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

November 29, 2022

43rd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2022-Nov-29 (PDF)

L035 - Tue 29 Nov 2022 / Mar 29 nov 2022

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 29 November 2022 Mardi 29 novembre 2022

Orders of the Day

Less Red Tape, Stronger Ontario Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 visant à réduire les formalités administratives pour un Ontario plus fort

Members’ Statements

Heintzman House

Gender-based violence

Gender-based violence

Dental care

Mike Lapaine

Shaw Festival

First Nations police services

School safety

Canadian national soccer team

Adult and Teen Challenge Thunder Bay

Introduction of Visitors

Report, Financial Accountability Officer

Wearing of scarves and ties

Independent members

Question Period

Government accountability

Government accountability

Health care

La francophonie

Government investments

Agri-food industry

Affordable housing

Health care

Northern and Indigenous mental health and addiction services

Nurses

Firearms control

Senior citizens

Gender-based violence

Intellectual Property Ontario

Northern emergency services

Public transit

Notice of dissatisfaction

Introduction of Visitors

Introduction of Bills

Building Better Business Outcomes Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 pour garantir de meilleurs résultats pour les entreprises

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

Woman Abuse Prevention Month

Petitions

Nurses

Health care

Sexual assault

Health care

Social assistance

Automobile insurance

Optometry services

Orders of the Day

Less Red Tape, Stronger Ontario Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 visant à réduire les formalités administratives pour un Ontario plus fort

Private Members’ Public Business

Ojibway National Urban Park / Parc urbain national Ojibway

Request to the Integrity Commissioner

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Next, we’ll have a moment of silence for inner thought and personal reflection.

Orders of the Day

Less Red Tape, Stronger Ontario Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 visant à réduire les formalités administratives pour un Ontario plus fort

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 28, 2022, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 46,

An Act to enact one Act and amend various other Acts / Projet de loi 46, Loi visant à édicter une loi et à modifier diverses autres lois.

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

Mr. Billy Pang: I’m delighted to share my time with my colleagues the members from Brampton East and Scarborough–Rouge Park to speak to our government’s proposed Less Red Tape, Stronger Ontario Act, 2022. It’s a bill that’s necessary and timely.

This bill, if passed, would be yet another step forward in making Ontario work smarter for business and people. The proposed legislation builds on the government’s strong track record of reducing red tape. Since 2018, we have reduced regulatory requirements by 6.5%, saving individuals and businesses $576 million in annual compliance costs.

We have come a long way, but there’s no room for complacency. We know there’s more work to be done. The global supply chain crisis brought on by COVID-19, shifts in demand and labour shortages are impacting Ontarians and our economy. Reducing red tape on individuals and businesses is a key element of post-pandemic recovery and economic growth. To this end, our government is committed to making Ontario better for people and businesses by removing unnecessary, redundant and outdated regulations that hold us back.

The Less Red Tape, Stronger Ontario Act, 2022, outlines 28 new measures to achieve these objectives. They include proposed legislative and regulatory changes as well as policy announcements. I would like to highlight some of the key initiatives in the proposed reduce-red-tape package in two aspects: supporting Ontario’s supply chains and cutting red tape for Ontarians.

Modernization measures for the agriculture and food industry are a central piece of the proposed legislation. Last week, we released the Grow Ontario strategy, the province’s plan to build consumer confidence and support farmers and Ontario’s food supply. The strategy will promote Ontario-grown food, attract an innovative talent pool and stabilize the food supply chain. Increasing commercialization and adoption of innovative new technologies and practices also play a key role in the strategy.

The proposed legislation includes amendments to the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Act. Our intent is to help members of feeder cattle cooperatives expand their businesses and create more jobs. This will support the sector’s capacity to deliver safe, healthy food products to all Ontarians.

The proposed legislation, if passed, would also modernize the Agricultural Research Institute of Ontario—ARIO—Act to reflect current and future agri-food research and innovation needs. The proposed amendments to the act will allow for more research that accurately reflects the evolving nature of agri-food research today and in the future.

Speaker, we all know that transportation is an important pillar that supports Ontario’s supply chains. There are several proposals in this package that would make the transportation sector more competitive. Firstly, we are upgrading Ontario’s Highway Corridor Management System to provide a seamless and integrated online platform for approvals and permits along provincial highways. Work is ongoing to allow applicants to submit, track and receive all Ministry of Transportation approvals online, saving time and money.

Each year during the spring thaw, roads become weaker and susceptible to permanent damage caused by vehicles. To help protect road infrastructure during this time of the year, local authorities have the power to temporarily reduce vehicle axle weight limits. We are giving municipalities a new option to optimize the timing of this reduced load period, which will help improve competitiveness while protecting Ontario’s road infrastructure.

Our province has one of the largest and most complex energy sectors in North America. We are proposing to simplify our gasoline volatility regulation to reduce regulatory and administrative burden on the petroleum industry by aligning with national standards. This will increase the competitiveness of our energy sector.

We are also proposing to amend the Oil, Gas, and Salt Resources Act to reduce barriers through carbon storage technology. This amendment, if passed, will reduce red tape as a first step in creating a framework to regulate and enable permanent storage of carbon as a new tool to help reduce Ontario’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Speaker, one of the most common concerns I hear from my constituents is the red tape and regulatory barriers they face in their daily lives and business. Our government has heard their concerns. One of our government’s top priorities since 2018 has been to remove unnecessary, redundant and outdated regulations that are holding businesses back. We know that there are more things our government can do to cut red tape and make it easier for people to interact with the government.

To improve government transfer payments, we are establishing an efficient, transparent and coordinated approach through a standard online digital platform. This will reduce paperwork and administrative burdens for government-funded organizations. Also, we will work with Indigenous businesses and communities to address barriers to accessing government business support programs and procurement opportunities.

To enhance our province’s occupational health and safety system, we are proposing amendments to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act that would improve the operational efficiency of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board. The amendments, if passed, would ensure injured or ill apprentices receive loss-of-earnings benefits at the same amounts a journeyperson would receive; ensure government documents are consistent with, not duplicative of, other government directives; and streamline requirements for office lease transactions.

The proposed legislation also continues review of the Ministry of Transportation’s co-operative performance rating system in the evaluation of bids for engineering services. Focusing more on the price and technical proposal when evaluating bids for engineering services will make it simpler to administer and fairer for all participants.

For the court system, we will increase court capacity and efficiency to help address the COVID-19 backlog in criminal cases. We are doing this by temporarily increasing the limit of the number of days retired judges can work and allowing court clerks to reopen certain proceedings.

We’re also proposing to make jury questionnaires available online and test the feasibility of moving away from providing a paper version. This will reduce administrative costs and make it easier for prospective jurors to participate in the court system.

Speaker, I wish I could speak more on this important bill for Ontario, but I’m mindful of the time. So, in short, this bill, if passed, will streamline processes and modernize outdated practices across multiple areas of government and multiple sectors of Ontario’s economy. This will lead Ontario to more economic certainty, confidence and stability, and it will help to ensure our province continues to be competitive in the global market.

And may I invite all the members of the House to vote in favour of the bill and join me in looking forward to a stronger Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): I recognize the member for Scarborough–Rouge Park.

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: I’m pleased to have this opportunity to rise in the House today to discuss Bill 46, the Less Red Tape, Stronger Ontario Act.

From the moment our government took office, one of our top priorities has been removing unnecessary, redundant, outdated regulations that keep people and businesses from reaching their full potential, and we have come so far over the past four and a half years. I know the 28 cross-government initiatives within this proposed legislation build on the progress we have made by increasing Ontario’s competitiveness, building a more robust supply chain and making it easier to interact with government by cutting red tape.

Simply put, we are taking swift action to build a stronger Ontario, where people thrive and businesses prosper, now and into the future. We are focused on leading Ontario to greater economic certainty, confidence and stability. And during our uncertain times, these items cannot be taken for granted.

The Ministry of Transportation is committed to reducing the burden on Ontarians, modernizing its programs and supporting businesses in the transportation sector. We know that in today’s world and economy, a well-functioning transportation network is key to helping get products to market and get people where they need to go. A transportation network depends on having the right investments, the right maintenance and support, but beyond that, it also needs the right regulatory environment in place to help respond to the needs of the public and businesses.

I want to spend some time talking more specifically about some of the specific items that the ministry is bringing forward this year. First, we are making improvements to Ontario’s highway corridor management system to provide a seamless and integrated online platform for approvals and permits along provincial highways. The Ministry of Transportation is also responsible for reviewing and assessing land development proposals, permit applications for signs, building and land use, and for entrances, encroachments and utility management adjacent to provincial highways. In total, MTO processes between 5,000 to 7,000 permits for work along provincial highways annually.

In June 2017, we launched the Highway Corridor Management System to support Ontario businesses, stakeholders and members of the public in securing permits to conduct work along provincial highways and save time and money. Madam Speaker, in fact, over the past five years, the Highway Corridor Management System has reduced wait times, and the time to complete the application process is reduced by an estimated 500,000 hours, saving over $12 million for businesses and members of the public.

Work is ongoing on a new land development review module that will enable developers and municipalities to submit, track and receive Ministry of Transportation approvals for their land development applications and all online applications. The targeted release for the land development review is the summer of 2023, which will provide immediate value to users. Following this release, subsequent phases are planned and will include enhancements based on our user base. When released, the module will be available for anyone to use, including municipalities, developers and the public.

The ongoing and planned enhancements of the Highway Corridor Management System will provide a simple, easy, efficient and more convenient way for businesses, stakeholders and members of the public to submit, track and receive MTO permits and MTO development approvals in a manner that is more transparent and more accountable. The Highway Corridor Management System improvements will better support economic development proposals of Ontario’s businesses and municipalities, as well as provincial priorities such as Open for Business, bringing new housing supply to the market, and providing government services faster, better and easier.

We are taking action to improve the ability of municipalities to protect road infrastructure while ensuring that vital goods can continue to move on our roads. Each spring, roads become weaker and susceptible to permanent damage caused by heavy loads. To help protect road infrastructure during this time of year, the Highway Traffic Act provides local authorities the ability to reduce vehicle axle weight limits for a period of time, known as the reduced load period or the spring thaw period.

Madam Speaker, reduced load periods are typically in effect annually from March through the end of May or June and are only applied to designated secondary and tertiary roads, including a limited number of secondary highways in northern Ontario. The province enacts reduced load periods on some roads, but, for the most part, the reduced load period is enacted locally by municipalities via bylaws.

The Ministry of Transportation, in partnership with the Ontario Good Roads Association, is creating frost depth prediction models that will provide municipalities with the option to optimize the timing of reduced load periods, including shortening the period when conditions permit. The model uses data from MTO’s Road Weather Information System, including 20 sites with frost depth and moisture sensors across the province and breaks down geographic zones established across Ontario with local adjustments for micro-climates.

The model will provide seven-day advanced notice of the onset of reduced load periods using real-time and forecast temperature input for the geographical zones. This will allow municipalities to shorten the duration of reduced load periods, which will help support the supply chain and cut red tape for the agriculture, agri-business and trucking industry, while protecting road infrastructure.

