced a special guest, Darrell Fox, Terry’s brother, who spoke passionately and movingly about his experience of joining his brother partway through the run.

Darrell often talks about running as well, and he kind of jokes some days; he thought he ran more than Terry because he zigzagged through the crowd trying to obtain donations, but he hadn’t done it day in and day out, as Terry had done. He was still in awe of his brother.

After talking about this, he actually answered questions, signed books and talked about his experiences taking photographs. He said that the Marathon of Hope changed his family’s life forever.

Then we toured the exhibit. Words cannot express what it was like as we saw the jug of the Atlantic Ocean water that Terry had scooped up in Newfoundland and that he had intended to dump into the Pacific Ocean at the end. As we know, his journey ended tragically near Thunder Bay, Ontario. His prosthetic leg, his shoes, his shorts, his t-shirts and his sock full of holes were on display. His journals, his meticulous documentation of every mile he ran and how many he had left, were there on display.

Speaker, he ran a full marathon—42 kilometres—a day, every day. His mental toughness, his dedication to raise awareness and research dollars for the Canadian Cancer Society is an overwhelming and inspirational story. Why did he do it? Precisely to make sure that children who were suffering from cancer had the best care and research that they could possibly get.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I thank all members for their statements.

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

International Day of Pink

Hon. Liz Sandals: I am very pleased to stand in the House today to recognize International Day of Pink—which actually isn’t today; it’s on Wednesday this week, on April 13.

As we all know, a safe, inclusive and accepting school environment is essential for students to succeed in the classroom and beyond. That is why this Wednesday, thousands of students and educators across Ontario, Canada and around the world will be recognizing International Day of Pink.

As most members of the Legislature are likely aware, International Day of Pink was started in 2007 by two high school students from Nova Scotia, David Shepherd and Travis Price. When they discovered that a classmate had been bullied for wearing a pink shirt to school, they decided to take action. They bought pink shirts and handed them out to some of their fellow students to wear to school. Before the end of the week, hundreds of students arrived at school wearing pink shirts, in an overwhelming sign of solidarity and support for their bullied classmate.

I’m providing my support to International Day of Pink and showing my solidarity today by making the statement that bullying is unacceptable, period. Bullying can be physical, verbal, social or electronic. It can be based on sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression, race, age, appearance, disability or any other factor that may set someone apart from others. Any form of bullying, for any reason, is unacceptable in our schools. International Day of Pink acts as a worldwide annual event for people to speak out against bullying.

Our government fully embraces International Day of Pink and its message of bullying prevention and awareness. Our government is taking action on bullying in a number of ways. We developed anti-bullying legislation, specifically the Accepting Schools Act. This act, which passed in 2012, was the first legislation of its kind in Canada. This important piece of legislation is helping to make every school in Ontario a safe, inclusive and accepting place to learn.

Last year, our government took further steps towards ending bullying and promoting well-being, by releasing the revised and up-to-date health and physical education curriculum. This research-based curriculum helps our young people build skills for healthy relationships that will help prevent bullying, including cyberbullying, and harassment. In cases where this is happening, our curriculum will better prepare students to actively and safely respond, or get help in cases where it is needed.

Our health and phys-ed curriculum helps children and youth develop the skills they need for online safety by learning about safe and respectful use of technology and also to understand the social, emotional and legal implications of online behaviours such as sexting.

Many schools and school communities are already demonstrating leadership in fostering and maintaining positive school climates. For the last five years, a number of school communities in Ontario have been recognized for their efforts through the Premier’s Awards for Accepting Schools. These awards celebrate the innovative work that the safe and accepting school teams do in promoting a positive school environment and supporting student achievement and well-being.

Speaker, we’re also working collaboratively to establish a Bullying Awareness and Prevention Week, where our school communities are given a platform to raise awareness of bullying-related issues with parents and their local communities. I should also note that our strong, ongoing partnership with Kids Help Phone gives young Ontarians access to telephone and Web-based professional counselling services 24 hours a day, every day.

