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

November 16, 2021

42nd Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2021-Nov-16 vol. A (PDF)

L018A - Tue 16 Nov 2021 / Mar 16 nov 2021

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 16 November 2021 Mardi 16 novembre 2021

Orders of the Day

Build Ontario Act (Budget Measures), 2021 / Loi de 2021 visant à protéger nos progrès et à bâtir l’Ontario (mesures budgétaires)

Members’ Statements

Environmental protection

World Vision 2021 Global 6K

Affordable housing

Sant Teja Singh Ji

Environmental protection

Hospital funding

Steve Minnema / David Wickham

Food banks

Events in Barrie–Innisfil

Legislative pages

Visitors

Hugh Edighoffer

Order of business

Question Period

Child care

Affordable housing

Optometry services

Research and innovation

Indigenous affairs

COVID-19 immunization

COVID-19 response

Driver examination centres

Climate change

Agri-food industry

Government accountability

COVID-19 immunization

Tenant protection

Transportation infrastructure

Child care

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Government Agencies

Introduction of Bills

Anti-Money Laundering in Housing Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 sur la lutte contre le blanchiment d’argent dans le secteur du logement

Petitions

Optometry services

Long-term care

Optometry services

Affordable housing

Optometry services

Optometry services

Affordable housing

Injured workers

Orders of the Day

Build Ontario Act (Budget Measures), 2021 / Loi de 2021 visant à protéger nos progrès et à bâtir l’Ontario (mesures budgétaires)

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Build Ontario Act (Budget Measures), 2021 / Loi de 2021 visant à protéger nos progrès et à bâtir l’Ontario (mesures budgétaires)

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 15, 2021, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 43,

An Act to implement Budget measures and to enact and amend various statutes / Projet de loi 43, Loi visant à mettre en oeuvre les mesures budgétaires et à édicter et à modifier diverses lois.

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

Ms. Jessica Bell: I’m pleased to be here today to speak to Bill 43, the bill accompanying the fall economic statement. It is a big omnibus bill; I’m not going to cover it all today, but I do want to raise some of the issues that I see that particularly affect the residents of University–Rosedale.

The big issue that I see is that base funding to education is being cut by $467 million. It’s going down from $31.3 billion to $30.8 billion. This is very concerning, because funding education and health care is fundamental to who we are as Canadians and Ontarians. It is very concerning to see an additional cut to education funding because it will affect the 33 schools in my riding and the thousands of parents and kids who rely on schools to get kids ready, teach them what they need to know, help them get the support they need and help them thrive.

It is very clear that the pandemic has had a huge impact on children in a negative way and it’s also had a huge impact on parents, especially women. We see the statistics. The participation in the workforce has dropped, especially for women. It has dropped down to 1980s levels. We have seen a 40-year reversal in the gains that we have made to address equity in the workplace—taken away in a short 18 months.

We know that there are things that we can do to help parents, especially women, get back into the workforce. One way we can do that is by making sure we have high-quality, well-funded schools that are as safe as possible so that they can remain open. That requires a fair amount of funding so that the school boards across the province can do what they need to do to provide schooling to the million-plus kids who need it. That, unfortunately, is not what’s happening.

I want to summarize some of the issues that parents, parent councils and my trustee, Chris Moise, have raised with me over the last two months since schools have returned in September.

We are getting reports of class sizes that are very large—32, 33 children, even in the smaller classes, the JK, the SK classes where kids really need that extra support so that they can be socialized, so that they learn how to read and write.

There’s no additional funding for online learning. So what that means is that teachers that have taught in in-person classes are being pulled out to teach online. As a result, schools are being forced to do last-minute shuffling, often merging classes together, in order to accommodate the loss of that teacher. That’s happening in many schools across my riding.

When it comes to COVID safety, there have been some improvements. I have seen the HEPA filters; principals have communicated with me about the arrival of HEPA filters across schools in my riding. But what we’re not seeing is a comprehensive rollout of rapid tests. We see them piecemeal here and there but we’re not seeing the comprehensive rollout of rapid tests, even though other countries have moved forward with a comprehensive rapid testing program and it’s been very effective in curbing the spread of COVID, especially in schools, which is where we know the spread of COVID is happening.

It should have been here in September. We are now in November and we are not seeing it rolled out in the way that we need.

I am not seeing the public health nurses that I’ve heard the Minister of Education speak about again and again and again. I don’t know where they are, but I’m not getting calls from principals telling me that they’ve arrived.

We’re not seeing the mental health supports that are really critical, including reliable access to social workers.

We’re seeing kids in special-needs classes being forced into hybrid models of learning. In the mainstream classrooms, by and large, it’s been in person or online. You get a separate teacher for each. But when you go into developmentally delayed classes, classes where there are kids on the spectrum, we are seeing that there has been a move that the TDSB has made, because of a lack of funding, to move forward with a hybrid model. So a teacher is required to teach in person and online at the same time, and I’m getting calls from parents who are really concerned about that because they’ve had enough. They need help.

The testing for air quality in schools is still not being done, even though we know that’s critical. It’s being done elsewhere. It’s been working effectively in New York City. It is a measure that we are calling for here. This government has chosen not to move forward with it.

The facility condition index: After years of advocacy, the Ontario government started tracking how poorly maintained schools were across Ontario and what amount of funding is needed to get them up to a state of good repair. The facility condition index is getting worse. Schools, in order to be maintained to a state of good repair—so the heating is working, the cooling is working, there are no bricks falling on kids, which happened in my riding—is short $16.3 billion. And Jesse Ketchum, which is a school in my riding, is one of the worst—no funding in this fall economic statement for that.

What I find so concerning is that the poor maintenance of our schools, the facility condition index, actually doesn’t include a whole lot of things that are needed to keep schools well-maintained. So the number is actually larger than $16.3 billion.

The example I like to give is that the water quality in schools is not included in the facility condition index. Many schools in my riding are very old. There’s lead in the pipes, so kids cannot drink water from the drinking fountains. They have to fill up a bottle at home and take it to school with their own water, just like we do here in Queen’s Park because there’s lead in the pipes here. But with schools it’s a bit different. And we don’t even have a plan for that.

So it was very disappointing to see a cut of $500 million to schools in the fall economic statement. What it tells me is that this government is continuing on its agenda of wanting to cut funding to schools in order to move forward with a privatization model, in order to drive parents away from the public education system and move them into private schools and charter schools, all with the goal of reducing taxes and giving big contracts to big business to provide education when it should be the public sector to do it. It is an ideological approach, and it’s our kids that are suffering as a result. I urge you to change that approach.

The second concern I have with the fall economic statement concerns the issue of housing. It is the number one issue in my riding when I go door to door and I ask constituents, “What is top of mind for you? What do you want me to raise with the Ontario government?” Housing is the number one issue that comes up at the door, and that makes sense. In University–Rosedale we have some of the highest rents in the country. The average rent for all properties is getting close to $2,400 a month, which is astronomical. Over a third of Ontarians now pay unaffordable rent, and many of those people are in my riding of University–Rosedale.

Owning a home is also completely out of the picture. A new national Bank of Canada report shows that in Toronto, a household needs to make $205,000 a year—we’re talking top 2%, 3% of income earners here—to afford an average home and must save for 28 years for a down payment, which is five times more than the historical average. It’s deeply concerning. Many people have given up.

You would think that this government—because this government knows full well that housing affordability is an issue in their constituencies too. You know that. You’re getting these calls just like me. You would think that the Ontario government would put measures in their fall economic statement to address the housing affordability crisis, but when I looked through the fall economic statement, I didn’t see much. I’m going to summarize what I saw.

One is that the government decided to create a task force to study the problem, which is really very disappointing because the whole purpose of a task force is to identify whether you’ve got a problem or not—hey, we’ve got a problem; we already know we have a problem—and the task force is to identify solutions to that problem. There are already solutions that other provinces and countries and municipalities have tried and successfully implemented in order to stabilize housing prices and make rent more affordable for the nearly 50% of Ontarians who now rent. The measures already exist.

We know what needs to be done. Proposing to study an issue is the oldest trick in the book. It’s to pretend that you’re working on a problem when really you’re doing very little at all.

The second measure that I see—well, there are two others, actually, that I noticed in the fall economic statement that address housing. The other one is this government is looking at moving forward—a small step forward—in bringing about real estate transparency within the housing sector in Ontario. I support this move. I think it’s a good measure.

The challenge is that there are loopholes in the fall economic statement’s measure to truly address real estate transparency. I’ll just explain it for a minute. Many experts have said time and time again for many years now that Ontario, like BC, has issues with money laundering and tax fraud. Investors come here and take advantage of some of the loopholes we have in our laws which allow them to use trusts, numbered corporations and partnerships to buy properties anonymously. They hide their human individual identity behind a number and they buy and sell properties in order to make profit.

By and large, many of these transactions are legitimate, but there is a small

section of people that use them in order to engage in money laundering and to engage in tax fraud. It is deeply concerning, because many experts and academics have made it very clear that this habit and activity is contributing to the massive increase in speculation that we are seeing in the housing market and a run up in housing prices. It’s also just not fair, because, if there are some companies that are not paying their taxes, it means other people, the rest of us, have to pay more in order for us to get the services that we need to run our province.

So this government has decided to bring in a measure that would require businesses that are registered in Ontario to track who their true beneficial owners are: the actual human individuals who own that business and stand to benefit if that business sells or makes profit. Now, that’s a good thing, but here are the loopholes, and I’m asking this government to introduce amendments to improve these loopholes. The loophole that it creates is that if they are businesses that are incorporated elsewhere, in another province, in another country, they are not required to disclose the identity of the individuals who own that property. That’s a very big loophole.