The ministry is also reviewing the use of the corporate performance rating system in evaluating bids for engineering services to improve the fairness and efficiency of the procurement process. Corporate performance rating is a measure of past performance on ministry assignments. Engineering service providers are currently selected based on weighted evaluations of a firm’s corporate performance rating, the price of their bid and the technical quality of their written proposals.

The recent reviews of the corporate performance rating system have found that the criteria for evaluating service providers’ past performance have become somewhat subjective, resulting in little distinction in the ratings between high-performing and low-performing firms. So focusing more on the pricing and technical proposal when evaluating bids for engineering services would make the procurement process simpler to administer and fairer for all participants and help ensure the best value for taxpayer dollars.

Madam Speaker, as you can see, the Ministry of Transportation and the government takes seriously our role to remove unnecessary, redundant and outdated regulations that are holding businesses back. Reducing red tape on individuals and businesses is key to post-pandemic recovery and our economic growth.

Under the leadership of Premier Ford, our government has taken more than 400 actions to reduce burdens since 2018 without compromising service levels, health, safety and the environment. Our efforts to eliminate unnecessary red tape and burdens and open doors to economic activity will ensure the province is one of the best places in North America to raise a family, work and operate a business.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Now we’ll go to questions.

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: Thank you to the member across for his submission—to both members for their submissions.

I guess my question would be specifically to the Juries Act, that particular portion in the bill. In particular, the Ontario trial lawyers, who I met with last year, were calling for an end to the use of civil juries. Civil juries have oftentimes led to exorbitant amounts of time in the delays in the court system. In Canada, there’s no constitutional right to a jury trial in most civil matters. Ontario is one of the last Canadian jurisdictions to grant parties the right to choose jury trials for most civil matters.

So my question to you would be: If most of Canada is actually moving away from civil jury options, why, through this modernization of the Juries Act, are you leaving this behind, when it clearly is a simple way of cutting red tape?

Mr. Billy Pang: Thank you to the member for asking the question. Our government is on a mission to drive efficiencies and reduce red tape, so moving governments to a digital-first model and modernizing outdated processes are some of the many ways that we are cutting red tape to lower administrative costs. So why does the member not understand that?

And we also need to reduce administrative burdens and lower costs to the taxpayer; that’s good for Ontarians. Cutting red tape across government has many benefits: It makes interactions with the government easier, it reduces our dependency on postage and it improves our environment by reducing our dependency on paper.

Also, it’s not just about eliminating regulatory burdens. It involves modernizing processes like moving programs and services online. These actions being taken by our government will make it easier for prospective jurors to—

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Thank you. We’re going to go to the next question.

Mr. Robert Bailey: My question is in regard to some of the changes at OMAFRA. What is the ministry proposing to change under those rules about animal health preparedness?

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: As I mentioned in my remarks, this bill takes a whole-of-government approach in reducing red tape. This particular bill contains 28 actions, including items that are part of multi-ministry items from 11 different ministries, and that’s why our strong record of reducing red tape is there to protect, starting from health, towards safety, and all the way to the environment. And this bill will definitely have a comprehensive approach that we started in 2018, to make sure that we are making Ontario’s economy more competitive and enabling businesses, enabling public transit users to make sure—

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Thank you for the answer. Next question?

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: This omnibus bill makes changes to the Provincial Offences Act, the Juries Act, the Courts of Justice Act, but none of these items address femicide rates across Ontario—rates that are rising. It is fine to do housekeeping legislation like this; however, it also has to come alongside real and meaningful measures to prevent violence against women.

My question to the member across the aisle: I am wearing this purple scarf today, like so many in this chamber, to raise gender-based violence awareness. So why are we talking about housecleaning bills today when we should be passing legislation that makes life safer for women and girls across the province of Ontario?

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: Our government, on this side, and our members in the middle right there, we take action to protect all Ontarians, to especially stand against gender-based violence and protect our Ontarians, protect the public transit users, protect Ontario businesses, because we believe in taking action, not just words. That’s why this bill contains 28 action items—not 28 words, Madam Speaker, 28 action items—to enable the potential of Ontario’s businesses. It’s a perfect way to recover the economy after the pandemic.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question?

Ms. Laura Smith: As an individual who has dealt and worked within the courts system for a number of years, I was very happy to see a modernizing of the juror system with respect to the composition. I continuously get calls from constituents asking about this specific issue. So the ministry recently identified two issues that have affected the composition of jury rolls in Ontario. How are you working to prevent these errors from happening in the future? Is this the right time to implement further changes to the jury system?

Mr. Billy Pang: Our government is committed to continuous improvement of the jury system and ensuring Ontario has the most robust jury selection process in Canada. The Attorney General has directed the Ministry of the Attorney General to take all necessary action to address these errors and ensure that the jury roll is accurate, secure and in compliance with Ontario’s legal obligations. The previous issues that affected the composition of recent jury rolls in Ontario have been identified, and MAG has implemented a more stringent monitoring and auditing system around the process.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question?

Mr. Joel Harden: As I was listening to the comments from my friends in government this morning, I’m mindful that we are living in a climate emergency. We just had an international conference talking about the need for everyone to take up their responsibility.

I’m looking at

schedule 5 of this legislation that’s talking about the capture of CO 2 as a solution. I’m wondering if either one of the members who spoke could comment about what either of these initiatives are doing to meet our climate emergency targets, because what I’ve seen so far is a government ripping up the greenbelt, suing the federal government unsuccessfully around carbon mitigation measures. I’ve seen them literally tear EV charging stations out of GO station transit and now promote them later. I see a government caught in contradictions on climate change.

I’m wondering if either member could explain to me what

schedule 5 does to get Ontario back on track to take the climate emergency we’re living in seriously.

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: Our government is taking strong action to reduce unnecessary red tape. But in 2017, under the Liberal government, supported by the NDP, Ontario had the highest cost of compliance in Canada, totalling $33,000 for businesses. That is $4,000 more than any other province across Canada.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): We have time for one quick question.

Mr. Aris Babikian: My question is to either of my colleagues: What is the government doing now to support Indigenous people and businesses?

Mr. Billy Pang: Thank you to the member from Scarborough–Agincourt for the question. Today, the Ontario government introduced the Less Red Tape, Stronger Ontario Act, which, if passed, would implement measures to increase Ontario’s competitiveness, strengthen provincial supply chains and make government services easier to access and interact with. The highlight is about increasing capacity and efficiency to improve services, including for Indigenous communities. Ontario’s agri-food sector has always been a cornerstone of the provincial economy.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Before we go to further debate, I’ll recognize the member for Barrie–Innisfil on a point of order.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Pursuant to standing order 7(e), I wish to inform the House that this evening’s meeting is cancelled.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Thank you. The evening meeting is cancelled.

We’ll go to further debate.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: I heard the members opposite talking about “smarter for business and for people.” I’m not sure about the “smarter for people” part. Government services faster, better, easier—it depends on which services you’re talking about.

The WSIB is part of this bill, and there are some references made to it. First of all, I’m very proud to say that the very first injured workers’ support group was founded in Thunder Bay in 1985 as a way to support injured workers, because, even at that point, the WSIB was actually undermining the health and well-being of injured workers. It required a support group that is ongoing, and there are support groups now across the province and the country that have become absolutely essential to survival for people with permanent disabilities.

In terms of the experiences of workers who get hurt or ill through their work, we have seen the first part of what was one of the original social safety nets, workers’ compensation, now known as the WSIB, turned into a short-term disability scheme that largely abandons workers who experience work-related permanent injuries.

Created over 100 years ago, Sir William Meredith, the one-time leader of the Conservative Party and father of workers’ compensation in Canada, laid out key principles known as the Meredith Principles. These are compensation as long as the disability lasts; collective liability—the employer pays into the fund; no fault; an independent agency; and non-adversarial.

The reason for this compensation board was to remove the need for employees to sue their employers. It was far too costly for employers and employees, so this compensation system was set up. It was meant to be no-fault and always to be there to support workers so that they could live out their lives in dignity.

Meredith believed that if you treated workers fairly, especially when injured, social and economic stability would be the result. Unfortunately, these principles have been systematically eroded and, increasingly, workers are calling for the ability to sue their employers for injury and disease, so we’re back to where we were 100 years ago. The evidence is overwhelming that people with disabilities face major barriers to employment, with some 50% of people with disabilities not able to find paid employment.

Deeming was introduced into Canadian law starting in 1979. It is a departure from human rights norms on income security. Deeming allows the adjudicators of employment injury benefits to cut income security benefits. These decisions are based on laws that permit the assumption of employment when, in practice, injured workers have not secured any employment and remain unemployed. Deeming permits dramatic cuts to employee injury benefits and causes economic hardship for people with disabilities while employers pocket the savings. Deeming laws are based upon stigmatizing people with disabilities.

In Ontario, stigma is institutionalized in law based on the idea that people need to be incentivized to return to the job market—I’d like to hang on to that word “incentivized.”

Employment injury benefits are critical lifelines to ensure that people living with work-acquired disabilities are able to live a life with integrity and dignity. Employment injury benefits have, for over 75 years, been recognized by the United Nations multilateral system as an indispensable and irreplaceable type of income security that is an essential element of social security.

The International Labour Organization’s Philadelphia Principles on income security provide a baseline, defining what constitutes dignified treatment in employment injury benefit systems, and yet cost containment for the business community is continually prioritized over a human right to essential income security. Indeed, the workers compensation system envisioned by Meredith and practised in Ontario for most of its history has been utterly changed over the last 25 years.

Instead of being there to help injured workers access support, the WSIB now functions like a private insurance company doing its utmost to deny claims in order to return money to employers, but this was never the intent behind creating a workers compensation system.

Just to remind the members on the other side, we’re talking about incredible red tape, regulation after regulation, barrier after barrier, after being forced to appeal before somebody with a permanent disability can access any form of support. They can’t work, they have no income—it takes six months to get on ODSP, which we know is not enough to survive on—and so on. The barriers are endless and cause enormous distress in families, enormous psychological distress, and, of course, physical abandonment. People don’t have the money to live. They can’t pay their mortgages. Families break down. The consequences are very, very significant.

Many workers who experience permanent injuries while on the job are, indeed, forced into poverty and homelessness because the WSIB has a routine policy of turning down claims, forcing injured workers to launch appeals that take years to resolve. How do they survive in the interim? Their lives have been utterly changed because of the injury or because of being poisoned in the workplace, yet, instead of getting the financial support they need and are entitled to, they are forced to apply for ODSP, and, as I said, even that can take up to six months.

Costs that should be borne by businesses through the WSIB are off-loaded onto the public. Injured workers are abandoned and the public picks up the cost. I think the message is quite clear: When a worker becomes permanently injured, they are disposable. When people have disabilities acquired through birth, accident, disease or through the workplace, they are treated as social pariahs, as fakers unworthy of income support. I don’t believe this should be the case in a society as wealthy as ours—it shouldn’t be the case in any society—but it is the norm, and a norm that this government continues to propagate.