Promoting well-being is also a key fundamental goal of achieving excellence—our renewed vision for education in Ontario. That vision will help to create learning environments that support the cognitive, emotional, social and physical development of our children and students. We know that bullying, harassment and discrimination have an immediate, negative impact on the well-being of our children and youth and their ability to succeed in school.

That is why the International Day of Pink is so important. This day is a reminder that everyone has a part to play in creating a positive school climate. So I encourage every member in the House to wear pink this Wednesday in recognition of the International Day of Pink and to continue to promote the success and well-being of all Ontario students.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): It is time for responses.

Ms. Sylvia Jones: I’m pleased to rise today on behalf of my leader, Patrick Brown, and the entire PC caucus to recognize this coming Wednesday, April 13, as International Day of Pink.

Last year, 9.4 million Canadians wore pink as part of International Day of Pink, and I hope that we will surpass that number this coming Wednesday. I’m proud that schools across Dufferin–Caledon in my riding will be participating in International Day of Pink.

Most of us know the story of how Day of Pink began, nine years ago, when two students in a Nova Scotia school stood up for a classmate who was being bullied simply because he chose to wear pink. These students organized a campaign to have their classmates wear pink in solidarity with their fellow schoolmate and against bullying. Now, every year, on the second Wednesday of April, individuals come together and wear pink to stand up against homophobia, transphobia and all other forms of bullying.

We should be proud of what we have accomplished here in this Legislature, but there’s still work to be done. I would like to specifically call out my former colleague Elizabeth Witmer for raising this issue many years ago as an MPP, and my colleague from Nepean–Carleton as well. Both have brought forward private members’ bills to try to end bullying in our schools.

We must continue working on building a culture, not just in our schools but in the entire province, that celebrates diversity in all its forms and that includes Ontarians from every corner of the province, in every community and on every block.

We need to continue standing up for those who are attacked for who they are. That is what International Day of Pink is about: a time for all of us to put differences aside and come together to recognize that it’s okay to be different, it’s okay to be who you are, and that bullying in any form is unacceptable.

On Wednesday, April 13, I hope you will wear pink on International Day of Pink to show that it’s never okay.

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: It’s my pleasure to rise on behalf of the New Democratic caucus and speak to the International Day of Pink this year. By standing up to bullying and discrimination today, we are working towards a more accepting Ontario tomorrow.

The support and popularity of the Day of Pink, which takes place on April 13 this year, speaks volumes to its success and the hard work of organizers, activists and communities across the province. I want to thank everyone who has organized an event this week for all of their efforts. Organizations like Jer’s Vision, Egale, Queer Ontario and the Trans Lobby Group are leaders in the fight against homophobia, sexism, racism, transphobia and discrimination in all of its forms.

The fight against bullying and discrimination is no easy task and there is not just one target. Indeed, it is an effort to change what is accepted in society, rather than expecting someone to fit into socially constructed norms. We must challenge anything and everything that asks us to change who we are to appease others’ expectations of us. This cannot be more true than when we are talking about Ontarians who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans or queer.

To this day, discriminatory practices remain in this province. While heterosexual couples don’t have to ask to be recognized as parents, queer parents are expected to adopt their own children. Yes, Speaker, right now, if a lesbian couple uses a sperm donor whose identity they know, the partner of the woman giving birth isn’t automatically considered a parent. Instead, after the child is born, a court date is obtained, independent legal advice is sought for the donor, and the non-birth mother chooses whether to adopt her own child or ask the court to declare that she is a parent.

The entire process for second-parent adoptions and declarations of parentage typically takes several months after a child’s birth. In that time, families are not properly recognized under the law, which can impact health care decisions, the ability to travel internationally with the child, as well as the family’s sense of security. In the unthinkable and unfortunate event that the birth mother experiences complications in childbirth, there is no guarantee that the children’s other mother will be legally recognized in a parental capacity.