The second thing is that the information around these individuals is not public. It’s a secret registry. It’s available to financial authorities and the police, if they need it, but it’s not a public registry. We think it should be a public registry.

This issue doesn’t apply to individuals like you or me. We are already required to track our identity, and it’s public within the MPAC tracking system. This would apply only to numbered corporations, trusts and partnerships. So that’s a large loophole.

Finally, partnerships are exempt. If you’re a money launderer and you see this new law, you’re like, “Okay, I just won’t register in Ontario and I’ll turn my company from a numbered corporation into a partnership,” and then you can just avoid this whole process overall.

My request to you is that you address these loopholes in order to clamp down on money laundering and tax fraud in the real estate sector. The measures already exist; they have been tried elsewhere. I urge you to move forward on those measures.

The final thing that I see in the fall economic statement, when it comes to housing, is the amount of funding that is going to municipal and housing sectors. It’s a cut. A cut is being made from $512 million—that’s what it was in the 2020-21 budget—down to $481 million in the 2021-22 budget. That is really a travesty.

I fail to understand why this government would choose to cut funding to municipal services and housing at a time when we have a homelessness crisis. We have a mental health crisis. We have an utter need for the construction and the purchasing of supportive housing so that we can help people who are sleeping in our parks right now.

If you travel across Toronto and visit the parks, you will see people who are in very desperate circumstances sleeping outdoors: Dufferin Grove; the park in Kensington, formally Alexandra Park; and parks near the lake in the MPP for Spadina–Fort York’s riding. It is an absolute crisis.

What is very clear is that the municipality of Toronto needs financial help to work with social service providers to provide permanent housing to people so that we can address our homelessness problem. In fact, the city of Toronto last week passed a motion calling for an additional $45 million from the provincial government in order to assist in dealing with the homelessness crisis that Toronto has right now—the worst homelessness crisis I have ever seen and that Toronto has experienced in decades.

It would be a positive move for this government to increase the amount of funding that goes to municipalities and housing so that the city of Toronto and all municipalities across Ontario have the additional support they need to get people off the streets and housed.

An example I like to use on how effective this could be is the building 877 Yonge; 877 Yonge is right near the Toronto Reference Library. It used to be a retirement home; we did a lot of work with the seniors who lived there. Now, it is a supportive housing building. So people who are in really difficult circumstances are being moved into—not a hotel, not a short-term, temporary hotel, but a permanent home, with social workers and supports living on-site to provide people with the care they need.

That building is part of the Housing Now program, and it was funded by money that came from the federal government and the city. They just bought it outright. We don’t need to spend five or 10 years getting the approvals to build a new building; they just bought it outright. It’s 200 new homes that are available right now to move people in.

But you know who wasn’t at the table? The Ontario government wasn’t at the table. I think that’s a real travesty, because those kinds of initiatives should get the Ontario government’s support, so that we can really tackle the housing affordability crisis and the homelessness crisis that we have today.

I want to conclude by talking a little bit about the lack of support for child care. The reason why this is such a big issue—what I expected to see in the fall economic statement was a commitment to roll out $10-a-day child care, which provinces all across Canada are moving forward with in partnership with the federal government. I was hoping to see that kind of statement here, but I didn’t.

The reason why it is so important is because in my riding of University–Rosedale, it costs about $1,500 a month, on average, for a parent to find and pay for a child care spot for that child. That works out to about $36,000 a year if a parent has two young children. That’s a lot of money. That’s more than a lot of people make in the city of Toronto. And this government—I’ll give them a tiny amount of credit—introduced a tax credit in the fall economic statement of $1,500. Let me tell you, there’s a big difference between $36,000 a year and $1,500. There’s a massive amount of money that still needs to be paid forth by the parent: $34,500 a year.

Also, this government, instead of investing in high-quality, non-profit and public child care, has watered down standards by increasing allowable staffing ratios within private child care facilities. Now, I don’t think that that is a good way to address the child care crisis, because those rules are there for a reason. They were developed in response to tragedies of children getting injured and dying, and government doing the wise thing and responding with fair and sensible regulation. Keeping those regulations is a good idea.

What also needs to be done is the Ontario government needs to step up and work with the federal government and make a deal to bring in affordable, high-quality, $10-a-day child care that is provided by non-profit and public providers. That is what parents in my riding need. That is what this government needs to do.

So that’s a

summary of what I see in the fall economic statement that really affects the residents of University–Rosedale. There needs to be more funding for housing. There need to be more measures to make housing affordable on all levels. There needs to be a greater commitment to invest in public education, because it is fundamental to who we are as Ontarians and Canadians. And there needs to be a real commitment to move forward on affordable, $10-a-day, high-quality, non-profit and public child care.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): We have time for questions and answers.

Mr. Michael Parsa: I want to thank my honourable colleague for her presentation.

Speaker, one of the areas in the fall economic statement that was very important to me and I think to all of us here was the support that’s being provided in the long-term-care sector. We saw many years of neglect by the previous government, whether it was just lack of beds—the fall economic statement, you notice, highlights that more beds will be added, more inspectors will be added, more nurses, more PSWs. I’m just wondering if my honourable colleague can point to why she won’t be supporting it after such contrast, when the previous government let down our most vulnerable.

On the other hand, we are changing it and making sure that they are supported. I’m wondering why my honourable colleague is not supporting it.

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you so much to the member for Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill. I am happy to see that there are movements in the right direction to provide additional support—financial support—to the long-term-care sector in order to increase the amount of hours that each resident receives from a personal support worker to get the care they deserve. And it is a move in the right direction to increase inspections in order to ensure that the regulations that are designed to protect residents are properly enforced.

Here’s what I’m concerned about: There is a long-term-care home in my riding, St. George. It’s run by Sienna. Every quarter, Sienna posts profits that it gives to its shareholders. But when you walk into St. George—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Thank you. The next question.

Mr. Jeff Burch: Thank you to my colleague from University–Rosedale for all the great work she does for our caucus on housing and other issues. She started out her speech talking about women’s issues, and with the recovery, that’s going to be really important. She ended talking about $10-a-day child care, and how this government couldn’t seem to get over its ideological issues, to do what other provinces are doing. What’s she hearing from women in University–Rosedale about the importance of $10-a-day child care for them, as we go into a recovery?

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The member for University–Rosedale has one minute to respond.

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you very much. I’ll give two examples. One is that I hear from child care educators, who make between $35,000 and $45,000 a year, that they can’t afford child care. That needs to change, and that comes from affordable child care. I’m also hearing from parents who have quit their job—it’s almost always women—because they can’t make it work because they can’t afford child care either.

It’s critical to increasing women’s participation in the workforce and bringing about equality.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question?

Mr. Will Bouma: I have two quick questions, because I don’t know if I’ll get a chance to ask both.

I always appreciate the member from University–Rosedale because she has a point of view from downtown Toronto that I sure don’t get in Brantford–Brant.

On the child care issue: I think our minister has been quite clear that we would like to make a deal with the federal government, but they are shortchanging the people of Ontario with the offer that they have before us, both in the amount that they would give us in order to do child care but also in the longevity of the agreement, which would leave us hanging high and dry in just a few years and with no commitment to future funding. I was wondering if she would think that it’s appropriate for us to fight for Ontario to get its fair share from the federal government in child care—number one.

Number two: I was wondering if she could speak about inclusionary zoning. I was watching Steve Paikin—Toronto has just done this—and a couple of the commentators were saying that this would dramatically increase costs of regular housing from the affordable—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Finish your question, please.

Thank you.

The member for University–Rosedale to respond.

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you very much to the member from Brantford–Brant for those two questions. I’m just going to focus on the first one because I’m going to focus on the fall economic statement.

My assessment of the situation is that there are two issues that the Ontario government is having difficulty dealing with when it comes to the negotiation about high-quality and affordable $10-a-day child care that is delivered by the public or the non-profit sector. One is that they want big corporate chains to be included in the agreement. I have a lot of concerns with having big child care chains coming in from the US, providing discount child care, undercutting child care workers’ wages, and then receiving a government subsidy to do that. I think that’s deeply concerning, and I’m asking this government to take that sticking point, that negotiating point, off the table.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question?

Ms. Sara Singh: Thank you to the member from University–Rosedale for your coverage of the fall economic statement. You highlighted a number of different concerns as our housing critic, as well.

I want you to elaborate a little bit on the importance of diversity in housing. We spoke of folks in long-term care and, obviously, the need there, but can you talk about the importance of investing in community-based assisted living arrangements for vulnerable seniors and people with disabilities as well?

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you very much for raising that question.

I get a lot of calls from—it’s often parents with adult children who are in really critical need, and they are finding that they’re putting their adult children in places that are not safe. They are not being maintained to an adequate standard. There is inadequate food. There is inadequate staffing to make sure that these people are not harmed by others or don’t harm themselves. There is no appropriate education for these folks or appropriate entertainment. It’s actually deeply concerning, what I’m hearing from constituents.

There is a need, and our party is proposing this: that there is funding to provide community-based care not only for older residents but for younger residents and people with disabilities as well.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question?

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: My thanks to the member opposite for her words this morning.

Obviously, in smaller communities in this province, and larger as well, it’s important that we see infrastructure investments being made in improving the lives of all of our constituents.

I know in my community, my local mayors and councils were very excited to see the doubling of the Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund. I’m wondering if you could speak a little bit about the doubling of that fund and what that would mean for communities across Ontario.