After years of appeals, if an injured worker finally does get support from the WSIB, they can then be blindsided by having their claims drastically cut through the practice of deeming. The member from London North Centre spoke about this yesterday in his discussion of Bill 46, but I would like to reiterate the absurdity of deeming practices.

Let’s take the example of a former mine worker with an incapacitating injury who is deemed to be able to work as a parking lot attendant at $16 or $18 an hour, or whatever the going rates are in cities with parking lot attendants. As in many other places, a worker in Thunder Bay was deemed to be able to be a parking lot attendant, and his income supports were drastically cut as a result.

But guess what? There is not a single parking lot that uses a parking lot attendant in Thunder Bay. We don’t have them.

No matter; the worker was deemed able to do this job, so therefore he had to lose a large percentage of his WSIB income. If you think this sounds like the script for a Franz Kafka theatre-of-the-absurd novella, you would be right. Once you have been deemed, you are dumped, and there is no way out.

Last week, the Minister of Economic Development had the temerity to brag about cutting employers’ WSIB premiums by 30%. Then, at the same time as injured workers are being forced onto ODSP, he gave a so-called surplus of $1.5 billion back to employers.

Imagine if that money was going to injured workers or other people trying to live with a disability. How many more people could live in dignity and remain integrated in their communities? Instead, though, bad actors of the business world receive huge payouts and are continually incentivized to deny that injuries have taken place at their workplaces.

This year, injured workers were betrayed yet again when their cost-of-living allowance was set a full 2% lower than stipulated in law and in WSIB policy. Once again, injured workers support groups are having to rally together and come up with a means to appeal being shortchanged by the WSIB.

Why should they have to do this again and again? Why should injured workers have to organize themselves to fight against the organization that was created in order to support them? There’s something very foul about the entire set-up.

This brings me back to Bill 46, a grab bag of different housekeeping changes. While some of these are useful, there is so much that needs to be done to make the WSIB responsive to those it was intended to serve.

It’s really, frankly, hard to accept that the WSIB was mentioned at all, because the really important critical elements of the WSIB and its purpose are being ignored and not addressed. Certainly, current WSIB practices are examples of red tape run amok, with injured workers having to hold themselves together physically, financially and emotionally while experiencing the institutional violence that is now the norm for the WSIB.

I must say, there is a lot of excitement in this government about getting more people into the trades, especially young people. But we should be aware that the rate of permanent injuries in Ontario, by the WSIB’s own accounting, is about 15,000 people annually, and I am deeply concerned that many of these new workers won’t know what hit them when they discover that, rather than being there to support them in what might be their greatest time of need, the WSIB will be trying to save money for employers by treating them, if they’ve received a serious injury, as an adversary to be defeated.

Welcome to the trades, boys and girls. Learn worker safety, but if anything goes wrong, there’s a good chance you’ll be thrown under the bus as yet another disposable disabled person. Is this really what this government wants to be known for?

I was listening to the radio this morning, and I heard an interview with a doctor. He was talking about changes to medical assistance in dying—MAID—that are coming up, that will be making it easier for people with mental health challenges to choose to die. What he said was very, very disturbing. He said that he could get permission for somebody to choose to die in two weeks, and yet people are pushed into those states of mental crisis because they are not receiving the supports they need to actually survive. People are choosing death because they can’t afford to live, and that is, indeed, a crime—a crime that is being perpetuated by policies of this government.

Now I want to move—I’ve got a few minutes. Yesterday, the member from Huron–Bruce said: “The intent of this legislation—our ninth red tape reduction bill since 2018—is to ... ensure Ontario remains competitive in the global marketplace.... That impact is significant, so we need to take a look at our supply chain and determine how we can best build in resiliency.”

The member further said that “a made-in-Ontario solution is the best route.”

But I’m wondering whether this bill might have been an opportunity to redress something that was quietly brought in by this government during the last session, and that is the dropping of the requirement for Canadian content in manufacturing from 25% to only 10%.

The manufacture of mass transit in Thunder Bay has been a significant contributor to good-paying jobs and economic stability in our community for a very long time, but the boasting about procuring contracts in Japan for mass transit has me questioning this government’s commitment to Ontario workers.

When the member from Huron–Bruce spoke about building in resiliency, I immediately thought about how supporting our own world-class manufacturing facility in Thunder Bay could provide that resiliency.

Alstom—the great manufacturer of subway, streetcar and GO trains we enjoy, right at this moment, in this province and in the city of Toronto—is at risk of shutting down permanently by 2024 if new contracts are not in place very soon. Once a contract has been signed, it takes a good two years to put all the pieces in place to have the factory tooled up and the skilled workers sourced and hired. Thinking about maybe doing something at some vague point in the future isn’t good enough. They need to be able to bid on contracts now.

Upholding the 25% Canadian content requirement on all upcoming contracts would help Alstom remain competitive and win the contracts they need for future viability. This is something that needs to be redressed by this government, and I regret that it’s not in this particular bill. It’s not good enough to talk about all the great manufacturing jobs that will be coming up when the government is unwilling to support the manufacturing of mass transit by one of the best facilities anywhere in the country and, I believe, anywhere in the world.

I’ve got a few minutes left. In the briefing notes, in the preparatory notes to this bill, the government talks about funding to universities. I’d like to point out that this government is claiming to support colleges and universities, but Ontario has the lowest post-secondary funding in all of Canada. It would have to be raised by 46%—not to be first, but just so that Ontario would not be last place.

On a per-student basis, public funding has been on a downward trend in Ontario since it last peaked in 2008-09. Since then, per-student funding has been declining. On a per-student basis, Ontario universities’ operating funding is 40% lower than the rest of the Canadian average. Provincially sponsored research funding is 55% lower, which makes me wonder where the innovation is going to come from if our colleges and universities do not have the research funding that they need in order to do proper research.

For years now, Ontario has had amongst the highest tuition fees in Canada for domestic students at the undergraduate and graduate levels, and the highest tuition fees in Canada, by far, for international students.

To make up for low levels of per-student public funding, post-secondary tuition fees have been allowed to increase. The persistent underfunding of colleges and universities ignores long-term planning and investments that are needed to support universities’ educational research mandates. The exponential rise in tuition fees is a clear barrier to access. So to further make up for the shortfall in budgets, of course universities and colleges have been directed to aggressively recruit international students.

It’s wonderful to have international students in our schools. However, the fees that they are being charged—most of those students actually come because they hope to become permanent residents. So I think it is quite reasonable to say that these are actually head taxes, that these exorbitant fees to attend university or college here—amounting in the $25,000, $30,000, $40,000 to get through a program, which they then have to spend years and years to pay back. They work minimum wage jobs for a few years, and then, oops, they get let go just before they’re able to apply for permanent residency status. So it’s a pretty twisted scheme, I would have to say.

I’m running out of time. I would love to talk about the fact that universities and colleges are now largely staffed by contract workers—contract workers with PhDs, contract workers with years of teaching experience who are paid basically minimum wage. It doesn’t matter what their qualifications are, the pay remains the same. The teaching load can be 20, 40, 60, a couple of hundred, whatever, and then you reapply every year. It is undermining students’ ability to access support from faculty, and it certainly puts the lie to the notion that if you get more and more education, you will get a better job.

In fact, the irony is that the people teaching at colleges and universities, who are highly educated, are amongst the lowest-paid workers in any field in the province.

That is something that students then come to recognize, and ask themselves, “What does this mean? I’m paying all this tuition. The people who are teaching me aren’t making a living wage.” They have no job security, no benefits, and this has become the norm at universities and colleges.

So we have efforts to remove red tape when it concerns a particular part of the business community, but otherwise, we have endless barriers to survival for people with disabilities, for people who receive injuries while working, for people working in white-collar jobs who actually can barely keep a roof over their heads in spite of having received 10, 12 years of education.

I will leave it at that. Thank you.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): We’ll now go to questions.

Mr. Will Bouma: I listened with interest to the comments from the member from Thunder Bay–Superior North. It’s interesting. I’m hearing very similar arguments to what we were talking about with the fall economic statement, I think it was just last week, where the opposition members have really no opposition to anything that’s in the legislation whatsoever. However, they are providing constructive criticism on what we could be adding to further legislation, which I really appreciate.

Since the members listening to the debate aren’t saying anything negative about what’s in the legislation per se, I was wondering if we could count on their support to get this passed as quickly as possible.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: One of the things I didn’t talk about was the carbon capture

section of this, which I think of as probably the poison pill of this legislation because we don’t see any scientific evidence, no consultation with environmental groups. We don’t actually know what the consequences of carbon capture will be, and that, I think, is a very serious concern.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question?

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: I want to talk about an incident that happened in London which was quite disturbing. It happened in December 2020, where eight charges were laid in connection with the incident of Teeple Terrace. It was a four-storey condo building that collapsed under construction. About 40 workers were on site. Two concrete workers—and you mentioned how young workers are—21-year-old John Martens and 26-year-old Henry Harder, and five more were injured.

One of the survivors I met with, Jacob Hurl, is advocating fiercely for changes to the WSIB, which I appreciate that you highlighted that very much in your debate. Jacob is fighting really hard to make these changes, and what he’s looking for—and he’s asked about this comment and I’d like to see if you could reply—is he wants a publicly accessible employer registry where employers are required to disclose their history of on-site accidents and any workplace safety concerns and hazards. Would you comment on that suggestion?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: I think it’s an excellent suggestion, but I also worry that, even if we had such a thing, it would not necessarily tell us the truth, because businesses are incentivized to not disclose. Often workers are actually told, “Look, we’ll give you an extra bonus if there are no claims, if there are no accidents reported,” because the employers, of course, get these bonuses if there aren’t any accidents reported.

So I think that we need a registry, but we also need changes at other levels so that, if the WSIB was doing what it was supposed to be doing, employers would not be looking for a way to escape from their responsibilities. They would be paying in knowing that their responsibilities would be covered by the system that was originally intended to do that.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question?

Mr. Kevin Holland: My member and neighbour across the floor has made several statements here under the guise of red tape reduction that really are a little bit off-topic. I know the previous government drove over 300,000 manufacturing jobs out of the province of Ontario through red tape hassles. As the mayor of my community for 31 years, and as a business leader and a business owner in the province of Ontario, I can tell you, the 15 years of the previous government, propped up by this official opposition, drove out businesses and made it impossible for small business to thrive and grow and provide jobs to the residents of Ontario that we are speaking about.

We have taken relentless action to address red tape. We have returned all those 300,000 manufacturing jobs back to Ontario. We are making it more effective for businesses to prevail in Ontario. Why does the official opposition not support the government? And why do they not support efforts to reduce red tape reduction in the province that will allow us to grow and prosper?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Thank you for the question. A number of things: First of all, I haven’t said whether I’m supporting it or not. Secondly, during the last four years, small businesses suffered incredibly under the way that the government chose to handle the pandemic, and we saw enormous amounts of wealth going to very large businesses, while small businesses were forced to shut down.