I’m proud to say that New Democrats are at the forefront of the fight for equality of parental recognition in this province. My colleague from Parkdale–High Park, whose work in this area is a testament to her dedication as an activist and as a legislator, has tabled Bill 137, Cy and Ruby’s Act (Parental Recognition), 2015. This legislation would eliminate the distinction between the person who gives birth and the child’s other parent.

This legislation also makes sure that lesbian co-mothers who use donor sperm would be able to include both mothers’ information on the child’s birth registration form and allows for the recognition of an additional parent, such as a known sperm donor.

Finally, the legislation removes all gendered language from birth registration forms. Trans men who give birth will no longer be forced to identify as “mother,” which is discriminatory and denies their lived reality.

While this legislation passed second reading, it has yet to be called to committee and enacted into legislation. The government’s response to parental recognition must be more than lukewarm. Each day the government stalls in calling this important legislation to committee is another day of discrimination and uncertainty for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans or queer parents. LGBTQ parents should not be forced to take this government to court for action on this issue. Equal access to parental recognition must be a priority.

Petitions

Privatization of public assets

Mr. Bill Walker: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the current government under Premier Kathleen Wynne is calling for the sale of up to 60% of Hydro One shares into private ownership; and

“Whereas the decision to sell the public utility was made without any public input and the deal will continue to be done in complete secrecy; and

“Whereas the loss of majority ownership in Hydro One will force ratepayers to accept whatever changes the new owners decide, such as higher rates; and

“Whereas electricity rates are already sky-high and hurting family budgets as well as businesses; and

“Whereas ratepayers will never again have independent investigations of consumer complaints, such as the Ontario Ombudsman’s damning report on failed billing; and

“Whereas the people of Ontario are the true owners of Hydro One and they do not believe the fire sale of Hydro One is in their best interest;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“To protect Ontario ratepayers by stopping the sale of Hydro One.”

I fully support it, will sign my name and send it with page Jack.

Autism treatment

Ms. Jennifer K. French: I have petitions from Fiona Cassels in Stittsville: “Don’t Balance the Budget on the Backs of Children with ASD.”

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the government recently announced plans to reform the way autism services are delivered in the province, which leaves children over the age of five with no access to intensive behavioural intervention (IBI); and

“Whereas in 2003, former Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty removed the previous age cap on IBI therapy, stating that Liberals support extending autism treatment beyond the age of six; and

“Whereas applied behaviour analysis (ABA) and intensive behavioural intervention (IBI) are the only recognized evidence-based practices known to treat autism spectrum disorder (ASD); and

“Whereas the combined number of children waiting for ABA and IBI therapies in Ontario is approximately 16,158; and

“Whereas wait-lists for services have become overwhelmingly long due to the chronic underfunding by this Liberal government;

“Whereas some families are being forced to remortgage houses or move to other provinces while other families have no option but to go without essential therapy; and

“Whereas the Premier and her government should not be balancing the budget on the backs of kids with ASD and their families;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the government of Ontario to immediately ensure that all children currently on the waiting list for IBI therapy are grandfathered into the new program so they do not become a lost generation.”

Mr. Speaker, I wholeheartedly support this, affix my name to it and send it with page Jerry.

Child care

Mr. Arthur Potts: I have a petition here with hundreds of names that have been collected very quickly and initiated by Nadine Blum and Kelly Doctor, who are here in the east gallery.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas many parents and caregivers are being charged non-refundable fees to place their children on wait-lists for daycare centres;

“Whereas non-refundable daycare wait-list fees can range from tens to hundreds of dollars;

“Whereas due to the scarcity of quality daycare spaces, many parents and caregivers are forced to place their children on multiple wait-lists;

“Whereas non-refundable daycare wait-list fees impose a significant financial burden on parents and caregivers for the mere opportunity to access quality child care;