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you very much to the member for Niagara West.

What I can say is, when I look at the fall economic statement, I see a cut in the amount of funding that’s going to municipalities. I’m sure that there are many municipalities out there, including the city of Toronto, that don’t want to see a cut from the Ontario government; they want to see an investment.

When I also look at infrastructure, I often think of transit and transportation because that is what I used to spend a lot of time on. What I see when I look at the FAO reports is that investment into infrastructure like transit is actually dropping under this government. So I have concerns. I don’t share the same kind of hope that you might.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question.

Ms. Sandy Shaw: Thank you for your speech this morning. Child care is a huge issue in Hamilton as well. We have organizations that have been struggling to make sure that there is accessible, affordable child care: Today’s Family, Umbrella, to name just a few.

It’s distressing to hear that Jason Kenney managed to get a deal with the province, but we here just seem to be dragging our heels. It’s also distressing to hear the idea that part of the problem is that there is an interest in making sure that there is privatization in child care. It’s already expensive and it’s already difficult to access.

My understanding—there are reports that this government, despite all their bluster, is not co-operating with the federal government. In fact, there are reports that the federal government, the minister responsible, hasn’t even heard yet from this government.

So while families are waiting, while kids are losing the opportunity to get back into child care after suffering so much during COVID, what can we say to this government to get them moving on a child care deal that works for families in the province?

Ms. Jessica Bell: Affordable child care is a very important issue. It’s an issue that doesn’t just affect the parents and kids in my riding; it affects the parents and kids in ridings all across Ontario, including many held by Conservative MPPs.

I can say this: It is extremely important that the Ontario government come up with a plan quickly. If nearly all other provinces can do it, so can we. It is time to stop stalling and it is time to start acting, because parents and children across Ontario are waiting for you to do it.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Further debate?

M me Lucille Collard: We’ve got a whole 12 minutes here, and I’ll be sharing my time with the member for Ottawa South.

Donc, merci monsieur le Président. C’est un honneur de me lever en Chambre aujourd’hui pour apporter la perspective des gens d’Ottawa–Vanier, les gens que je représente depuis un peu plus d’un an et demi.

Les Ontariens se tournent vers le gouvernement pour trouver des solutions aux problèmes économiques comme le coût de la vie, les changements climatiques et l’équité. C’est juste normal. Cet énoncé économique de l’automne était l’occasion pour le gouvernement d’améliorer son bilan et d’améliorer la vie des gens. Au lieu de cela, le gouvernement a choisi de ne pas poursuivre les programmes qui pourraient rendre la vie plus abordable.

On sait que c’est un problème important : les budgets des familles sont comprimés de toutes parts; les gens ont du mal à joindre les deux bouts. Les frais de garde d’enfants et de logement sont maintenant des dépenses énormes, et les familles doivent sacrifier d’autres frais de subsistance pour s’assurer qu’elles peuvent garder un toit au-dessus de leur tête et apporter de la nourriture sur table. Ce n’est pas un signe de prospérité, monsieur le Président; c’est un signe de pauvreté qui se profile pour plusieurs Ontariens.

L’Ontarien vit présentement une des plus grandes crises du logement au pays, ce qui oblige davantage de personnes et de familles à faire des choix difficiles; des choix qu’aucun de nous ici qui a le privilège de servir dans cette Chambre n’a à faire; des choix comme choisir entre les médicaments et le loyer, ou les vêtements et l’épicerie, ou choisir entre prendre une assurance d’auto ou inscrire un enfant dans une équipe de hockey.

De nombreuses femmes décident d’abandonner leur carrière, car le coût de la garde des enfants est prohibitif. Cela conduit à une récession pour les femmes en Ontario, car les femmes retournent au travail en moins grand nombre que les hommes.

Heureusement, le gouvernement fédéral a un plan pour réduire les frais de garde d’enfants à 10 $ par jour. Malheureusement, ce gouvernement n’a pas encore été en mesure de conclure une entente comme première étape pour rendre la vie plus abordable pour les familles.

Avoir un toit au-dessus de sa tête est un besoin primaire très de base pour vous assurer d’avoir la capacité et la motivation de contribuer à la prospérité collective. Pour permettre à chaque Ontarien de travailler ensemble vers un meilleur avenir pour l’Ontario, un Ontario ouvert aux affaires, un Ontario inclusif, nous devons prendre soin de tout le monde.

Prendre soin de tout le monde, monsieur le Président, c’est aussi aider nos petites entreprises à survivre à la COVID afin qu’elles puissent continuer à nous apporter l’excellence locale en biens et services. Et n’oublions pas nos parents et nos grands-parents qui ont besoin de soins de haute qualité et la possibilité de rester dans le confort de leur foyer le plus longtemps possible. La santé mentale est devenue le principal obstacle à ce que chaque Ontarien ait la capacité de faire de l’Ontario le meilleur endroit où vivre.

Nous devons regarder en amont pour identifier les lacunes de notre système afin de mieux soutenir toutes les couches de la société afin d’assurer un mode de vie digne et valorisant pour tous. Donner à chacun une chance équitable de réussir est la meilleure façon d’uniformiser les règles du jeu, pas en décidant qui obtient quoi selon combien ils sont prêts à contribuer à un parti.

Comprendre ce qui arrive à notre environnement sur la base des preuves abondantes à notre disposition et agir de manière responsable pour contrer les impacts négatifs de nos actions précédentes a le réel potentiel de contribuer à résoudre un certain nombre de problèmes liés aux enjeux économiques.

Notre santé mentale, et surtout la santé mentale de nos jeunes, est directement liée à l’environnement. Nous devons comprendre que nos enfants n’ont pas beaucoup confiance en un avenir radieux si la planète sur laquelle ils vivront n’est pas sûre. Nos enfants pensent que de ne pas avoir d’enfants est un meilleur choix compte tenu de l’avenir incertain auquel ils peuvent être confrontés face à une planète en déclin.

La seule façon de leur donner de l’espoir est d’arrêter de dépenser des centaines de millions de dollars sur des projets qui ont un impact négatif supplémentaire sur notre environnement et de commencer à investir, et de manière significative, dans des projets d’énergie verte qui pourraient assurer un avenir propre, prospère et abordable en Ontario.

J’incite le gouvernement à donner à chacun et chacune une chance équitable d’être fier d’être Ontarien. Donnons aux gens les moyens de vivre dans la dignité et la motivation de faire de leur mieux pour tous les Ontariens. J’espère que le premier ministre décidera de faire plus pour aider les familles de travailleurs que ce qui a été indiqué dans cet énoncé économique. Le gouvernement doit prendre des mesures pour alléger les défis budgétaires des familles de travailleurs en signant une entente avec le fédéral pour les services de garde d’enfants, en réformant le marché du logement et en investissant dans l’énergie verte.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Continuing the debate, the member for Ottawa South.

Mr. John Fraser: I love coming here first thing in the morning, because it’s so quiet. It’s almost like church. Maybe I can help us get going this morning.

Highway 413: Why does the government want to build a highway? It’s not 1950. They want to build a highway that no one wants, that’s going to save 30 seconds. Why do they want to do that? That’s the question. Why don’t they want to invest in education? They’ve cut a half a billion from education. Why are we spending money on this highway? Why are we spending money on this highway, when we just gave back to the people who own the Highway 407 a billion dollars? We just forgave it to them. Why did we do that? Where are this government’s priorities? It’s not the 1950s. It’s not the ministry of roads.

We need to invest in those things that are going to help our children in the future: education, child care. How do we not actually have an agreement with the federal government? For God’s sake, Jason Kenney got an agreement. That’s incredible. I mean, at the rate Jason Kenney is going, he’s going to be ahead of this government on climate change. If you look at the fall economic statement, there’s a nice paragraph that says, “We recognize climate change is a challenge.” Well, welcome to the parade, honestly.

I don’t understand the focus on highways. Why do we have to build a highway that nobody wants? And then a lot of people are asking questions about the Bradford Bypass: Why the change. Why the change?

Ms. Sandy Shaw: A golf course.

Mr. John Fraser: Was it done to save time, or to save the back nine?

Speaker, this government’s priorities are out of whack: half a billion from education; spending money on a highway that’s going to save 30 seconds, that’s going to pave over farmland and that people don’t want. What people want is they want a future for their children, they want education, they want better schools and they want $10-a-day child care. How come it’s not there?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: You know it’s not $10.

Mr. John Fraser: Well, it’s not going to be $10 at the rate your government is going, which is nowhere.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): No cross-aisle chatter, please. Speak through the Chair.

Mr. John Fraser: Your Minister of Education, if you want to talk about this, says, “Well, we want to get a billion-dollar deal, and we gave them some data points”—no plan, but some data points. I’m not sure if I was on the other end of a billion-dollar deal and trying to make it with someone—and they gave me data points and talking points whether they would sign on the dotted line.

Here’s the other thing: Milton two-way GO. I heard yesterday the other side crowing about, “We’ve successfully done this, just like we built the Vaughan hospital in three years. We cut the ribbon; we built the hospital.” It takes 10 years, folks, to build a hospital, minimum. Have a bit of humility, that’s all.

Talk about Milton two-way GO—how do you figure you got to where you’re at with CN in negotiations? Because you guys started it three years ago? No. We all know that there’s work done in the governments before us. You can take as much credit as you like, but have a shred of humility more than what we hear on a day-to-day basis. I don’t care; cut the ribbon, take the credit, but don’t tell other people—don’t tell us—that we did nothing, because that’s just a load and it’s a lack of humility.