The other piece is that there’s no business prosperity without worker safety. One doesn’t come without the other—or there’s no social prosperity. I could say individual businesses, yes, they can make lots of money, but social prosperity needs a balance between the two.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): The next question?

Miss Monique Taylor: I thoroughly enjoyed the member from Thunder Bay–Superior North’s comments on Bill 46, and it raised some thoughts that have been happening in my community, and I’m sure across the province, when it comes to injured workers. We know that injured workers have had to fight tooth and nail for every dime that they receive, or every benefit that they receive, and so the injured workers coalition has been put into place and this government has been threatening their funding. I believe that they actually had told them they were no longer getting funding.

They’re now getting it back again on 30-day limits with no contracts. The same people that we need to help our injured workers fight this horrible system is the same funding that this government is cutting.

I’m wondering if the member could comment on her thoughts on cutting funding to be able to help injured workers fight this beast of a WSIB.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Yes, I think, clearly, these groups do need access to funding. They shouldn’t have to be fighting to get support for injured workers, and yet, they do. Another interesting piece is that injured worker members of these support groups used to be able to support other workers in their appeals, but at some point somebody—the law society, probably with some pressure—decided that these advocates were working as lawyers and were no longer allowed to help other injured workers. That’s pretty awful, I would say, not to be able to provide peer support.

And the fact that funding is then constantly on, off, on, off, prevents injured workers from supporting each other in the way that they need to.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Next question.

Mr. Vincent Ke: Thank you to the member from Thunder Bay–Superior North for the presentation.

In 2019, Ontario had the highest cost of complaints in Canada, totalling close to $33,000 per business. That was $4,000 more than any other province. That is why our government, since 2018, we created the Ministry of Red Tape Reduction, and in the past four years we introduced some other bills and reduced lots of red tape. For example, we can now renew our licence, our health care card, our driver’s licence and renew the car’s licence online. You don’t need to go to ServiceOntario. All of that, the dealer can transfer, and can register the transaction online. You don’t need to do the paperwork.

So my question is simple, to the member opposite: Do you feel this is comfortable for you or for the dealer to do the business? If yes, why don’t you support this bill?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: There may well be elements in this bill that are worth supporting. The problem is that the government continues to do omnibus bills, and in an omnibus bill you’re forced to take it or leave it, even though there may be very significant parts of that bill that are offensive and will not be working in the best interests of the people of Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): One last quick question.

Mr. Joel Harden: I just want to thank my seatmate and my friend from Thunder Bay–Superior North for those comments. And, just mindful for people watching, we have paramedics with us here in the chamber. We have people who put themselves in harm’s way every single day in communities. You spoke very eloquently about the need to have a WSIB system that will be there for workers, particularly when they get injured. And it hurts me to say this morning that there is a $6-billion surplus at the WSIB. As you said time and again, we have an organization that makes a business out of refuting claims. So do you have a message for paramedics this morning about the fact that—

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Thank you. For a quick reply—

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Thank you, and welcome to the paramedics. Thank you for being here. Thank you for the work that you do. Yes, we have your backs. The NDP will always have your backs. We’ve been fighting for improvements—

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Thank you. That’s all the time we have for questions.

We’re going to be moving on to further debate.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: It’s my pleasure to talk about this red tape bill, because there are ways that we always try to work with government despite the, “We’re always opposing, we’re not proposing”—we certainly are.

We like to have things work smoothly here on this side of the House, and my background is insurance. Insurance is all about systems and how to operate systems so that you get the best performance out of your work. Last night, Intact was here, if anyone went to the reception. I didn’t get an opportunity to meet with Intact, but they talked about many efficiencies, and I encouraged them to put those things forward to the government and not to be shy or reserved about it. Because sometimes when we’re looking to make changes to systems, we have to open up all topics to talk about those things to make sure that we get the best result.

In this case, the government’s intention is to try to cut some red tape to make things better, and there are some things in here that they put through that, you know, some of it makes sense, right? But when we talk about things, what people are looking for today—families are struggling in my riding of London–Fanshawe. There are so many issues that are top of mind, and I have to say that—every piece of legislation is important. It changes people’s lives. There are things that come to my riding that people really want to see done.

They want systems changed so that their life is better, and a system such as health care is one of those things that I hear about every day. There’s nothing on health care in this red tape bill.

I want to read an email from a resident that I got just recently, at the end of November. She said, “I’m a resident in the east end of London, Ontario”—that’s my riding that I represent. “Today, while I continue to scour the Web for a family physician, I was brought to a web page that told me that if I had been on the Ontario physician wait-list for an extended amount of time, to then contact a member of Parliament for my district. I’m not sure what amount of time classifies as an extended period of time. However, myself and both my children have been on the wait-list since 2016 or 2017, and still nothing.

Thank you for your time, and hopefully there’s something you can do to help us with this relentless journey.”

Here is a system in our Legislature, in our province—a health care system that we all rely on. It’s not to say that we don’t rely on some of these pieces that have come in this red tape bill, but we’re all going to use the health care system. We have the paramedics here today. They know how important it is for that system to work when they pick up their patients, when they pick up that 911 call and bring them to the emergency room. That system is broken. We’ve heard from paramedics that it takes hours—20 hours, so long—and they’re stuck in that hospital area waiting to pass on their patient.

That’s a system that I think we need to look at and fix, because there are 911 calls not being answered and people are not getting help.

I mentioned a constituent recently whose wife had fallen twice in the last couple of months. He called 911, and they were waiting for hours. In one of the incidents, a repairman was able to help them, so they cancelled that 911 call.

So it’s no fault of the paramedics, it’s no fault of the people calling 911; it’s the system. The health care system needs to be fixed, and it has been broken for decades.

I urge this government, as they’re looking through red tape and as they’re coming out with schedules—I think there are eight in this act here—to take the same diligence to look at the systems that are affecting people’s health care, affecting the wait times for paramedics to get to their calls and then drop off their patients, do that patient transfer, and to limit that or minimize that amount so they can go back to doing what they’re supposed to be doing—to a wait time for someone who has been on the wait-list since 2016-17, and then to be told on a website to contact your member of provincial Parliament. Those are the systems that we need to focus on.

But here we are, today, talking about different red tape systems, and that’s fine. That’s where the government wants to take the time of the Legislature. I respect that. They have a right to set their agenda.

One of the things that we’ve been talking about is the Courts of Justice Act that extends the time of judges. I met with the Ontario trial lawyers as well. These are civil cases, but they talked about how there were not enough judges to hear their cases, and they wanted an option of asking for juries in civil cases. That’s not in here. They’re talking about how jurors will be selected to make that system work better for jury selection, most likely, obviously, in criminal cases. When we’re talking about a court system and judges in civil cases—there’s not enough of them.

The Ontario trial lawyers told us that this is causing a problem, and the ones I was speaking to directly said it was about insurance injury claims—so delays and delays, which is costing the person who’s injured, which is costing the system, a lot of heartache.

So if there’s an option to choose juries as opposed to the judge having to hear it over and over again, finding those judges—and as I said, there’s a shortage of judges—in every sector we’ve been hearing, people are retiring and they’re not infilling the new people coming in. So in this case, we’re talking about having retired judges come in and work more hours to try to clear the backlog. And that is a solution. I have to say it is a solution. But the other part they could also consider is hiring new judges, because that’s not going to solve the problem, from what I’ve heard, in the civil part.

And I know with criminal court, with provincial courts, it’s also an issue. So let’s get new judges, young judges who are coming on and who are very much aware of different issues in society—one of them being the Internet and cyber, right?

So it’s not terrible, like I say, to allow judges to come out of retirement or add in more hours, but we could be looking at other ways to supplement that and hire new judges to fill the ones that are retiring and making sure we have enough judges to put those court cases through in a timely fashion.

And when we talk about systems, again—I don’t know if you guys have heard about the Landlord and Tenant Board; that is destroyed. It’s so broken. It’s so broken not only for tenants but for small landlords. I know you were on that call with SOLO, the Ontario small landlords association. They’re representing small landlords, because—for an example, I had a constituent come into my office. They live in the basement, they’re renting the main floor, and they’re having to wait eight months for a hearing.

So tenants who are facing issues with their landlord are having to wait eight months, in a system that is completely destroyed and broken. Small landlords, like the example I used where the couple lives in the basement and they have the rented upstairs, are having to wait eight months, if not longer, to get a hearing.

So these kinds of systems are broken, and I wish this government would, again, not just hire adjudicators in the Landlord and Tenant Board, but look at other ways we can look at the backlog, because small landlords and big corporate landlords are two different entities, and maybe those are pieces of a system that we can help clear that backlog.

Speaker, the other part of systems and red tape that they were talking about is the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Corporation Act. Again, this is acknowledging that when the OSPCA enforcement was ended in 2019, there was a bit of a technical issue, and now they’ve corrected that so that the society can then be incorporated.

And I want to thank all the farmers in Ontario for all the work that they do.

There are a lot of publications, Speaker, that come into our office. Every day we get magazines and reports from many stakeholders, lobbyists that come here, and I want to let them know that we really appreciate the actual ones that come in my mail, because I do look at them, especially when there’s legislation that can relate to these publications that we get into our office.

I just want to point out that the Beef Farmers of Ontario, who sent the publication, were at Queen’s Park this year, and it was their 15th annual barbecue at Queen’s Park.

We all know that the government has a new strategy for sustainability around agriculture, and, again, I hope that they’re listening to the beef farmers.

They captured our MPP Sol Mamakwa—if no one’s seen the magazine—in one of the articles here, but this is one of the things they put in the article. They said, “In speaking with MPPs, BFO requested a review of the PAWS Act as it relates to enforcement on farms and removal and seizure of livestock in partnership with agricultural stakeholders.”

Again, we have discussions with groups that come here, with lobbyists, with stakeholders that want to give feedback and solutions or criticisms to a system that we set up, to legislation that we put forward, and they’re looking for solutions. I hope that this government is working with the Beef Farmers of Ontario to listen to them, to correct—

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: Of course we are.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: Yes, and the Minister of Agriculture has said that of course they are, and that’s a good thing.

Speaker, I see that my time is running out, and I will sit down.

The Acting Speaker (M me Lucille Collard): Yes. Thank you. I appreciate you recognizing that it is time to move to members’ statements.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Heintzman House

Ms. Laura Smith: Madam Speaker, two weeks ago I had the pleasure of visiting the 50th anniversary of the Artisan Craft Show, featured in the historic Heintzman House, located in my riding of Thornhill. This annual craft show is a special tradition started by the Heintzman House auxiliary, and is now managed by a dedicated group of board members. The event showcases the diverse and creative talents of local artisans, and also features the historic, beautiful 19th-century heritage property.

The Heintzman House has an interesting history, built in 1798 by Empire Loyalists, then eventually purchased by Charles Theodore Heintzman of the Heintzman piano company—Heintzman piano, also known as the Steinway of the north. This brand of piano was a fixture in homes all across Canada. The Heintzman House has also been a venue for a seniors’ health club and high tea, Halloween events and its very special seasonal art shows.