“Whereas daycare wait-lists are often administered in a non-transparent manner which creates the risk that they will be administered in an unfair and/or discriminatory manner;

“Whereas parents and caregivers in Ontario already face significant barriers accessing daycare due to high costs and limited numbers of daycare spaces;

“Whereas quality child care is a public good and not a commodity and the costs of child care should not operate on a supply-and-demand basis;

“Whereas there are currently no regulations in place to prevent daycares from charging parents and caregivers exploitative fees;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“That all members of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario recognize that we have a responsibility to take action now, and support a requirement for transparent administration of daycare wait-lists and a ban on non-refundable daycare wait-list fees.”

I completely support this petition, endorse it and send it down to the table with Deanna.

Prompt payment

Mr. Robert Bailey: This petition is addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

“Whereas delayed payments are a harmful practice in Ontario’s construction industry;

“Whereas Ontario’s trade contractors incur significant costs when payments are delayed from general contractors;

“Whereas cash flow risks have forced many contractors out of business and discouraged others from investing in capital or hiring new workers;

“Whereas payment delays have led trade contractors to hiring fewer apprentices, which will lead to fewer qualified tradespeople in the future;

“Whereas prompt payment legislation offers government the opportunity to provide stimulus to the economy without spending a dime;

“We, the undersigned, call on the Ontario Legislature to support Ontario’s construction industry by adopting prompt payment legislation as a means to address the payment delay issues in Ontario.”

I agree with this petition, affix my signature to it and send it with Jerry.

Autism treatment

Ms. Catherine Fife: These petitions were given to me by Professor Janet McLaughlin in Waterloo. It’s entitled “Don’t Balance the Budget on the Backs of Children with ASD.”

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the government recently announced plans to reform the way autism services are delivered in the province, which leaves children over the age of five with no access to intensive behavioural intervention (IBI); and

“Whereas in 2003, former Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty removed the previous age cap on IBI therapy, stating that Liberals support extending autism treatment beyond the age of six; and

“Whereas applied behaviour analysis (ABA) and intensive behavioural intervention (IBI) are the only recognized evidence-based practices known to treat autism spectrum disorder (ASD); and

“Whereas the combined number of children waiting for ABA and IBI therapies in Ontario is approximately 16,158; and

“Whereas wait-lists for services have become overwhelmingly long due to the chronic underfunding by this ... government;

“Whereas some families are being forced to remortgage houses or move to other provinces while other families have no option but to go without essential therapy; and

“Whereas the Premier and her government should not be balancing the budget on the backs of kids with ASD and their families;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the government of Ontario to immediately ensure that all children currently on the waiting list for IBI therapy are grandfathered into the new program so they do not become a lost generation.”

It’s my pleasure to affix my signature and give this to page Diluk.

Caregivers / Aidants naturels

Mr. John Fraser: I have a family caregivers petition, une pétition des aidants naturels.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“À l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario :

“Whereas there are over 2.6 million caregivers to a family member, a friend or a neighbour in Ontario;

“Attendu qu’il y a plus de 2,6 millions d’aidants naturels qui soutiennent un membre de leur famille, un ami, ou un voisin en Ontario;

“Whereas these caregivers work hard to provide care to those that are most in need even though their efforts are often overlooked;

“Attendu que ces aidants naturels travaillent sans cesse afin de fournir des soins à ceux qui en ont le plus besoin, même si leurs efforts sont souvent ignorés;

“Whereas one third of informal caregivers are distressed, which is twice as many as four years ago;

“Attendu qu’un tiers des aidants naturels sont en difficulté, le double d’il y a quatre ans;

“Whereas without these caregivers, the health care system and patients would greatly suffer in Ontario;

“Attendu que sans ces aidants naturels, le système de soins de santé et les patients de l’Ontario souffriraient énormément;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to support MPP Gélinas’s bill to proclaim the first Tuesday of every April as Family Caregiver Day to increase recognition and awareness of family caregivers in Ontario;

“Donc, nous, soussignés, pétitionnons l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario d’appuyer le projet de loi de la députée Gélinas pour déclarer le premier mardi d’avril comme la Journée des aidants naturels afin de sensibiliser les Ontariens à leur importante contribution.”