You raised the minimum wage. I’m happy for those workers who will be getting it now. I would have been a lot happier if I hadn’t watched three years ago every single person on the other side standing up and cheering the Premier as he cut the raise to the minimum wage, took away equal pay for equal work, took away paid sick days. Then we had to spend 400 days—not just us, but just literally everybody in this province had to drag the government screaming and kicking to get back paid sick days.

I remember in 2018 when you guys thought that was the greatest thing—every day, six, seven, eight standing ovations. Well, the Premier stuck it to the little guy, the minimum wage workers and their families. I remember that. Maybe you don’t remember that. I remember that. Maybe you want to forget it. You don’t see a lot of those standing ovations anymore—certainly had a heck of a lot of them in 2018 and 2019.

Hon. Todd Smith: Those were the days.

Mr. John Fraser: Yes, you’re right. There we go: Those were the days, looking back fondly on 2018. You hear that? The minister says, “Those were the days.” Those were the days. Yes, those were the days when we stuck it to the little guy. I don’t know. It’s not something I would be very proud of.

I don’t know if the Premier is in Etobicoke taking delivery of that vehicle that we ordered in 2018, but I’ll be interested to see whether or not that’s the case.

Thank you very much, Speaker, and I’m looking forward to questions—oh, not everybody at once.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): We do have time for questions. The first one goes to the government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I love listening to Liberal members talk. Colleagues, if they had just got that fifth term, then they would have been able to get these things accomplished. It wasn’t the four terms they had; it was just that fifth term. They were so close to building a hospital, they were so close to Milton, they were so close to getting all these things done. They built no long-term-care homes. They were close. They just needed that fifth term—if they had only got 16, 17, 18 years.

Why are we building roads? Well, because there are a million people coming to Ontario. Why? Because this government is encouraging people to come back and the economy is growing. It’s unacceptable that I should be in traffic for an hour. It’s good for the Liberals.

Why did we delay certain enhancements to the minimum wage? Because they were driving away jobs by the thousands, and people are now coming back.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Ten seconds to pose your question.

Hon. Paul Calandra: On every count, that government was a failure, and it wasn’t us saying that, it was the people—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Thank you.

I’ll leave it up to you to decide what the question was in there, but I turn to the member for Ottawa South to respond.

Mr. John Fraser: I will remind the member, who I have a lot of respect for—and it’s always entertaining going back and forth with him—that this province led the G7 in jobs and growth for five years before you took office. We were one of the top three places for five years for foreign direct investment.

And by the way, the hospital? It takes 10 to 12 years minimum. It used to take 17 years to build a hospital. There will be things that you do that you won’t be around for, unfortunately, I think, after June this year. And I’m looking forward to actually talking to you about that, hopefully with humility, which I think is really important.

Just don’t say that somebody did nothing, all right? Just don’t acknowledge that they did something, as opposed to saying, “You did nothing,” because you know it’s not true.

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Order, please. Order.

The member for Manitoulin: You have a question, sir?

M. Michael Mantha: Merci, monsieur le Président. C’est tout le temps le fun quand on entend des gros coups de vent passer à travers de l’Assemblée ce matin.

Ma question est pour le membre d’Ottawa–Vanier sur le discours qu’elle a donné sur l’énoncé économique de l’automne. Moi, un francophone du nord de l’Ontario, j’étais—avec passion—en train de regarder l’énoncé économique pour voir quels sont les services qui vont venir pour améliorer les vies des personnes francophones. Je n’ai vu aucun énoncé en dedans de l’énoncé économique—je n’ai même pas vu un mot.

Fait que, pour les gens du nord de l’Ontario, ça nous éloigne de ce gouvernement. Ça ne nous rapproche pas. Ça ne nous rend pas un message qu’on veut améliorer les services.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question.

M. Jeremy Roberts: Je veux remercier mes collègues du Parti libéral pour les discours ce matin. Je pense que tout le monde dans la Chambre législative ici comprend l’importance des infirmières et des PSSP durant la pandémie. C’est pour cette raison que notre gouvernement a soutenu la formation de plus de 5 000 nouvelles infirmières et 8 000 PSSP dans notre budget cette année.

Donc, je veux demander aux membres de l’opposition : est-ce qu’ils vont soutenir cet investissement de 342 millions de dollars qui va soutenir la formation de ces membres importants de notre système de santé?

Alors, évidemment, l’investissement pour les infirmières et pour les préposés aux bénéficiaires est un investissement non seulement important mais nécessaire. Mais il faut que cet investissement-là soit permanent. On offre des augmentations de salaire temporaires en espérant que ça va attirer plus de gens dans la profession. Moi, je ne vois pas comment on va accomplir cet objectif-là si on sait qu’après la fin de mars, on va vous couper votre salaire.

Je parlais plus tôt de se donner les moyens d’accomplir nos objectifs. Il ne faut pas que ça soit juste des énoncés. Il faut améliorer les conditions de travail de ces gens-là si on veut les attirer dans la profession, et c’est ce qui manque, cruellement, dans le plan du gouvernement.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The member for Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas has a question.

Nous avons discuté de nos enfants, qu’ils s’inquiètent pour leur avenir. Dans ma circonscription, les gens sont vraiment déçus par ce gouvernement, surtout à propos du changement climatique. Est-ce que vous pouvez nous dire pourquoi vous pensez que ce gouvernement a décidé de bâtir plus d’autoroutes au lieu d’avoir un plan de changement climatique qui est crédible devant tout le monde? Est-ce que vous pouvez nous donner des mots rassurants qu’il y aura un avenir pour nos enfants?

M me Lucille Collard: Merci beaucoup. Merci pour l’effort. J’ai très bien compris la question, donc c’était très bien formulé.

Bien évidemment, on sait que le gouvernement présentement n’a pas mis une grosse priorité sur l’environnement, et ce n’est pas rassurant pour nos enfants. Il n’y a pas de priorité pour l’environnement parce que le ministre de l’Environnement est allé à Glasgow les mains vides. On n’a pas entendu parler de ce qu’il est allé faire là-bas. Est-ce que c’étaient des vacances? On ne le sait pas. Mais il n’y a eu aucun résultat qui est sorti de cette présence-là.

On sait que nos enfants sont inquiets de leur avenir. Ils voient très bien que ce n’est pas ce gouvernement-là qui va les rassurer. On va avoir besoin d’un changement de gouvernement qui donne la priorité sur l’avenir de nos enfants, parce que présentement ils ont perdu confiance. Ils préfèrent même de ne plus avoir d’enfants, parce qu’ils sont incertains de l’avenir qu’il va y avoir sur la planète. On a juste à regarder ce qui se passe en Colombie-Britannique présentement, encore une fois, pour réaliser que notre environnement, il est en danger.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Speaking of the environment, the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks has a question.

Hon. David Piccini: To the member’s point: I remember always getting an awkward moment when I first got elected, making an announcement I had nothing to do with—always acknowledged my predecessor.

But in just three years, we have, through legislation, regulated a direct minimum hours of care of four and a half hours. We fixed the hospital funding formula. We’ve launched community paramedicine. We’ve invested in subways after years of neglect. We’ve launched two-way GO, servicing folks in my community. We’ve created a climate where we’ve seen over $6 billion invested in electric vehicles and we’re the only province—you mention the Minister of the Environment—that’s on track to meet our goals by 2030 from Paris.

My question to the member opposite is: Just as I gave some credit to my predecessor, would he give credit to our government for getting all of that done in just three years?

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The member for Ottawa South to respond in 30 seconds.

Mr. John Fraser: He made my point. He said that they got something done in three years that takes 10 years, like a hospital. Look, I’ll give you credit. I don’t have a problem giving credit. But don’t tear out the charging stations, cancel the subsidies and then say all of a sudden that you’re the champions of electric vehicles. It doesn’t work that way. It’s like, “We’re the champions of minimum wage, but we cut it three years ago. And do you know what? When we did it, we celebrated. We all stood up and clapped.”

Can you believe that, really? Honestly. Thank you.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Further debate?

Mr. Bill Walker: A pleasure to stand in this House and speak to Bill 43, the Build Ontario Act (Budget Measures), 2021.

I want to congratulate the member from Pickering–Uxbridge, who is the Minister of Finance. When I was sitting in your chair, Speaker, I referenced him as the President of the Treasury Board. But he did a fabulous job of that, and I just want it acknowledged that he did a job with both. And I want to pay acknowledgement to the PA, the member from Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill, who has done a fabulous job in his role, and the former PA from Willowdale.

Mr. Speaker, it’s truly a pleasure to stand here. I want to again start this off by that speech—the cornerstone was paying credit to the people of Ontario; the people of Ontario who through COVID-19 have shown the Ontario spirit. They’ve shown strength, determination, compassion, generosity and grit, Mr. Speaker. To all of the people who have stepped up and done the right thing to get us through this once-in-a-lifetime pandemic, I applaud you. Know that our government is behind you, as it has been through the pandemic and will continue to be.

Mr. Speaker, through you—and I see the member, I believe, from Ottawa South wanted to engage and get this House heated up a little bit, so I want to just offer a couple of comments because I didn’t get a chance during the question-and-response. He talked about humility and he talked about data points. I just want to remind the people watching at home and listening, and for Hansard’s record, of some of those data points of when the Liberals were in for their 15 years; that 300,000 manufacturing jobs left our province.