Sadly, members of the board, including Bob Wilson, are no longer with us, but their memory lives on through the efforts of current members, including chair Ken Steinberg and previous ones like Roger Jones.

This Sunday evening, the Heintzman House hosts their family carol singalong, a favourite tradition for the community. By the way, Madam Speaker, we are fortunate to have a beautiful Heintzman upright piano right here at Queen’s Park. I discovered it last week. It plays at special events and is very much a part of this House, and I would be happy to show anyone interested at the break.

Madam Speaker, our community is grateful for the timeless privilege of the Heintzman House. Like a well-built piano, this House may have a few years on her, but she withstands the test of time and still looks pretty beautiful to me.

Gender-based violence

Ms. Catherine Fife: Today is the fifth day of 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence. I am so grateful to the staff and volunteers who work tirelessly every day to end gender-based violence in Waterloo region and across Ontario. It is my privilege as the Waterloo MPP to recognize the ongoing work of local women leaders in K-W, including Jennifer Breaton at the YWCA, and the former ED, Elizabeth Clarke; Sara Casselman at the Sexual Assault Support Centre of Waterloo; Jen Hutton at Women’s Crisis Services; the Feminist Shift; and, of course, Project Willow.

In the callous absence of leadership and adequate funding by this government, these women have stepped up to fight for supportive housing and anti-human-trafficking resources. They have stretched their budgets to support women and children who have experienced unthinkable violence and whose innocence has been stolen. And yet, in Ontario we must fundraise to keep women safe.

When survivors have the courage to come forward and ask for help, the resources should be there for them and their children. Women’s Crisis Services of Waterloo Region reports a 26% increase in femicides in 2021 compared to the previous year. OAITH reports at least 50—50—femicides in this last year, and yet Women’s Crisis Services had to turn people away at times, because their 90 shelter beds are full.

This should serve as a wake-up call for this government. My colleague MPP Lindo and I will not rest until we see women supported through the court system, through supportive housing, through counselling, and until all women in Ontario no longer have to live in fear.

Gender-based violence

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos: In Canada, a woman is murdered every 2.5 days—144 to 178 murders each year between 2015 and 2019—and in 2021, the rate of femicide was trending even higher across the country. Of the women murdered, 50% were killed by intimate partners and 26% by family members.

Halton Women’s Place is the shelter and support system in my own community for women fleeing abuse or in need of immediate assistance. They alone reported 2,200 crisis calls from the region in just 2021. This evidence shows that violence against women continues to be a serious problem, and while we all vigorously work to raise awareness and make changes, there is still so much more we need to do.

That is one of the reasons why November 25 has been declared the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, and why the United Nations launched the international campaign from that day—16 Days of Activism against Gender-based Violence. It’s a time to break down barriers and work together to increase knowledge and end the cycle of violence against women and children.

It’s why I’ve introduced a motion, to be debated this Wednesday, to ensure that Ontario judges, crown attorneys,

section 30 assessors and other professionals in the Family Court system have the knowledge they need to make their best judgment when dealing with child welfare.

Dental care

Ms. Jennifer K. French: A low-income senior contacted my office because she was trying to make an appointment to get her teeth looked after, but then she was told she doesn’t qualify anymore for the Ontario Seniors Dental Care Program. She was confused as to why she qualified before but no longer does. The feds tried to do the right thing by increasing payments to low-income seniors. They increased CPP payments by nowhere near enough, but enough to kick seniors out of provincial funding qualification. In this case, she has been kicked out because of about $224 per year.

The province hasn’t adjusted the threshold, so she has been cut from the program. She was surprised to no longer qualify by less than 20 bucks a month. However, this government isn’t surprised. They know, and they’re fine to save a couple of bucks, because, ironically, getting them to spend money on real folks and do the right thing is like pulling teeth. Now she needs dentures, and she no longer qualifies for the program. There is no way she can ever afford this without coverage. She shared with my office that she came to Canada for the promise of a better life.

She worked hard when she was younger and paid her taxes. She expected the government to fulfill their end of the bargain and care about her in her old age. She is having to fight tooth and nail for what she needs.

This government needs to adjust the threshold so that seniors who depend on the Ontario Seniors Dental Care Program aren’t being kicked out of it, and then after that, show some leadership and realize that dental care is health care and that teeth aren’t luxuries. The government knows that they have allowed the lowest-income seniors to be quietly booted out. While they keep saving money while choosing to drag their feet, they leave low-income seniors in pain and without dental care, when they had promised them that they would have it.

Shame on this government. Please fix this.

Mike Lapaine

Mr. Robert Bailey: It’s an honour rise in the Legislature today in recognition of Mike Lapaine, the president and chief executive officer of Bluewater Health in Sarnia–Lambton, who has announced that he will be retiring on December 31.

Mr. Lapaine began working with Bluewater Health in 2008, as vice-president of operations and chief operating officer, and he has been president and CEO since 2016. During his time with the organization, he has played a leadership role in many transformational projects, including the 2010 opening of the new Norman Street campus at Bluewater Health—the largest public sector redevelopment project in Sarnia–Lambton’s history—and the amalgamation of Sarnia’s two hospitals.

In recent years, Mr. Lapaine led the redevelopment of Charlotte Eleanor Englehart Hospital in Petrolia, helped secure permanent funding for a local withdrawal-management facility, opened an Ornge Air helipad on the Bluewater Health campus, and spearheaded the efforts to create a stand-alone Sarnia–Lambton Ontario health team.

And, of course, Mr. Lapaine was always available to discuss health care with his local MPP. I enjoyed those conversations very much.

Today, Mr. Lapaine’s family, friends and colleagues are marking his distinguished career with a celebration at the Sarnia Golf and Curling Club.

On behalf of all the residents of Sarnia–Lambton, I’d like to say thank you to Mike for everything he has done for Bluewater Health and the Sarnia–Lambton community over the last 14 years.

Congratulations, Mike, on your retirement. Thank you for your leadership and the lasting impact you’ve made on Sarnia–Lambton.

Shaw Festival

Mr. Wayne Gates: I want to rise today to speak about the Shaw Festival in Niagara-on-the-Lake and to congratulate them on their 60th anniversary.

This past Saturday, I got the chance to go with my beautiful wife, Rita, to see the opening night performance of Irving Berlin’s White Christmas at the Shaw. It was a wonderful show. I even had the privilege of meeting some of the talented cast members.

It all started in 1962, when the Shaw was founded, inspired by the life and works of George Bernard Shaw.

This year, in 2022, the Shaw is celebrating not only their 60th anniversary, but their biggest season yet, with 14 plays in three different theatres, as well as Outdoors @ The Shaw, and a series of concerts and outdoor events on the Festival Theatre grounds.

This has been a banner year for the Shaw. They have come back strong from COVID and shown the world they are one of the best destinations for theatre in Canada. Through their impressive fundraising achievements this year and community support, they continue to grow. The Shaw is a shining light for our arts and culture community in Niagara, and something that’s very, very important.

Throughout the entire pandemic, the Shaw has kept all 500 of their employees working. We need to thank Tim Jennings, all the staff, the actors, the board members and the volunteers for such a successful organization.

The Shaw Festival is truly remarkable. It’s a wonderful hub of culture and an important part of what makes our community and our heritage in Niagara so special.

And I want to thank the tourism minister and his wife for coming to the Shaw on Saturday night to help us celebrate our 60th anniversary.

First Nations police services

Mr. Will Bouma: Nearly four years ago, I was honoured to be the first MPP in Brantford–Brant to go on a police ride-along with the Six Nations Police Service. Immediately after the introductions and pleasantries, I asked the Six Nations police officer behind the wheel of the cruiser, “So, where is the on-board computer?” His answer was swift and professional: “We do with what we have. Everything is verbal over radio communication.”

That fateful ride-along will be ingrained in my memory forever, Speaker, and that is what started a chain of events that led to Friday’s announcement. Our government announced more than $6 million to help First Nations police services across Ontario better protect their communities. That includes nearly $643,000 directly to Six Nations Police Service in my home riding of Brantford–Brant.

This investment, Speaker, is part of the First Nations policing modernization initiative and will be used to purchase new technology, including mobile workstations, body cameras and automated licence plate readers.

I would like to thank former Solicitor General Sylvia Jones and current Solicitor General Michael Kerzner for making this funding happen. And a particular shout-out to retired Six Nations Police Chief Glenn Lickers and current Six Nations Police Chief Darren Montour for your advocacy for not only Six Nations, but Indigenous police services across the province.

As an active-duty first responder myself, Speaker, my message to every Indigenous police officer across Ontario is: We’ve got your back.

School safety

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: I want to use my time today to talk about a matter that requires urgent and immediate attention, and that is school safety. The harsh reality is that there has been a rise in violence in our schools and on school property. This is a crisis. Phone calls and emails from residents, and meetings with school boards and trustees make clear that this is a pressing issue that demands immediate action from this government. In my own riding of Scarborough–Guildwood, I’ve got students in grade 8 who are afraid to go to high school.

I want you to hear what a grade 10 student from Woburn Collegiate wrote to me last week. He says, “You are probably aware of the recent tragedy that took place right on my school grounds a couple weeks back—unfortunately I witnessed that shooting, as a student no one should have to witness that kind of horrible incident.... Since the shooting took place, my school has been more unsafe with threats concerning students in my school and the lack of urgent attention, and many violent fights have taken place since.

“I think if you can sit down and talk face to face with not only a principal or a TDSB director but a student who witnessed this violence daily, you would have a better understanding on this issue of violence. As a leader in my community, many students have asked me to step up and fix this problem but I need” the assistance of this government “in doing so. Students are crying out for help and we must attend to this problem immediately.”

There it is, in the words of our students. The message to the minister is clear: Lives are hanging in the balance.

Speaker, the TDSB has asked to meet with the minister regarding this issue, and I urge him to do so immediately because lives are hanging in the balance of our youngest learners.

Canadian national soccer team

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: Earlier this month, I was proud to host a very special event at Le Tréport in Mississauga to recognize and honour alumni from the Canadian national soccer team, including Dwayne De Rosario, a forward for the Mississauga MetroStars, and the Canadian national team’s all-time leading scorer, with 22 goals in 81 games from 1998 to 2015, and Carrie Serwetnyk from Mississauga, who was the first woman named to the Canada Soccer Hall of Fame. The leadership of these players helped build the game of soccer across Canada.

The recent success of our national teams, from the women’s gold medal at the 2020 Olympics, to the men’s team finishing first in CONCACAF, is because of the foundation these players built, although the result in Qatar isn’t what we were hoping for.

I want to take a moment to thank special guests and good friends, including Dr. Nick Bontis, president of the Canadian Soccer Association; Bill Manning, president of Toronto FC; and Bob Iarusci, a former captain of the Canadian national team, who served as our MC that night.

Lastly, I want to thank our outreach director, Joanna Maio, who worked for months to organize this event—the first of its kind—together with our friend, Lucky Raso. We look forward to celebrate together at our next soccer alumni event, and I welcome the soccer world to Ontario as we host FIFA men’s World Cup matches for the first time in 2026.