I’m affixing my signature.

Health care funding

Mr. Norm Miller: I have a health care petition signed by hundreds of constituents from Parry Sound–Muskoka, and it reads:

“Petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Ontario’s growing and aging population is putting an increasing strain on our publicly funded health care system; and

“Whereas since February 2015, the Ontario government has made an almost 7% unilateral cut to physician services expenditures which cover all the care doctors provide to patients; and

“Whereas the decisions Ontario makes today will impact patients’ access to quality care in the years to come and these cuts will threaten access to the quality, patient-focused care Ontarians need and expect;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“The Minister of Health and Long-Term Care return to the table with Ontario’s doctors and work together through mediation-arbitration to reach a fair deal that protects the quality, patient-focused care Ontario’s families deserve.”

I sign this and support this petition.

Gasoline prices

M me France Gélinas: I would like to thank Mr. Peter Sullivan from Chelmsford, in my riding, for sending those petitions in time. It goes as follows:

“Whereas northern Ontario motorists continue to be subject to wild fluctuations in the price of gasoline”—gasoline is 94 cents in Sudbury and 74 cents 50 kilometres down the road—“and;

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

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

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

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

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

I fully support this petition, will affix my name to it and ask Sohan to bring it to the Clerk.

Child care

Mrs. Cristina Martins: I have a petition here that’s entitled “Supporting Transparency of Wait-Lists and the Banning of Non-Refundable Daycare Wait-List Fees in Ontario,” and it is addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas many parents and caregivers are being charged non-refundable fees to place their children on wait-lists for daycare centres;

“Whereas non-refundable daycare wait-list fees can range from tens to hundreds of dollars;

“Whereas due to the scarcity of quality daycare spaces, many parents and caregivers are forced to place their children on multiple wait-lists;

“Whereas non-refundable daycare wait-list fees impose a significant financial burden on parents and caregivers for the mere opportunity to access quality child care;

“Whereas daycare wait-lists are often administered in a non-transparent manner which creates the risk that they will be administered in an unfair and/or discriminatory manner;

“Whereas parents and caregivers in Ontario already face significant barriers accessing daycare due to high costs and limited numbers of daycare spaces;

“Whereas quality child care is a public good and not a commodity and the costs of child care should not operate on a supply-and-demand basis;

“Whereas there are currently no regulations in place to prevent daycares from charging parents and caregivers exploitative fees;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“That all members of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario recognize that we have a responsibility to take action now, and support a requirement for transparent administration of daycare wait-lists and a ban on non-refundable daycare wait-list fees.”

Mr. Speaker, I agree with this petition, will affix my name and send it to the table with page Harry.

Ontario Retirement Pension Plan

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): The member for Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound.

Mr. Bill Walker: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and I’m sorry to hear of your current dilemma that you’re facing at home.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Ontario government’s proposed Ontario Retirement Pension Plan (ORPP) is a mandatory pension plan which would target small businesses and their employees; and

“Whereas there has been little to no discussion on what the costs would be, or who would pay them; and

“Whereas affected businesses would be hit with up to $1,643 per employee, per year in new payroll taxes starting in 2017; and

“Whereas affected employees would have up to $1,643 per year extra deducted from their paycheques, and it would take 40 years for them to see the full pension benefits; and

“Whereas the Canadian Federation of Independent Business predicts the unemployment rate in Ontario would rise by 0.5%, and there would be a reduction in wages over the longer term; and

“Whereas all of these costs would be shouldered exclusively by small businesses and their employees; and

“Whereas public sector and big business employees who already have a pension plan will not be asked to pay into the plan;

“We, the undersigned, do not support implementation of the Ontario Retirement Pension Plan and petition the government of Ontario to axe the pension tax.”