They tripled the debt in 15 years of the history of our province, which left us in a horrible state. The deficit was about $12 billion a year. Every single one of those—to the member from Ottawa South—was a dollar that wasn’t going to programs and services and all of the things that people in need, need. They built 611 beds in 15 years, and I think the House leader was going to get on to that and say that if they had had that fifth mandate they might have built the 612th bed over the next term.

He said, “Those were the days,” and he might have been paraphrasing someone across the aisle who was saying that, but those were not the days we want to go back to. With this budget statement and this fall economic statement, I want to assure the people of Ontario that we are here for them, as we have been throughout the pandemic, and we’ll continue to be.

I’m going to cover a couple of things, just from my great riding of Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound, and then I’ll come back to some of the more generic stuff. We have approved, just in the riding of Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound—and I want to reference those 611 beds over 15 years built by the Liberals. We’re going to have an additional 91 beds in Owen Sound, an additional 51 beds in Meaford, an additional 62 beds in Grey Gables, an additional 28 beds in Rockwood in Durham and an additional 26 beds in Hanover, Mr. Speaker. Just in my riding alone, we’ll have 640 beds.

We’re one of the highest percentages of seniors in the province. We needed those beds 15 years ago, but we are building them today. We have committed a total of 30,000 beds, and we’re going to recondition another 28,000 beds over the next 10 years.

Mental health: I want to congratulate the member from Vaughan–Woodbridge and the Associate Minister of Mental Health; $12.4 million in this document for rapid access to mental health, which we all know is direly needed across our province in all sectors.

Minister Dunlop, colleges and universities, the member from Simcoe North, was just in Owen Sound a week ago announcing that we are actually bringing our nursing programs back to rural Ontario—in our case, Georgian College in Owen Sound—so people don’t have to leave to get that last certification. They move to an urban area and many times do not come home, so that’s going to bring care closer to home. I just couldn’t thank, again, the member from Simcoe North and the Minister of Colleges and Universities enough.

Two daycares have been approved in my riding, in Holstein and Durham; drastically needed in our riding for many, many years. Multiple roads and bridges—and I want to again congratulate the member from Etobicoke Centre and the Minister of Infrastructure: over $2 billion for small, rural and northern; $30.2 billion over 10 years, which is going to drastically improve the lives of people across this great province.

Mr. Speaker, I’d be remiss—and you might have heard me say this once or twice in your years here: that the Markdale Hospital is actually, finally, going to be built. In fact, it’s coming out of the ground as we speak. The Liberals announced it three times and never did a darn thing, but today I drove by and I can tell you that that hospital is coming out of the ground, and that is fabulous.

Broadband: $4 billion—again, the Minister of Infrastructure. This is going to be game-changing across our province, and people are ecstatic about the ability. They’re flocking, actually, from those urban areas, to beautiful places like the Bruce Peninsula and Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound, and maybe a couple to Manitoulin, even, across the way.

Mr. Speaker, I’m excited about the isotopes. I did a motion here a couple of weeks ago to make sure that this is a fundamental strategic approach of our government that every government, frankly, of all stripes, endorsed, and should, going forward, because that is life-saving. It’s new technology. It’s new ways to create jobs. But most importantly, it’s going to help improve the lives of people across our great province.

We’ve talked about SMRs in the nuclear field. We know we can’t get to the net 2030 without nuclear, and the SMRs are, again, going to be game-changers. Hopefully we will have the wisdom to make sure that they are SMRs, just like the Candu, Ontario-made. Ninety per cent can be made here, and it will revolutionize, particularly, if they wish, the small, rural, Indigenous communities in our extreme Far North—which will give them a reliable, clean source of power.

It’s going to create jobs, Mr. Speaker, and a supply chain that already in our nuclear system is second to none. This gives them hope and vibrancy. The investment community is saying, “You show us that you’re committed to this.” I can tell you, for both Bruce Power and OPG, one of the key fundamentals that they believe has helped them to be able to go through with their life extension is knowing that this government stands behind them 100%, saying it will be here in the future, because it is the technology that is the baseload, that is there and providing good-paying jobs and clean, affordable energy.

We’re building roads, as has been spoken about in here. I think some of the people like to try to make this—Mr. Speaker, as the government House leader, the member from Markham–Stouffville, said, with one million more people in Ontario, we have to increase the roads. It would be like not increasing some of the Hiram Walker estate down in Windsor when you had all that ability, with more people wanting to enjoy those products.

There’s $40 million over two years for advanced manufacturing, $90.3 million for skilled trades, $5 million for Second Career, and $270 million for Discover Ontario. Folks out there listening, I hope you take it to heart to rediscover Ontario, as our Minister of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries has said. It’s incredible. That industry was hit so hard. Again, the beautiful Bruce Peninsula and all of Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound is a great place for all of those people to come and visit. I hope people will take this to heart and truly do it, and maximize some of those opportunities that are in front of them.

Mr. Speaker, I want to focus a little bit, in the early going of my speech, on the long-term-care sector. As I said, the former Liberal government, for 15 years—abysmal. No one had to be a rocket scientist to look at the demographics of the baby boom generation and know we were going to need more beds. The member from Ottawa South talked about 10 years; well, he had 15, and they built a total of 611 beds when we all knew that the seniors demographic was increasing exponentially.

So, Mr. Speaker, I am proud to say that our government is investing $2.68 billion to build 30,000 new and modern long-term-care beds in a decade, as thousands more are upgraded to the 21st century. We found out the hard way during COVID, sadly, because of that lack of effort and getting the job done by the former Liberal government, supported, by the way—just so some of my friends across the aisle in the NDP know, they actually kept that government in for at least the two terms that I was here during votes.

At the end of the day, I want to ensure that the people of Ontario know that we have committed significantly: 20,000 new and 15,000 upgraded beds in development, representing more than 60% of the province’s goal. That’s fundamentally a game-changer, Mr. Speaker. You’re going to hear that—“game-changer”—because we are making big change across many sectors for the betterment of the people of Ontario. We’re investing over $5 billion over four years to hire more than 27,000 long-term-care staff, including nurses and personal support workers.

Mr. Speaker, I was the critic of long-term care. I saw what the Liberals did not do, what they did not accomplish, and we are all paying the price of it now. We’ve said that we will commit, that we will turn this around, and by April 2022 we’re hoping to make significant progress by adding 16,200 more personal support workers. I have lots of friends and I have family who are personal support workers. They truly are the front-line heroes. They are the people out there every day. We do need them, we do value them and we want to make sure that there are more of them to be able to do that.

We’ve increased and committed to four hours of care per day. I tried to get the Liberals to do that in my critic role when I was in that role, and they wouldn’t do it. And yet, the member from Ottawa South likes to have a bit of revisionist history. He wants to talk about what you needed to get done and what you didn’t. The Liberals didn’t get a lot of things done in long-term care, and people have suffered because of that. We’re turning that around.

While I’m on that topic, Mr. Speaker, I want to talk a little bit about the Canada Health Transfer. At this point, it’s only 22% of the total provincial health care costs. We know that as people get older, as we all get older, there are more challenges and more complications. The cost of providing care is significantly more. At this point we are lobbying the federal government, saying, “You have to revisit that. You have to make sure that you are actually thinking of the long-term future.” All of us have the ability to be able to influence that. We’re suggesting that they need to get to at least 35%, so that we actually can take care of those people in a very appropriate manner.

COVID-19, as we all know, was something that none of us thought about, that none of us could see coming. We did not have any idea. This is a once-in-a-lifetime—hopefully—pandemic for all of us to have lived through, that hopefully we will never experience again, and our fundamental, I can tell you from being at the cabinet table, from the Premier and our cabinet and whole-of-government, was we wanted to ensure that the services and the programs are there for people.

I’ve had some people suggest, “You spent a lot of money. The federal government spent a lot of money.” That’s an absolutely true statement, Mr. Speaker. But at the end of the day, in their time of need, that is when your government should be there. You should be there to take care—and we’ll figure out over time how to bring that balance sheet back.

But $51 billion was expended to ensure that the people in that time of need—in something that none of us had an idea of how to deal with, that we’ve never had experienced. You couldn’t turn to a textbook. You couldn’t turn to anyone in our world to say, “How do you do this? How do you react?” We did what we thought was best. We put programs and services in place to help people through. That included $1 billion for a province-wide vaccination campaign that has seen Ontario achieve one of the highest vaccination rates in the world, Mr. Speaker.

I’m glad to say there are a lot of things in our lives that are starting to return to normal, or at least a resemblance of normal, because that vaccination has worked. It has been the case in Ontario where we’ve been able to convince the bulk of people to be vaccinated, and not do it for themselves only, but do it for their fellow men, women and people in our communities, Mr. Speaker.

We’ve included $5.1 billion earmarked to support hospitals, creating more than 3,100 additional beds, Mr. Speaker. Again, in that time of need, we had to flex. We had to flex for ICU beds. It was one of the biggest concerns we had: How do you deal with people in that time of need?

Some $3 billion in urgent and unprecedented support to over 110,000 small businesses across the province—we know that businesses suffered. It was a challenge, certainly, everyone knows that, but we tried to do our best. We wanted to protect people. We wanted to protect jobs. And our number one priority, which I’m going to continue to say and stand proudly behind, was protecting people’s health—our number one priority. We’ll continue to do that until it’s totally behind us.

Mr. Speaker, I’ve had some people call my office with concerns about the deficit: “Yes, you did some things” and “Yes, you had to do those things.” But they are concerned about the deficit because, as we know, and what I’ve shared before about the Liberals, every single cent that is spent on deficit financing is a cent not going to mental health, affordable housing or to people in need. So we are actually trying, and we will balance over time. We’ll put programs in place that are prudent, that are fiscally responsible.