Adult and Teen Challenge Thunder Bay

Mr. Kevin Holland: This past Saturday, I had the honour to participate in the opening of the Adult and Teen Challenge community office in Thunder Bay. The Adult and Teen Challenge provides a year-long program for those dealing with addictions. I was fortunate enough to be able to speak with some of the students at the women’s home, where the office is being run out of, about the program. The individuals were more than happy to share their journey with me. I spoke with women that graduated three years ago and are now mentoring others and spoke with others that were a mere two weeks into the program.

Regardless of the length of time these students spent in the program, the message was the same: Adult and Teen Challenge saved their lives.

They spoke of the family atmosphere at the facility, along with the sense of belonging that was instrumental to their recovery. I was able to speak with several men present that are part of the men’s program across town. As successful as the program has been for many struggling with addictions, the leaders of the program, many recovering from addictions themselves, realized that there was more that they could do. They set their sights on those members of the community who were not able to commit a full year of their lives to the live-in program but who were still looking to change their lives.

After many discussions, their vision of a community office was realized, and we cut the ribbon on Saturday to officially recognize the new services in Thunder Bay. The community office is the first point of contact for anyone dealing with addiction. The space provides pastoral counselling, along with family and outpatient small group support programs and mentoring. It facilitates action in the fight against addiction by supporting and referring people to life-changing help and creates a foundation for graduates to succeed when returning to the community.

I want to thank Adult and Teen Challenge for the part they are playing to bring hope and change to the lives of those dealing with addictions. You truly are changing and saving lives. I look forward to continuing to work with this group and others in Thunder Bay as we address this crisis. I want to remind those in need that you are never alone. Please seek help when you need it.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Once again, that concludes our 90-second members’ statements for this morning. It’s a subtle reminder that we should try to rein our statements in and try to respect that standing order to the greatest extent possible.

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. John Vanthof: Kennedy Dabner is our page captain today. Kennedy’s father, Jamie Dabner, and Kennedy’s grandmother, Val Kennedy, are in the gallery with us. A proud day for them and for Kennedy.

I would also like to recognize Melanie Ducharme in the gallery; she’s the executive director of the Pavilion Women’s Centre in Temiskaming Shores and a newly elected councillor in the city of Temiskaming Shores. Welcome.

Mrs. Robin Martin: I just wanted to take the opportunity to welcome my friends Elena Ricci and Roberta Scott from the Ontario Paramedic Association, here with us today.

MPP Jill Andrew: It’s an honour to welcome Marlene Ham, the executive director of OAITH to Queen’s Park, along with staff members Lauren Hancock, Amber Wardell, Sherece Taffe, and board members Abi Ajibolade, Sue Weir, Melanie Ducharme, Jessie Rodger, Jeanine George, Christy Savage, Tessa McFadzean, Sly Castaldi, Jennifer Chamberlin, Sandy Watson-Moyles and Jyoti Singh. Thank you for being here at Queen’s Park today. I can’t eyeball all of you, but thank you for your work advocating for women’s lives free from violence.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I just want to give a special shout-out and welcome as well to Sly Castaldi, OAITH board member and executive director of Guelph-Wellington Women in Crisis. Thank you for the great work you do in our community, and welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: I’d like to welcome a number of board members and staff from the Ontario Association of Interval and Transition Houses, who are here to mark their Wrapped in Courage campaign for Woman Abuse Prevention Month. Here today, we have Abi Ajibolade, Sue Weir, Melanie Ducharme, Jessie Rodger, Christy Savage, Tessa McFadzean, Sly Castaldi, Jennifer Chamberlin, Jyoti Singh, Marlene Ham, Lauren Hancock, Amber Wardell, and Sherece Taffe. I really want to thank you so much for all the important work that you do. I look forward to meeting you all on the staircase for a picture to recognize everything that you do.

Mr. Tom Rakocevic: I am proud to welcome the students from Palmerston Avenue Junior Public School, and a very special welcome to Aydin Bari, son of my dear and old friend Eban Bari. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Will Bouma: I’d like to welcome to the House today, from Leading Influence, our chaplain, Charlie Lyons, and the national director of Leading Influence, Tim Schindel. Thank you for coming today.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: I want to welcome Jessie Rodger, the executive director of Anova in London, and thank her for all the work she does to advocate for gender-based violence.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: I’d like to welcome Laurie Hepburn, executive director of the Halton Women’s Place, today to mark the annual Wrapped in Courage event and thank her for her incredible work, and her team and all of the women here, who are working so hard and tirelessly to end gender-based violence.

M me France Gélinas: I would like to welcome the Ontario Paramedic Association, which is at Queen’s Park. They’re in room 230, if you’re interested in having lunch with them today. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: I would like to welcome back to Queen’s Park Clint Thomas, who is representing Bruce Power. They’re hosting a reception tonight at 5 o’clock in rooms 228 and 230. Welcome, Clint.

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: I’d like to welcome the northern representative of the Ontario Association of Interval and Transition Houses. Jennifer Chamberlin is the executive director of the New Starts for Women shelter, which serves the Red Lake-Ear Falls district and Cat Lake, Deer Lake, Keewaywin, North Spirit Lake, Pikangikum, Poplar Hill and Sandy Lake First Nations. Meegwetch—thank you—for your work, and meegwetch for being here today.

Ms. Christine Hogarth: It is my great pleasure to introduce the women from Women’s Habitat of Etobicoke: Carla Neto, who is the executive director; Alicia Whyte, who is the manager of programs and client services; and Lina Almanzan, who is director of philanthropy, resources and systems. I just want to say thank you for everything you do for the women of our community.

Mr. Graham McGregor: I have three guests to welcome to the House today. The first one is Cyma Musarat, former Progressive Conservative candidate for Humber River–Black Creek. She’s also joined by two other politicians from Pakistan: Mahnish Rehman and Sobia Ahmed. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Todd Smith: My colleague the Minister of Agriculture introduced Clint Thomas, who is a wily veteran from the back halls here at Queen’s Park, but I’d like to welcome all of the members of Canada’s Canadian Nuclear Association to Queen’s Park today. They do have a reception in 228 and 230 later this afternoon.

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: Today, I would like to welcome the cement industry: from the Cement Association of Canada, Adam Auer, Steve Morrissey and Martha Murray; from St. Marys Cement, Filiberto Ruiz and Bill Asselstine; from Lafarge Canada, David Redfern and Rob Cumming; from Lehigh Cement Co., Nick Papanicolaou; from Concrete Ontario, Bart Kanters and Andy Wallgren; and from Ash Grove in Mississauga–Lakeshore, Marie Glenn and Richard Sluce. I welcome you all tonight to the dining room to see them.

Mr. Chris Glover: I’d like to welcome the Ontario Association of Interval and Transition Houses for the Wrapped in Courage campaign. I also want to welcome the Council of Canadian Innovators, and I’d like to thank Harry Zarek, Hugo Navarro and Sunita Chander for some wonderful conversations this morning.

Mr. Stephen Crawford: I would like to welcome my friend from the riding of Oakville, Sajid Anjum. He is joined by his team from Nisa Homes: Yasmine Youssef, Shiba Anjum and Razan Omar. I look forward to meeting with you after question period. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Kevin Holland: I’ll keep it short: I would like to welcome representatives from Faye Peterson House in Thunder Bay to the House. I look forward to meeting with you later today to discuss our priorities on ending violence against women. Welcome.

Hon. Michael Parsa: I’d like to welcome Lorris Herenda, CEO of Yellow Brick House. Thank you very much for all the work that you’re doing. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Report, Financial Accountability Officer

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that the following document has been tabled: a report entitled Expenditure Monitor 2022-23: Q2, from the Financial Accountability Office of Ontario.

Wearing of scarves and ties

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I understand the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services has a point of order.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to allow members to wear purple scarves and ties in support of the Ontario Association of Interval and Transition Houses’s Wrapped in Courage campaign to end violence against women.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Agreed? Agreed.

Independent members

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Ottawa–Vanier on a point of order.

M me Lucille Collard: I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House that, notwithstanding standing order 40(e), five minutes be allotted to the independents as a group to respond to the ministerial statement by the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services on the Wrapped in Courage campaign for Woman Abuse Prevention Month.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Agreed? Agreed.

Question Period

Government accountability

Mr. Peter Tabuns: To the Premier: Over the weekend, CBC published new information about the amount of protected Pickering farmland owned by the De Gasperis family, who are powerful landowners and PC Party donors. CBC found another 475 acres bought by the De Gasperis family in 2020 for about $24,000 an acre. They own at least 1,775 acres of greenbelt land within the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve. They bought this land cheap because it was protected as farmland in perpetuity.

How much does the Premier suppose an acre of this land would be worth after the Premier removes it from the greenbelt and makes it available for development?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: At the end of the day, the posting that the government has on the Environmental Registry of Ontario will grow the greenbelt by over 2,000 acres and provide an opportunity for the government to have a minimum of 50,000 homes built to get us closer to our goal of 1.5 million homes over the next 10 years.

The reason that minimum of 50,000 homes is so important is because our best year in over 30 years was last year, when we had 100,000 starts in the province of Ontario. We made a promise to the people of Ontario during the election that we would table a plan in place to ensure that we get to that goal. That’s exactly what the government has done.

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

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Again to the Premier: In 2016, the Ontario government sold 425 acres of Pickering greenfield in Seaton for about $383,000 per acre. If the De Gasperis family’s landholdings within the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve were suddenly made available for development, they would likely be worth at least what the Seaton lands were in 2016—probably more.

How much speculative profit is the Premier giving his friends and PC donors by removing their Pickering farmland from the greenbelt?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to caution the member on his language. We can’t impute motive.

Minister of Municipal Affairs.

Hon. Steve Clark: I’d withdraw the question.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member to withdraw.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I withdraw.

Hon. Steve Clark: Speaker, our motive is clear: We need to build 1.5 million homes over the next 10 years. In fact, Speaker, based on the new immigration targets by the federal government, that will be even higher. We know that of the 500,000 new Canadians who are coming to Canada, over 60% are going to come to our province, many of whom are going to be in the GTA. So we need to ensure that the plan will get us closer to that goal.

We are in a crisis, Speaker. We needed to take bold and transformational action as a government. That’s why our building homes faster act puts a plan in place to make sure that we do this. And this is exactly why the government has posted on the Environmental Registry the comment period regarding these lands. We have a plan to grow the greenbelt, to add over 2,000 acres of protected land into the greenbelt, but at the same time, having that minimum 50,000 homes in the ground by 2025.

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

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Speaker, again to the Premier: Once the De Gasperis family’s 1,775 acres of Pickering farmland are removed from the greenbelt, land worth about $24,000 an acre as protected farmland would be worth at least $383,000 per acre as developable greenfield, based on what Seaton land went for in 2016. If you do the math, we find the Premier is about to instantly transfer nearly two thirds of $1 billions in speculative profit to his friends and PC donors, just by removing their Pickering farmland from the greenbelt.