I fully support it, will affix my name and send it with my page buddy Jack again.

Autism treatment

Miss Monique Taylor: I’d like to thank Cindy Thompson from the city of Ottawa for doing all the hard work in putting these petitions together.

It reads as follows:

“Don’t Balance the Budget on the Backs of Children with ASD.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the government recently announced plans to reform the way autism services are delivered in the province, which leaves children over the age of five with no access to intensive behavioural intervention (IBI); and

“Whereas in 2003, former Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty removed the previous age cap on IBI therapy, stating that Liberals support extending autism treatment beyond the age of six; and

“Whereas applied behaviour analysis (ABA) and intensive behavioural intervention (IBI) are the only recognized evidence-based practices known to treat autism spectrum disorder (ASD); and

“Whereas the combined number of children waiting for ABA and IBI therapies in Ontario is approximately 16,158; and

“Whereas wait-lists for services have become overwhelmingly long due to the chronic underfunding by this Liberal government;

“Whereas some families are being forced to remortgage houses or move to other provinces while other families have no option but to go without essential therapy; and

“Whereas the Premier and her government should not be balancing the budget on the backs of kids with ASD and their families;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the government of Ontario to immediately ensure that all children currently on the waiting list for IBI therapy are grandfathered into the new program so they do not become a lost generation.”

I couldn’t agree with this more. I’m going to put my name on it and give it to page Chandise to bring to the Clerk.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Unfortunately, that concludes the time we have available for petitions this afternoon.

Orders of the Day

Hon. Helena Jaczek: Government order G181.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): I’m pleased to recognize the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Ted McMeekin: Thanks, Mr. Speaker. I’ll be sharing my time with the member from Northumberland–Quinte West, my parliamentary assistant.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): I wish to remind the minister that he needs to move second reading of the bill to initiate the debate.

Hon. Ted McMeekin: Mr. Speaker, forgive me. I’m new at this. I’ve only been here 15 years, right?

Municipal Elections Modernization Act, 2016 / Loi de 2016 sur la modernisation des élections municipales

Mr. McMeekin moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 181,

An Act to amend the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 and to make complementary amendments to other Acts / Projet de loi 181, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1996 sur les élections municipales et apportant des modifications complémentaires à d’autres lois.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): I recognize the minister to lead off the debate.

Hon. Ted McMeekin: I want to make that exciting announcement again that I’ll be sharing my time with my parliamentary assistant, who will enlighten us shortly. Before I turn the floor over to him—my parliamentary assistant—I’m pleased to discuss the proposed Municipal Elections Modernization Act, known affectionately as Bill 181.

It was just last week that I was joined by my parliamentary assistant, the member for Northumberland–Quinte West, and the Deputy Premier and the Associate Minister of Finance to announce the important changes we are proposing to municipal elections in Ontario. Our proposals, if passed, would help ensure that the rules governing how municipal leaders are elected are clear and reflect the real and evolving needs of our communities.

Mr. Speaker, municipalities really are the governments closest to the people, as you know. We saw that last week up in Morriston. They provide front-line services like public transportation and recreation facilities. They deal with local issues like fixing roads and collecting property taxes. Our communities need to be strong and vibrant places where people can live, work and raise families. Good municipal government is what turns cities and towns into communities, and streets into neighbourhoods. For this reason, we want to help make sure the rules governing municipal elections are clear and simple and that they capture how modern campaigns and elections should be run.

At a time when voter turnout in many communities is going down, it’s time to look at ideas that might help us reverse this trend. Many seem to agree with me. The reforms we’re presenting also reflect the significant input we received from municipalities, community groups and the public at large.