It’s good to hear that this year, for 2021-22, the finance minister is projecting a deficit of $21.5 billion, which is $11.6 billion lower than the outlook published earlier. Again, by being prudent, by making sure we continually review, we can bring those numbers down and make sure more dollars are going out the front door.

Mr. Speaker, we’re going to have, again, projected revenues of $168.6 billion, which is also an improvement over 2020-21, because as we know, Mr. Speaker, you need to continue to increase those revenues to stay in touch with time. It’s $14.6 billion higher than projected in the 2020-21 budget and $11.7 billion higher than projected in the 2021-22 fiscal quarter finances.

Mr. Speaker, it’s incredible. You think you have 20 minutes and you can cover a lot of stuff. I’m not even getting to most of my high points, and even at the rate I speak, it’s challenging to get it all out.

But I want to make sure that we again cover very quickly that we have $51 billion that we have invested on behalf of the people because we made their health and their care a priority. Mr. Speaker: $300 million for surgical recovery in hospital reform, and making sure that—we had to delay and defer so that we had that capacity in our hospitals if people, and the wave came as strong as it could have come—to make sure that we had those resources there. It’s more than $580 million since the start of the pandemic.

This is going to allow supporting up to 67,000 surgeries and procedures, as well as up to more than 135,000 diagnostic imaging hours. There was a Surgical Innovation Fund to support 104 projects. I think that is moving us in the right direction.

Nursing is absolutely critical. I just want to say, on behalf of every single person in this House, the nurses are the heart blood of our health care system and they always will be. So, to you, thank you so much for all that you have done and continue to do. Mr. Speaker, to strengthen the nursing and personal support workforce, we’re planning to invest $342 million beginning in 2021-22, adding 5,000 new and upskilled registered nurses and registered practical nurses, as well as an additional 8,000 personal support workers.

That includes 500 registered nurses with specialized acute care training, 420 registered nurses through the existing Community Commitment Program for Nurses, 900 registered nurses, 700 registered practical nurses through the WeRPN bridging program, 8,000 PSWs to critical areas of the health care system through a variety of programs, and an additional $57.6 million beginning in 2022-23 to hire 225 nurse practitioners. Again, a huge shout-out to them for the great job that they do on our care.

I alluded earlier to the Associate Minister of Mental Health—$12.4 million over two years to expand mental health and addiction supports for health and long-term-care workers across this province. Again, not only are we caring for the people most of our professionals care for, but we also know this is an added burden to them, so we’re putting in programs and services to help them through this.

I’m going to repeat it again, because it’s such a critical component that has come to light: 8,000 PSWs to critical care areas; an additional $922 million to extend the temporary wage increase for personal support workers.

Mr. Speaker, we are going to put in an investment of $72.3 million over three years to increase enforcement capacity and double the number of inspections by 2022-23 in our long-term care. That was something, again, that we heard loud and clear. We’ve made changes. We are taking action and steps to be able to improve that.

I’m going to reiterate: 30,000 new beds and upgrades to 28,000 existing beds, a $3.7-billion commitment to long-term care, which—had the Liberals done that in their term, maybe we would have had different results.

I want to talk a little bit about home care, Mr. Speaker, because it’s always the case, I think, that if you surveyed the bulk of people and said, “Where do you want to spend your remaining days,” it would be in their own home. They don’t want to go to other facilities. Obviously, there is a need in certain cases where you have to, but the bulk of people want to do that. One of the ways to do that is to actually have a home safety tax credit for those seniors to make improvements to their home and have a tax benefit to be able to do that so they can participate, they can be there, helping themselves as well.

That’s a great thing, I think, Mr. Speaker—up to $1,000 for an individual or $2,000 for a family.

And the tourism recovery grant and the travel small business grant—again, the staycation in Ontario that I mentioned earlier, Mr. Speaker: I think it’s fabulous that we’re actually thinking back to say, “How do we help these small businesses in need? How do we encourage the community to step forward? How do we allow individuals to be part of the recovery from this devastating COVID-19 pandemic?” Well, that is to be able to encourage people to get out, to be able to get out of their house now that most of the lockdowns are over and to travel and to reconnect with family, to travel our great province, which we should all be proud of.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I want to push the federal government to take a look at that Canada Health Transfer. We are projected to spend $69.9 billion on base health care and a further $5.2 billion on dedicated COVID-19—that’s 40% of the provincial budget. The Canada Health Transfer is projected to meet 22% of these costs. We want it to be up there at a much higher level of 35%, and I hope people will push their federal members of Parliament to give that a concern.

A couple of last touching points, Mr. Speaker: The Ring of Fire is an absolute gem of an asset that is in our own backyard. It will allow us to move forward with the electronic vehicle, which will revolutionize our world. I talked about the SMRs, the small modular reactors—again, a new evolution. Here in Ontario, we have the ability, we have the capacity, and I couldn’t be more happy to stand here and suggest that we are the government that is going to continue to move that forward.

Mr. Speaker, I started my speech a little bit earlier with a few notes about what the persistency was and how we can be there. We are a province, and we are a people, and I’m proud of it—and this budget moving forward and this fiscal economic statement is moving us forward. The people of Ontario showed, through the worst pandemic of our lifetime, that they have the strength, the determination, the compassion, the generosity and the grit. I want them to know that their government stands lockstep with them. Our government is there for you in your time of need. We’ll continue to be there in your time of need.

It’s the people of Ontario that we all stand here for and have the humble honour of representing. I’m honoured to do that, and we are with you. Ontario spirit.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): I thank the member from Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound for his 20-minute presentation. I know he’s anxious to respond to questions; however, that will have to take place later, because we’re at that point on our agenda where we go for members’ statements.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Environmental protection

Ms. Jessica Bell: Ontario and Canada’s lakes are fundamental to our life, our health and the health of the environment. Yet every day, we pump pollutants into our Great Lakes system: mercury, hard metals, toxins and plastic, including microplastic.

The most common type of microplastic are microfibres that are shed from our clothes in the washing machine and then released in our waterways and Great Lakes system. These plastics end up in fish, birds, oysters, and then they move up the food chain to us. We need to take action to protect our health and safety and our waterways.

That is why I introduced a bill, Bill 279, with my friend the MPP for Kingston and the Islands to require all new washing machines to be equipped with a cheap filter that captures up to 87% of microfibres and stops them from entering our waste water system and then our lakes. These microfilters work. We know this because of the pilot that was conducted in households in Parry Sound by Georgian Bay Forever. I want to thank the leadership and the staff and the volunteers of Georgian Bay Forever. I also want to thank Lisa Erdle, a researcher at the University of Toronto.

And I want to thank the townships that are right now passing resolutions in support of this bill, including Archipelago and Seguin. I also want to thank Jen Petursson from Fashion Takes Action.

This movement is growing, and I urge you to join. If we truly want to protect Canada and Ontario’s lakes from harmful microplastics pollution, the Ontario government must pass our bill to install microfilters on washing machines. Let’s get it done.

World Vision 2021 Global 6K

Mr. Billy Pang: For over 70 years, World Vision has worked with communities and partners to help kids and families across the world rise out of poverty.

I have been a World Vision volunteer for over 30 years and currently sponsor six kids. This organization has a special place in my heart.

Six kilometres is the average distance a woman or a child in the developing world walks for water. Too often, the water obtained is not clean to drink.

This year, the 2021 Global 6K aimed to fund clean water projects in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Haiti.

Speaker, I want to thank everyone who donated to Markham-Unionville’s Walk for Clean Water fundraising event. In combination with four teams—Billy Pang and friends, Grace Chinese Gospel Church of North York, Peoples Grace Church, and Marie and Wini Zumba Dance—we raised over $45,000 to support this great initiative.

Let’s continue to support and change lives one day at a time.

Affordable housing

Mr. Jeff Burch: Speaker, Christine and Dave Hunt have one simple goal: to find a safe, affordable place to live. After falling victim to a rental scam, they lost $1,400, money they needed to secure a rental. Since then, they’ve had to live with family in Welland after being refused at over 20 apartments in the Niagara region.

Christine and her family are far from alone. My office hears from countless families who are having a nearly impossible time finding a safe and affordable place to live. Seniors and those on fixed incomes are increasingly having a hard time with the rising cost of living and unsustainable rental increases.

Since this government was elected in 2018, the cost of a rental has increased dramatically. And statistics recently released from the Canadian Real Estate Association showed that the cost of buying a home in Niagara has increased 121% in the last five years.

Speaker, we know that Ontario’s municipalities cannot solve the affordable housing crisis alone. This Legislature has the opportunity to take action and tackle this crucial issue in our communities by investing in social housing, investing in affordable housing stock, and by expanding the ability of municipalities to use inclusionary zoning.

Housing is a human right, and people in Ontario shouldn’t have to sacrifice an arm and a leg to put a roof over their heads.

Sant Teja Singh Ji

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: This is a subject that is very personal to me and many Canadians of South Asian origin. I want to talk about an individual who was the first turban-wearing student to graduate from Harvard University, an individual who dedicated his life to fighting for a just society, and an individual who is known as one of the first ambassadors of Sikhism to the Western world. Speaker, his name is Sant Teja Singh Ji. He was an educator by profession who preached hard work and honest living.

In the early 20th century, Sant Teja Singh Ji played a vital role in helping South Asian migrants in Canada achieve permanent residency. Without his valiant efforts, there would not be such a strong and vibrant South Asian presence in Canada today. As a result of his esteemed efforts, the province of British Columbia has declared July 1 as Sant Teja Singh Day.