Does the Premier finally understand how corrupt this looks?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member to withdraw.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: Speaker, former mayor of Pickering Ryan was very clear to the government when he indicated that he wanted this land out of the greenbelt and to have it as developable land.

The current mayor, Mayor Kevin Ashe, in Pickering has said it better than I could, Speaker. I’ll quote him now. He said that that land was put in based on “political science,” not “real science.” That is exactly why the government has put forward a plan that will grow the greenbelt and that will add urban river valleys, which I think all members of this House will support. It will add property in the Paris-Galt moraine.

But at the end of the day, we’ll have an opportunity to build a minimum of 50,000 homes. I’m with former mayor Ryan. I’m with Mayor Ashe. I’m not going to deal with political science. We’re going to deal with real science on this side of the House.

Government accountability

Ms. Jessica Bell: My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. On November 16, the minister said he spoke with developers prior to announcing that lands would be removed from the greenbelt. The minister needs to clarify his remarks. Did the minister or any other government or PC Party official share with any landowner information about the government’s plan to remove lands from the greenbelt before it became public?

Hon. Steve Clark: I watched this member on CP24 yesterday. I’ve heard her in the House. She mischaracterizes Bill 23 often.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the minister to withdraw.

Hon. Steve Clark: Withdraw, Speaker.

Our government was crystal clear with Ontarians during the election that we wanted to build more homes, provide more choice, give mayors stronger powers and have a plan in place to build 1.5 million homes.

I’ve said in this House countless times that I will meet with anyone—a municipal official, a not-for-profit, Habitat for Humanity, Ontario Aboriginal Housing Services, people who build one home a year, people who build 1,000 homes a year. We need every partner non-profit in the public space, every partner in the private space if we’re going to build—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I couldn’t hear the minister.

Supplementary.

Ms. Jessica Bell: Back to the minister: Last week, the CBC reported that a group of land speculators purchased 37 hectares of farmland outside Ottawa’s urban boundary last year, and then, earlier this month, the minister overrode the city’s official plan and put these lands within the urban boundary, making these very lucky speculators instantly richer. Coincidentally, these speculators, together, donated more than $12,000 to the PC Party last year and this year.

My question is to the minister. Did the minister or any other government or PC Party official share with any landowner information about the government’s plan to add lands to Ottawa’s urban boundary before it became public?

Hon. Steve Clark: This member looked in the camera yesterday and said that Bill 23 cut affordable housing dollars—not true. In fact, Bill 23 actually works collaboratively with the Minister of Infrastructure to create a new attainable housing program on government-owned lands, something that everyone can agree on.

I’m not going to take any lessons from the NDP’s jiggery-pokery in terms of how we’re going to put housing forward.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We’re not going to allow “jiggery-pokery.” You’ve got to withdraw.

Interjection.

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

Ms. Jessica Bell: Minister, what I’m not hearing from you is a no. I’m going to ask again: Did the minister or any other government or PC Party official share with any landowner information about the government’s plan to remove lands from the greenbelt before it became public? Yes or no?

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Member for Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke, come to order.

Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to respond.

Hon. Steve Clark: That’s public. We’re encouraging Ontarians to provide comment on the Environmental Registry of Ontario.

The plan is simple, Speaker. The plan is simple. We’re going to add to have a net gain of over 2,000 acres to the greenbelt, and the 15 properties involved will provide us with a minimum of 50,000 homes to help get to the 1.5-million home target over the next 10 years.

The government has said—all of the bills we tabled; yesterday was my 10th—that we we’re going to put forward a plan that’s going to get us closer to that. Every policy, every posting, every opportunity we’re providing for comment in this Legislature puts us closer to that 1.5-million goal to allow the families who want to realize the dream of home ownership, the seniors who want to downsize and the new Canadians who want to have a home that meets their needs and their budget—that’s what every policy we’re putting forward as a government gets us closer to.

Health care

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: My question is to the Premier. In two days, on December 1, the Connect-Clinic, a virtual-only health clinic, will have to close its door entirely to its 3,500 trans patients who live across rural and urban Ontario. These individuals need gender-affirming health care.

Connect-Clinic’s lead physician and founder, Dr. Kate Greenaway, wrote to me: “Because of the changes to the physician services agreement, we will no longer be able to provide our life-saving care. We are expecting to need to close the clinic in response.”

Speaker, will this government help save the clinic? Will they help deliver the alternative funding plan that’s needed to stop the cut to ensure that gender-affirming care continues in Ontario? Yes or no?

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

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Thank you to the member opposite for raising this question prior to question period. I want to be clear with the people of Ontario that we are not eliminating or forcing individuals to close virtual care clinics. What we are doing is we are equalizing to make sure that people have access to their family physicians in person.

It is a change that we have negotiated with the Ontario Medical Association, who took it to their members and voted on it in support. I might add, it’s the first time since 2012 that we have had an agreement with the Ontario Medical Association without the need for arbitration. This is a good system of balancing the need for in-person care with the important use of virtual care.

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

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: I’m desperately pleading with the minister to help me keep the lights on at this life-saving health clinic. The government’s new limited virtual care billing fee will not cover the clinic’s operating expenses. Clinic patients come from across Ontario—rural and northern Ontario—they cannot all travel to Toronto. They come from Sudbury. They come from Sault Ste. Marie. They come from across this great land.

Although the physician services agreement is finalized, this government must reverse the funding cuts to Connect-Clinic through an alternative funding plan. It’s an option before the government.

I’m looking for an answer. We have two days to save this clinic. We have two days to save this health service. Will the government help us do this?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Again, I want to reinforce that virtual care absolutely has a place in the province of Ontario. What we are doing is equalizing it to make sure that individuals also have access to their primary care in person. We’ve done that through the OMA agreement.

The member opposite raises an important issue, but there are other opportunities, like community health clinics, that provide specialized service. Those types of services will continue within the province of Ontario, because we understand how specialized services offer unique opportunities for people who have special skill sets to work with a specialized population.

We’re continuing to do that, but we need to reinforce that having individuals access their primary care physician in person, as well as virtually, is an important part of how we provide appropriate care in Ontario.

La francophonie

M. Andrew Dowie: Ma question s’adresse à la ministre des Affaires francophones. La francophonie ontarienne contribue à notre richesse culturelle et à notre croissance économique. Sa promotion au-delà de nos frontières est essentielle pour que sa prospérité continue.

L’Ontario a récemment signé un protocole d’entente avec la Wallonie-Bruxelles après le Sommet de la Francophonie en Tunisie.

Monsieur le Président, la ministre peut-elle nous en dire plus sur les opportunités de partenariat à l’Organisation internationale de la Francophonie et les bénéfices qui en découlent?

L’hon. Caroline Mulroney: Je remercie mon collègue pour cette question excellente.

La participation de l’Ontario au sommet de l’Organisation internationale de la Francophonie, aux réunions connexes et à son forum économique donne à la province l’occasion d’explorer les liens de coopération internationale et aussi de promouvoir les atouts économiques de la province auprès des États et des gouvernements membres de l’OIF.

L’Ontario désire ainsi tirer parti des opportunités de partenariat avec les membres de l’OIF et aussi de leurs délégations afin de :

—poursuivre nos discussions avec nos partenaires, tels que la Wallonie-Bruxelles, avec qui nous avons signé un protocole d’entente;

—explorer des échanges bilatéraux dans les domaines commerciaux, éducatifs, touristiques et culturels; et aussi

—appuyer nos efforts pour soutenir l’entrepreneuriat francophone.

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

M. Andrew Dowie: Merci à la ministre pour cette réponse. Je suis heureux d’entendre parler d’initiatives qui contribuent à promouvoir la francophonie ontarienne.

La communauté francophone mérite un environnement propice à son épanouissement afin qu’elle puisse continuer à participer activement à la prospérité de la province.

Monsieur le Président, la ministre peut-elle nous en dire plus sur la Stratégie de développement économique francophone de l’Ontario et sur les possibilités de partenariats internationaux?

Notre présence au sein de l’OIF nous permet de mettre en valeur la francophonie ontarienne. C’est ainsi, en élargissant le cercle de nos relations culturelles et économiques au-delà de nos frontières, que nous allons continuer de contribuer à la croissance et à la prospérité de l’Ontario.

Government investments

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is to the finance minister. Speaker, this government has a history of underspending on the public services that people rely on. Today, the independent, non-partisan Financial Accountability Office released their second-quarter update, and it’s no surprise to see that, once again, the province is spending less than planned in key areas, including $859 million less in health, $413 million less in education and $244 million less in children’s and social services.

Why does this government have such a hard time investing resources that they promised to?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): And to reply, the President of the Treasury Board.

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: If we look at that FAO report, it shows that we invested over $3.6 billion more than was invested in the same period last year. That means more than $1 billion extra in health care, $879 million in education, $518 million on children and social services.

The member opposite knows that this is a snapshot in time. It does not take into full consideration the investments that have been made and are going to be fully realized in hospitals and school boards across the year. This was shown through our public accounts, which showed that this year we made the largest investment in public health, an over-$5.2-billion year-over-year increase to support our health care investments across the province.

The member opposite knows this, the FAO also acknowledges this, and we’ll continue to make sure we have the investments and supports there to ensure that Ontarians and members across this province receive the care they need.

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

Ms. Catherine Fife: It is such a shocking disconnect that this government has from the lived experience of people in this province. At a time when our pediatric hospitals are over capacity due to an early respiratory season, it is indefensible that public health spending was $500 million less than planned. That is money that could have been spent on a comprehensive, widespread vaccination campaign, including an advertising blitz and pop-up clinics to keep our province’s children safe.

Speaker, budgeting is about choices. The government at one point acknowledged that this money had to be spent. There was a need for it, and they failed to do it. Why did the government choose to underinvest in public health by half a billion dollars?

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: Every step of the way, this government has put forward record and historic spending into health care, as we saw last year. It’s unfortunate that the members opposite, the NDP and Liberals, have voted against every single one of those measures.

The largest increase to health care spending in this province: The members voted against that. That was shown in the public accounts. They voted against hospitals in Brampton. They voted against hospitals in Mississauga and Windsor. All across this province, Mr. Speaker, they voted against increasing and supporting medical schools so we have the doctors and nurses of tomorrow. The members opposite voted against every single one of those investments.

Year over year, we put in $5.2 billion more than the last year in health care spending, the largest increase in the entire country and the history of this province, and we will continue to ensure that we make the necessary investments to support health care across—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Waterloo will come to order. The Minister of Municipal Affairs will come to order.

The next question.

Agri-food industry

Mr. Will Bouma: Ongoing labour shortages, global shipping disruptions and declining processing capacity are significant concerns that continue to impact our agri-food sector. In my riding of Brantford–Brant, I am proud of the over 1,400 agri-food businesses that all serve a critical role in contributing to the province’s economic prosperity and job creation.