Over the past year, we’ve had a number of conversations with Ontarians about municipal elections. As you know, the Municipal Elections Act is reviewed immediately following each municipal election to see if we can make some improvements. During the review, we asked how we could make local elections work better while keeping them fair, and Ontarians responded. I’m pleased to inform the House that we received more than 3,400 submissions. We heard many perspectives, including on the subject of ranked ballot voting.

Mr. Speaker, if this bill passes, Ontario will become the only jurisdiction in Canada to currently provide municipalities and voters with an alternative to the first-past-the-post voting system.

I’m pleased that we are joined here today by Dave Meslin from Unlock Democracy, and Katherine Skene and the good people from the Ranked Ballot Initiative of Toronto, who have all been powerful advocates for this type of reform.

Proponents of ranked ballots believe this method of voting can make election campaigns more civil. I agree with this outlook. Jurisdictions that are using ranked ballots around the world have noticed better engagement, better and more civil debate, and higher voter turnouts. Those are three things I think we’d aspire to here in Ontario.

I believe candidates would have a vested interest in working better together, possibly reducing negative campaigning. I think we could all agree that’s very much what our communities deserve: elected officials who are committed to working together to serve their communities better and debating issues of substance that are important, rather than engaging in personal attacks.

It will be up to municipalities to decide whether to embrace ranked ballots. I know several municipalities that we have met with have advocated for them.

The member from Northumberland–Quinte West will speak further about what we heard on ranked ballots shortly.

Speaker, we are also proposing changes around campaign financing and third-party engagement with additional accountability measures, because we also heard about the need to ensure that the rules governing how municipal leaders are elected are transparent, accountable and flexible enough to ensure local choice.

We hope to increase transparency in municipal elections, so we are proposing a framework to regulate third-party advertising in order to increase accountability for advertisers and ensure more fair and transparent support. This would include setting contribution and spending limits. Only contributors who are eligible under the act could register as a third party. Third parties would also have to identify themselves on signs and advertisements. Candidates would not be able to direct a third-party advertiser on where they should focus their efforts or what their advertisements should say.

We are also proposing changes to the campaign finance rules that ensure the rules are not only transparent but consistent with accountable, fair and modern election finance practices. Corporations and unions could not register to be third-party advertisers or make contributions to third-party advertisers in municipalities where there is a bylaw banning these contributions. It’s important.

Furthermore, I believe that any discussion about modern elections must include the option to ban corporate and union donations. Where have I heard that before? It’s important that our cities and towns undertake this important conversation with their citizens. I applaud groups that have fostered that conversation—groups like Campaign Fairness, who have also joined us today. I was pleased to speak at their reception here at Queen’s Park last Wednesday, and I was pleased to hear their perspective on the importance of this legislation. Here, in part, is what they said to us:

“The Liberal government gave us the Greenbelt Act and Places to Grow legislation and the Lake Simcoe Protection Act, but politicians and developers found ways to get around that legislation.

“Now you’ve proposed Bill 181....

“Your timing could not be more perfect....

“[While] nobody can be certain that the MEA modernization act will suddenly change the political landscape or protect southern Ontario’s physical landscape ... it goes a long way to ensuring that combattants fight on a level playing field and restores respect for the political system. Nobody can ask for more than that. Today you’ve done something truly important ... and we thank you.” I thank you for those comments.

Our proposed changes would help voters, candidates and contributors alike to better understand the election rules. In fact, the changes aim to encourage greater compliance with these rules. For instance, one proposed change is to refund nomination fees to candidates only if they file their financial statement by the deadline. In this way, candidates would be encouraged to file on time.

We also heard during the consultation that Ontario’s municipal elections are just too darned long. Ontario currently has the longest nomination period of any province in Canada. This contributes to campaign fatigue among candidates and voters—January 1 to whenever, with the 800 community meetings in Toronto that Mayor Tory told me about.

Based on what we heard, we are proposing to shorten the municipal election campaign period by 120 days. Candidates would be able to register between May 1 and the fourth Friday in July, instead of January 1 to the second Friday in September, in the year of the municipal election. Shortening the length of the nomination period would give municipalities more time to prepare ahead of the election, should they choose to use ranked ballots.