Through you, Speaker, I would like to take the chance to appreciate his many achievements. As a Canadian with South Asian origins myself, I am well aware that I would not be in the position I am today without the selfless efforts of Sant Teja Singh Ji. He was truly a man ahead of his time, who served humanity without any distinction of caste, creed, race or colour. His life was his message to the world.

Environmental protection

Ms. Jennifer K. French: I was recently joined on a beautiful fall day by the leader of the official opposition, the MPP for Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas, councillors from the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation, regional Councillor Dies, EANAP and many community and environmental voices at Carruthers Marsh in Ajax. We were there to commit to protecting this vitally important area and to adding the Carruthers Creek headwaters to Ontario’s greenbelt when the Ontario NDP form government in 2022.

Before the change in government, however, I wish it were possible to convince this current anti-environment PC government to protect these headwaters. I’m not optimistic, however, after the war we had over Duffins Creek. This Premier has paved over wetlands and farmlands, giving his buddies what they want, come hell or high water—and there will be high water. This Premier has slashed flood prevention programs by 50% and has hobbled conservation authorities.

Even though the now MPP for Ajax publicly committed to bringing the Carruthers Creek headwaters under the protection of the greenbelt when he was campaigning in 2018, just like other local PC Party campaign promises, they don’t hold water—unlike wetlands, Speaker.

People and businesses in the area should be saved the heartache and cost of flooding. Building on the Carruthers Creek headwaters will increase downstream flooding in Ajax an average of 77%, as high as 113% in one region, according to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority watershed study. The Carruthers Creek headwaters are comprised of prime agricultural lands containing sensitive hydrological features, and are completely surrounded by the greenbelt. The watershed is vulnerable and invaluable. We must protect it, so, government, please—please—add the Carruthers Creek headwaters to the greenbelt.

Hospital funding

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: Today, on behalf of my constituents in Scarborough–Guildwood, I stress the urgent need for a new hospital in Scarborough. A year ago, I asked the Minister of Health to advance funding to support our new hospital, and we are still waiting. Most of our hospital buildings were built between the 1950s and the 1980s. Today our hospitals rank at the very bottom in facilities conditions. We need an urgent response to move forward with Scarborough Health Network’s renewal plans.

Just last week, I visited Scarborough’s oldest senior, 110-year-old Ms. Dora Skeen, who was at the Scarborough General site. While on the seventh floor of the tower, I couldn’t help but notice the narrow space that was crammed in with patients, nurses, PSWs and other staff. They were doing their best to make use of every inch.

I met a dedicated PSW and nurse, Natalie, who specializes in treating the feet of diabetes patients to save their limbs. It is my hope that we provide conditions that better support her work.

Thank you to the Scarborough Health Network and all the front-line workers for their perseverance in fighting this pandemic amidst facilities challenges. We owe so much to these front-line workers for saving lives and keeping us safe. Their team has vaccinated almost 600,000 individuals, conducted over 400,000 tests and admitted over 3,000 patients to treat COVID.

The SHN has created the 2030 Future Facilities plan, which specifies a vision for a new and expanded hospital facility. I urge the government to accept their proposal and not leave Scarborough behind.

Steve Minnema / David Wickham

Mr. Dave Smith: On a number of occasions during the three and a half years that I have represented Peterborough–Kawartha, I’ve had the distinct privilege to rise in this House to thank some extraordinary individuals for things that they have done. Today, I would like to talk about two individuals from the Peterborough Police Service: PC Steve Minnema, and PC Dave Wickham.

At approximately 4:30 in the afternoon on August 4 of this year, PC Minnema and PC Wickham arrived at PRHC on a completely unrelated matter, when they saw a man fully engulfed in flames trying to get to the hospital emergency department. PC Minnema and PC Wickham were able to intercept the man and extinguish the flames before he entered the hospital. This allowed hospital staff to assist him without the potential for additional injuries had he been able to get into the emergency room before the flames were extinguished. The actions of these two officers not only saved the life of this man, but they also prevented injuries to others who were in the ER department waiting room.

Speaker, most of us would have turned and ran when we saw someone running at us engulfed in flames, but not PC Minnema and PC Wickham. They quickly recognized what needed to be done and immediately jumped into action. They ran towards the flames, extinguished the fire and saved the man’s life without concern for their own.

From the bottom of my heart, PC Minnema and PC Wickham, thank you. Your actions were truly heroic.

Food banks

Ms. Sara Singh: Good morning, Speaker. It’s an honour to rise here on behalf of the people of Brampton Centre. I would like to take a moment to thank all of those who work in our food banks in our local community. I would like to acknowledge Angie Rehal, the acting executive director at Seva Food Bank; Gord Warren, the chairman at St. Andrew’s food bank in Brampton; as well as Annie Bynoe at the Knights Table, for the tremendous work that they have done to help serve our vulnerable community.

Speaker, as you know, food bank usage has increased across our province and across the country. Food Banks Canada, through their HungerCount 2021, estimates that there was a 20% increase in food bank usage across the nation, with one in four locations experiencing a 50% increase in demand.

We know that the pandemic has been difficult on individuals in our communities. The rising cost of food, stagnant wages and business closures have made it harder and harder for people to get by. I’d like to take this opportunity to encourage all members here to donate and to encourage others in your community to donate to our local food banks—but more importantly, that we continue to fight against low-wage policies that push people into poverty, and that we help them with the wages that they need and the supports that they need to get through this pandemic and thrive in our local communities.

Events in Barrie–Innisfil

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I am very proud and humbled to represent the riding of Barrie–Innisfil. It’s a great riding because we have so many local businesses and so many local charities that are really thriving this time of year, and really providing hope and giving a little in our community. I wanted to take this opportunity to remind people to give a little, choose local, and think of charities that have just started ramping up, like the Innisfil Rotary Club through their Innisfil Christmas for Kids campaign, where they’re getting help from Johnny Burger—so thank you, Johnny Burger, for all your efforts—and of course looking forward to their Santa Claus drive-through parade.

We also have Christmas Cheer in Barrie that has been operating for about 47 years. It’s incredible the work they do with local charities as well. And, of course, Youth Haven’s Boxes of Hope, where they provide hope for so many youth across Simcoe county.

But it’s not just our youth, young people and families; it’s also our seniors. I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the Senior Wish Association that is gathering boxes for seniors in our community, to lift up spirits and get back into that great holiday spirit.

We also have, of course, the second annual Light It Up Innisfil campaign by Jennifer Richardson and her family, as we try to always keep up with the Richardsons. It’s difficult sometimes, Speaker, because they’re doing a lot. But they are doing their Light It Up Innisfil event this year where proceeds will be going to, of course, the Innisfil Food Bank and Christmas for Kids. Last year, they had about 139 houses participate in the campaign of lighting up the ornaments and Christmas decorations outside their homes, and they raised over $2,500. This year, we’re looking for even more.

So support local and your charities.

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

Legislative pages

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I am going to ask that our pages assemble.

It is my honour and pleasure to introduce this group of legislative pages:

From the riding of Don Valley West, Claire An; from the riding of Etobicoke North, Rishi Bhargava; from the riding of Brantford–Brant, Eleanore Bouma; from the riding of Parkdale–High Park, Elinor Carter; from the riding of Whitby, Nathaniel Gardner; from the riding of University–Rosedale, Joel Kronis; from the riding of York–Simcoe, Hayden Lai; from the riding of Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill, Serena Noronha; from the riding of Brampton North, Felicia Pagulayan; from the riding of Markham–Unionville, Athisha Surees; from Beaches–East York, Isabella Surman; and from the riding of Davenport, Alfie Tabachnick.

On behalf of all the members, I wish you our welcome and best wishes and our thanks for all the help that you’re going to give us in the coming weeks.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Now, back to work.

Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m also very pleased to inform the House that page Isabella Surman from the riding of Beaches–East York is today’s page captain, and we have with us today at Queen’s Park her mother, Sarah Cahill, and her father, Matthew Surman. Welcome to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

Hugh Edighoffer

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the government House leader on a point of order.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to allow members to make statements in remembrance for the late Mr. Hugh Edighoffer, with five minutes allotted to Her Majesty’s government, five minutes allotted to Her Majesty’s loyal opposition, and five minutes allotted to the independent members as a group.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Calandra is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to allow members to make statements in remembrance of the late Mr. Hugh Edighoffer, with five minutes allotted to Her Majesty’s government, five minutes allotted to Her Majesty’s loyal opposition, and five minutes allotted to the independent members as a group. Agreed? Agreed.

I recognize the member for Perth-Wellington.

Mr. Randy Pettapiece: It’s truly an honour to pay tribute today to Hugh Edighoffer, someone who exemplified the very best of public service as MPP, as Speaker, and throughout his life.

Who was Hugh Edighoffer? When he passed away in July 2019, we read a simple statement in Hugh’s obituary that was characteristic of the man’s decency and humility: “Hugh was a small businessman, mayor, town councillor, member of provincial Parliament and Speaker of the Ontario Legislature.” He was, indeed, those things. But to his family, friends, constituents and colleagues in public service, and all those who knew him, he was much more.

Hugh was a community builder. After graduating from college, Hugh returned to his hometown of Mitchell to work in the family business, a retail clothing store his grandfather founded in 1924. With an early sense of public service, Hugh got involved in local service clubs, including the Lions Club and the chamber of commerce. In the 1950s and early 1960s, Hugh’s dedication to community led him to local politics. He held various municipal offices, including councillor and mayor of Mitchell. With this experience, it’s probably not surprising that as an MPP, he supported community-building projects. He knew their value.