With one in every eight jobs in Ontario coming from the sector, expanding and enhancing the agricultural industry should be a priority for our government. Speaker, can the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs please share with us how our government is growing and supporting the agri-food sector in Ontario?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: Not only do I appreciate the amazing work that the member from Brant offers his constituents and the agri-food industry, but I very much appreciate the question, because I’m pleased to share with you that after the agri-food industry in Ontario has been ignored for years through the Liberal government and their friends on the opposition benches, I am absolutely pleased to share with you that our plan to grow Ontario forward has been incredibly well-received by all stakeholders in Ontario’s agri-food sector.

Ontario is poised to build a secure and stable supply chain, and Grow Ontario is our strategy to ensure that our agri-food sector in this province has certainty in its supply chain. It’s the result of conversations that I’ve had for over a year with our stakeholders, like Food and Beverage Ontario, who told me that the number one challenge is a labour shortage. So, through building a strong supply chain, growing our labour workforce, as well as innovation and research, the future is bright for Ontario’s agri-food industry.

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

Mr. Will Bouma: Thank you to the minister for her response. It is great to hear that our agri-food sector has a government that is working with them, listening to them and addressing their concerns. Unfortunately, ongoing global economic instability is adversely impacting the agricultural industry worldwide and at home. This sector needs reassurance that our government will continue to show leadership and take action to remove barriers and lift burdens so that this vital industry can continue to prosper.

Speaker, can the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs please elaborate further on how our government will deliver results in this sector?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: Our government, through Grow Ontario, has included measurable targets that will allow us to track the progress to implementing this 10-year strategy, like boosting the amount of food produced right here in Ontario by 30%, by developing 250 more made-in-Ontario agri-food innovations and technology, and we’re looking to grow the workforce in this province by 10%. These targets are backed up with amazing investments from our government: $10 million in the Food Security and Supply Chain Fund, as well as the $25-million strategic processing fund.

Our stakeholders are incredibly pleased that they finally have a government that understands the importance of the agri-food industry, and our Grow Ontario plan has real goals with tangible actions. Our strategy represents a bold vision, built on a commitment that is second to none, and it will also raise awareness of the amazing food produced right here in Ontario, not only for our consumers in this province but around the world.

Affordable housing

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: Last week, Global News reported that Metrolinx has sold eight parcels of land since March 2021. None of these lands were used for affordable housing. Seven out of eight parcels went to private companies, including large-scale developers. This is the same public agency that previously reneged on an agreement with the Jane and Finch community to hand over land for a community hub.

It is clear that Metrolinx thinks it can ignore its duty to serve the public interest. Does the Premier think that Metrolinx, a public agency, can ignore its duty to serve the public interest as well?

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

Hon. Kinga Surma: Thank you to the member for the question. Under our realty portfolio under our government’s leadership, we are very carefully looking at surplus properties that we can then use for government priorities like affordable, attainable housing, like building long-term-care homes. This is a strategy that our government developed. We are well under way to building more long-term-care homes, as well as more housing in the province of Ontario.

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

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: As an agency of the province, Metrolinx is mandated to follow the Ontario’s realty directive, which has a stated purpose of “effective and efficient management of government realty, including active consideration of provincial interests with respect to social, environmental and economic purposes for realty.”

Speaker, it is clear Metrolinx does not care about “provincial interests with respect to social, environmental and economic purposes”—all it cares about is selling off public land to the highest bidder. Will the Premier ensure that surplus lands owned by public agencies like Metrolinx are used for affordable housing or, at the very least, for public purposes?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Associate Minister of Housing.

Hon. Michael Parsa: I want to thank my colleague for the question. As the Minister of Infrastructure alluded to earlier, we’re looking at every possible scenario to improve housing in the province for the people of Ontario. Through the community renewal strategy, we’ve invested over $4.4 billion over the last three years to make sure that housing is available, and in particular to our most vulnerable.

Through our latest initiative, the bill that passed yesterday, Bill 23, we will have more affordable homes offered to Ontarians. We’re lowering fees for Ontarians so that we can get more housing built.

Unfortunately, over the last few years, we’ve seen both the Liberals and NDP oppose and vote against every single housing bill that we’ve put forward. On this side of the House, we’re for housing, we’re for building homes; on the other side, they oppose housing and they will vote against every single housing bill.

I ask them to change their direction and start supporting housing and support Ontarians in our mission to make sure everyone’s—

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

Health care

Ms. Stephanie Bowman: Many of my constituents in Don Valley West, especially Thorncliffe Park, don’t have a family doctor, much like 1.8 million other Ontarians. Health care workers have been saying repeatedly that they are overwhelmed. On November 24, 2022, the health minister said, “We will continue to work with all health care providers...when they bring forward innovative ideas, and we will continue to fund those innovations....”

I don’t believe Ontarians are seeing that statement in action. Nurse practitioners have put forward an innovative solution that could provide relief, even if temporary: more nurse practitioner-led clinics.

My question, through you, to the health minister: Is the government, in fact, committed to investing in innovative health care solutions, such as nurse practitioner-led clinics now, to address staffing shortages, to help support health care workers and to create more access for Ontarians to get the medical attention they need?

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

Hon. Sylvia Jones: We are absolutely investing in these innovative practices, but I have to say, it’s a bit rich—it’s a bit rich—to come from a member representing this party. The previous Liberal Premier admitted that they did not invest appropriately in health care and long-term care—in fact, eliminating 50 residency positions—while we have continued to expand, through health school expansions, the first historic expansions in Brampton and Scarborough, and the first expansions in medical schools in northern Ontario since—wait for it—a previous Conservative government.

So are we investing in innovations? Are we taking those ideas that are coming from our health care professionals? One hundred per cent, we are. I will take no lessons from this party on how—

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

Ms. Stephanie Bowman: The health minister talks a lot about health care capital investments, yet, despite that, under this government’s watch, health care workers are overburdened, they’re struggling. Many Ontarians don’t have access to family doctors under this government, they’re having their surgeries cancelled under this government, and they are all asking for this government to help.

In October, Ontario’s five largest health care unions requested an urgent meeting with the Premier and the health minister to work on real solutions to the crises. As of Thursday, they had received no response. The unions say that “the PC ‘plan’ is failing miserably.” The actions the government has said they’re taking to help people who need care are not working.

When will this government listen to the practical advice of health care workers to help Ontarians who need care now?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Did the member support when we issued a ministerial directive to the college of nurses and to the CPSO to expedite the applications, assessments and, ultimately, licensing, when appropriate, for internationally educated graduates? Did the member and the opposite party do that? Did the member opposite, when we added 160 undergraduate seats and 295 postgraduate positions for individuals who want to the practise in the province of Ontario—where was the member opposite?

We are making those investments in the short, medium and long term, and I would like to think that, at the end of the day, they will understand that these investments, which should and could have been done 10-plus years ago, are now being done under Premier Ford and our government.

Northern and Indigenous mental health and addiction services

Mr. Ross Romano: Research from the Canadian Mental Health Association reveals that residents of northern Ontario have higher self-reported rates of poor mental health compared to the provincial average.

Under the previous Liberal government, people living in the north had limited access to essential mental health services. Speaker, this is not right nor is it fair.

Access to care in our province should not be dictated by where a person lives. Every Ontarian deserves accessible mental health and addiction services. That is why our government must support the mental health needs of individuals in rural, remote, northern and Indigenous communities.

Speaker, can the Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions please share with this House how our government ensures improved access to mental health and addiction services province-wide?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: The member from Sault Ste. Marie is correct: The north has been neglected for far too long. This is why I’ve been travelling in the north, and I’ve had the opportunity to visit many of the cities and rural and remote communities.

Just recently, in October, I had the opportunity to meet with Carolyn Karle and Team DEK, a local addiction recovery group, who have lost children to addictions. I was honoured to speak with them to listen to their experiences and learn more about what we must do to fill the gaps in their community to give better care to individuals. Mr. Speaker, we’re filling those gaps as a government.

I was in North Bay last week with the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade to announce an expansion of the North Bay addictions centre of excellence at Canadore College. This is an investment of $4.5 million to build 53 beds not only to help people but to train individuals in the north to provide better supports and build on the continuum of care in northern Ontario.

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

Mr. Ross Romano: Thank you to the minister for that response.

Building more beds and training additional staff are integral to expanding our mental health care system; however, we know that there is no one-size-fits-all approach in supporting individuals with mental health and addiction services. Recognizing the uniqueness of service needs is paramount in northern Ontario and with our Indigenous communities. Unique barriers confront Indigenous communities in accessing mental health care services. That is why our government must support and enhance Indigenous community-based programs that are culturally focused.

Speaker, can the Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions please explain what our government is doing to ensure that Indigenous communities receive the care that they deserve?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Thank you to the member for that question.

The trauma that was suffered by Indian residential school survivors, as well as the intergenerational trauma to their families and communities, requires a focused commitment to culturally appropriate services. That’s why $2 million of the Canadore investment will go toward servicing Indigenous populations.

In addition, we’re also providing supports to several Indigenous-led organizations to deliver evidence-driven, land-based care—$3.8 million for the St. Joseph’s Care Group and Dilico Anishinabek Family Care to open 34 new beds in Thunder Bay and $4.2 million to the Sioux Lookout Friendship group for addictions services.

Mr. Speaker, these are just three of the incredible investments and initiatives that are being made as a result of the Addictions Recovery Fund, which is going to open 400 treatment beds, 7,000 treatment spots—and, I might say, 56% of which will be in northern Ontario in rural and remote communities.

We’re building partnerships with our Indigenous communities because they’ve told us, “There can be nothing about us without us.” And we’re listening.

Nurses

Miss Monique Taylor: My question is for the Premier. A couple of weeks ago, we brought up the issue of operational room assistants replacing scrub nurses at Hamilton Health Sciences, but we have seen no action to date. The Minister of Health speaks of innovation, but this is not the innovation we need. This is reckless gambling with patients’ lives to save a few bucks.

When will the Premier stop replacing nurses in the operating room and ensure Ontarians have safe, high-quality surgical care?

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

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Hyperbole is never going to replace facts in this place or in Ontario. For clarity, what we have is, Hamilton Health Sciences have worked alongside and through the innovative partners at Niagara Health and Mohawk College to establish a credentialing program that enables various existing members of the health care team to gain competencies required to practise as operating room technicians and attendants. These HHS team members include medical device reprocessing department techs, health care aides and support workers. This is part of the innovation that Hamilton Health Sciences proposed and we funded.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Miss Monique Taylor: This is not what nurses are proposing and what they know is safe in our operating rooms.

Over 4,000 community members have signed petitions calling on this Premier and his government to stop cutting corners and compromising their surgeries. Speaker, when you go into a surgery, you want to know that the right people are in the room to give you the right care when you need it. Ontarians deserve nothing less than experts and specialized nurses on their surgical team.

Will the Premier do the right thing and stop using their Surgical Innovation Fund to replace registered nurses in the operating room?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Oh, Speaker, where do I start? First of all, this is prepping surgeries. This is prepping the surgical rooms. It is not part of the surgical team. It is part of the surgical team in terms of they are preparing the surgical units. They are technically trained and actually making a difference in efficiencies and improving outcomes so that we can do additional surgeries.

Hamilton Health Sciences spent a lot of time working with their partners like Moha