Lastly, we are proposing improvements to the voters list. We will continue to work to make it easier for voters to add their name to the list or make changes to their information, as well as to make it easier for clerks to remove the names of deceased electors—who, from time to time, show up to vote—from the list. In addition to these shorter-term solutions, we will be working with stakeholders and a stakeholder working group to identify systematic issues with the voters list. We will, of course, continue to develop ways to help ensure a more accurate voters list over the long term.

Today I am proposing a package of reforms that respond to the changing needs of our communities. By increasing the transparency of municipal elections and promoting local choice, the proposed reforms represent a big step forward for local democracy, and they reflect what Ontarians say they want to see.

I want to thank everyone who spoke to us about how to make municipal elections more modern and how to make Ontario municipal elections better. Thank you to the good people of the Ranked Ballot Initiative, Unlock Democracy, and Campaign Fairness for their outlook and for their support.

I’ll just close with a story my mother used to share with me when I was growing up. I didn’t understand it until I was in my mid-twenties. She said, “Teddy, anybody can slay a dragon, but it’s the people who get up every single day and try to love the world all over again who are the real heroes.” These folk are my real heroes. Thank you for what you’ve done.

Speaker, needless to say, I urge all members to vote for the passing of this bill. With that, things get far more exciting as I turn things over to my parliamentary assistant for some wise words.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): The member for Northumberland–Quinte West.

Mr. Lou Rinaldi: Speaker, let me welcome the folks in the members’ gallery: the Unlock Democracy folks, and the Ranked Ballot Initiative and Campaign Fairness people. This is truly democracy at work, and we thank them, as the minister did, for all their input. We’re not quite done yet, but I’m sure we will get there.

I want to thank Minister McMeekin for giving me the opportunity to speak today. This is very important, especially having spent some 12 years in the municipal sector before coming to this place back in 2003. It gives me some insight on some of the challenges.

Over the past year, I have had the pleasure of working alongside Minister McMeekin on the review of the Municipal Elections Act. In fact, I joined him in launching the review at the Centre for Social Innovation right here in Toronto just a few months back.

In my years of working at Queen’s Park and back home in the riding of Northumberland–Quinte West, I’ve come to understand first-hand the need to have a voice in local issues and in the local democratic process. As you heard from the minister, we heard from many people and groups since last summer on how we can strengthen and support our communities by working to improve how our municipal elections are run.

As part of my responsibilities as parliamentary assistant, the Premier gave me the mandate to strengthen municipal governance through the Municipal Elections Act review. I was tasked with helping to ensure that the act continues to meet the needs of communities, including providing municipalities with the option of using ranked ballots as an alternative to first-past-the-post. As Minister McMeekin mentioned, there is a lot of interest in the ranked ballot. Frankly, it even surprised me. As you know, Mr. Speaker, this type of ballot will allow a voter to rank candidates in order of preference.

No Canadian municipality currently uses the ranked ballot, but many jurisdictions around the world do, including Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Supporters of ranked ballots say that they have the potential to give voters a greater say in who is elected, can increase voter turnout and may result in elected officials who better reflect the diversity of their communities. Most of the public input that we received favoured allowing municipalities the option of using ranked ballots for future municipal elections.

During a review of the act, we heard feedback on several matters related to ranked ballots, such as the need to consult the public before a municipality decides to implement ranked ballots, how voters in a ranked ballot election will be counted, which offices would be elected using the ranked ballots and whether it should apply to all members of council and, of course, establishing a deadline for new rules to be in place so that municipalities have enough time to prepare for the upcoming 2018 municipal elections. Although that sounds far away, it really isn’t.

The legislation we are proposing today will provide the authority to address these matters. In giving municipalities the option to use ranked ballots, we are allowing for more choices at the local level as to how municipal leaders