That was my first experience with Hugh. I met him in the late 1980s, when I was on the building committee for the Monkton arena, now called the Elma-Logan Recreation Complex. We needed money to build it. These were the days before constituency offices, so we went to see Hugh at his home in Mitchell. He welcomed us, he heard us and he acted. He delivered an astonishing $600,000 in funding. When the project was complete, he added to the grand opening ceremony, bringing along another distinguished community builder, Lincoln Alexander, then the Lieutenant Governor of Ontario.

Just an aside on that: On the day of the opening, Speaker, we lost Mr. Alexander. We couldn’t find him. We had a secure room for him, and he wasn’t there. So just before the ceremony was to start, his security guard started running around, looking for him. I was on my way to the men’s washroom. I went into the washroom, and guess who was in there? Lincoln Alexander. And I said, “Sir, everybody is worried about your security and your safety, and people are looking for you right now.” He looked at me, and he said, “I don’t think anybody is going to shoot me in Monkton.” And nobody did. So we continued on with the ceremony.

Years later, after I was first elected, I enjoyed sitting down to dinner with Hugh—and that’s dinner at noon—at the Mitchell Legion on Fridays. He was always supportive and encouraging. And Hugh was determined. Hugh’s determination is well known and well respected, but his election results over the years make it unmistakable. He first ran for a seat in the provincial Legislature in 1963. Despite receiving nearly 40% of the votes, he was not successful. Four years later, he tried again. His second attempt was a squeaker. He won the seat by only 184 votes. I know how that feels, Mr. Speaker.

Having won an election, Hugh didn’t rest. He worked hard for his constituents. Throughout the 1970s, he won every election by a greater margin than the one before. By the election of 1977, Hugh won almost 70% of the votes in the riding of Perth, a plurality larger than any other in the province. Hugh easily won re-election again in 1981, 1985 and 1987.

His Progressive Conservative opponent in 1977 was Vivian Jarvis, who serves today in my constituency office. Before that election, Vivian visited Hugh and Nancy on their front porch. She recalls telling Hugh, “I’m not running against you; I’m running because we don’t have a candidate.”

Hugh was a statesman. It has been said, correctly, that Hugh elevated his constituents and public service over partisan politics or personal ambition. But he was always a proud Liberal and even served as chairman of the Liberal caucus. By 1985, Hugh had accumulated considerable knowledge about the workings of the Legislature, having already served as Deputy Speaker in a minority Parliament. That and a well-earned reputation for impartiality made him the obvious choice to serve as the new Speaker.

In his book Whose Servant I Am, Clare Dale writes, “The man who many people felt was ‘one of the most non-partisan politicians at Queen’s Park’ became the second Speaker of the Legislative Assembly to be elected from the ranks of the opposition.”

Two weeks later, Frank Miller’s government fell, and David Peterson became Premier.

Dale goes on to write, “Impartiality became the watchword for Edighoffer’s initial term as Speaker.”

His well-earned reputation for impartiality was tested, as Dale also notes, in a series of tough decisions as Speaker. He passed those tests, however, and in 1987 went on to become only the third person since the 19th century to have served more than one term as Speaker.

Hugh was a constituency person. Though he may be remembered in the halls of Queen’s Park as a statesman and a Speaker, to those of us in Perth county, his greatest legacy is one of his service to his constituents. They were the reason he ran. He was a humble, good-humoured people person who cared about his community, and voters rewarded him for it. To this day, it’s a story worth remembering and it’s an example worth emulating.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the member for London West.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: It is a pleasure to rise on behalf of the official opposition to pay tribute to one of the deans of the Ontario Legislature and one of the finest Speakers ever to preside in this chamber, Hugh Edighoffer.

Hugh Edighoffer served as the Liberal member of Parliament for the riding of Perth for 23 years, from 1967 to 1990, and before that as councillor and mayor. When he passed away in July 2019, the flags were lowered to half-mast at the municipal office in Mitchell, the community where Hugh grew up and where he dedicated most of his life to public service.

Former Premier David Peterson first met Edighoffer in 1975 and describes him as one of the sweetest men on earth: quiet, modest, decent and kind. He was admired for his non-partisanship, well-liked by everyone who knew him and respected by voters across party lines for his strong work ethic and as a champion of rural issues.

When Hugh was first elected, MPPs did not have budgets to run constituency offices or to hire staff. Hugh had inherited the Edighoffer family clothing business and held constituency hours at the back of the store. Peterson told me that Hugh was a smart guy and realized it didn’t hurt that constituents could buy a pair of gloves on the way in or out.

A decade later, in 1985, Stratford Mayor Dan Mathieson met Edighoffer when he signed up as a 14-year-old campaign volunteer. Dan remembers Hugh picking him up to go out canvassing or to put up signs. When Dan started volunteering on his own, Hugh always took the time to talk to Dan afterwards and ask how the canvass went. For Hugh, everything was a teachable moment. He not only asked Dan what people were saying at the door, but also what Dan had learned from the experience.

Hugh returned to Queen’s Park that year, becoming the second Speaker in Ontario’s history to be elected from the ranks of the opposition during the short-lived Frank Miller government. He became one of a handful of Speakers to serve more than one term when he was elected again in 1987 under Liberal Premier David Peterson. And although he did not run in the 1990 election, he served briefly as Speaker under NDP Premier Bob Rae until a new Speaker could be elected, making Hugh Edighoffer the only Ontario Speaker ever to serve under Conservative, Liberal and NDP governments.

Former NDP MPP David Warner succeeded Edighoffer as Speaker in 1990. Although there is no formal expectation that the outgoing Speaker will attend the election of the new Speaker, Hugh was there when David assumed the role in 1990 and was one of the first to offer his congratulations. David and Hugh would continue to see each other in the years that David served, and like every Speaker after him, including yourself, David considered Hugh a great friend. For David, Hugh exemplified the proud tradition of Speakers: always even-handed, always fair, always balanced and always respectful.

He had a nice sense of humour too and was famous for his calm and patient “I’ll wait” when things got out of hand.

Thirteen years after Hugh stepped down, John Wilkinson was elected as Perth–Wellington MPP and regarded Hugh as a treasured mentor and role model. John said that there was only one person in the riding who actually watched the legislative channel, and that was Hugh—when he was not out golfing at the Mitchell Golf and Country Club. John and Hugh shared similar paths: both Liberals, both with young families when they entered political life, and both unsuccessful in their first run for office. John recalls Hugh telling him after that initial defeat, “Don’t give up. I did it and you can do it, too.”

When John won in 2003, he asked Hugh for his most important piece of advice. Hugh said, “If your wife ever calls you and asks you to go home, go home. Always put your family first, because they will be there long after politics is over.”

Hugh lived by those same words. For him, family was everything. He was devoted to his late wife, Nancy, and was a loving and joyful father, grandfather and great-grandfather.

To his family, we say a profound thank you for sharing such a kind, gracious and loyal public servant with the people of Perth and the province of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Next, I’ll recognize the member for Guelph.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I’m honoured to rise today to pay tribute to Hugh Edighoffer. Hugh’s accomplishments are very impressive. He was a small business owner, a mayor, a town councillor, MPP and Speaker of the Legislature, but most of all, he was a decent, respectful and respected person.

When he was appointed Speaker of the Legislature in 1985 from the opposition benches, he was nominated and seconded by the three party leaders serving in the Legislature at the time, and I think that says so much about Hugh’s character. Former Premier David Peterson described him as a model to everybody, consensus-oriented. He made friends across party lines. Hugh was a model MPP, and for those of us who currently serve in the Legislature, someone who we can learn from. I’m inspired by his commitment to working across party lines.

I just want to say to Mr. Edighoffer’s family: You must be so proud of his accomplishments and the fact that so many MPPs from so many different parties so respect Hugh’s character and his public service. Thank you for sharing him with us.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Next, I’ll recognize the member for Ottawa South.

Mr. John Fraser: It’s an honour to say a few words of tribute to Hugh Alden Edighoffer: small businessman, mayor, town councillor, member of provincial Parliament for Perth and Speaker of the Ontario Legislature. He served this assembly on behalf of the people of Perth for 23 years. He was known for his impartiality and was one of the most non-partisan members of this House, qualities that served him well in this chamber.

I spoke to Gerry Phillips, a former member who most of us know, who served with him from 1987 to 1990. This is what he had to say about Hugh: “He was really a role model for Speaker. He commanded respect for himself and, by extension, for this assembly.”

He presided over this Legislature in changing times. There was the accord of 1985, the televising of debates and other technological changes, the transfer of responsibility to the Speaker for the legislative precinct. He was the only Speaker to serve under Conservative, Liberal and New Democratic administrations in Ontario’s history. But he left much more than that behind.

I was talking to John Wilkinson, MPP for Perth. He said that when he got here more than a decade after Hugh had left, staff at the assembly would routinely ask him, “How is Mr. Speaker?”—in reference to Hugh. He obviously left a very lasting impression on many people. It strikes me that what made him unique is that he listened and that he took a genuine interest in the people who were speaking to him and what they were talking to him about. Fairness, impartiality, taking a genuine interest: All those things, all those qualities set him apart.

All of us who sit here and all those who have gone before us, especially those who have to travel distances, know how much time we give up from our families. It is a big sacrifice. Hugh Edighoffer did that for 23 years to make his community, our province and this assembly a better place. Being separated from our families—well, that’s something we all accept as part of the job. But when you become Speaker, something else happens: You become separated from your other family, your caucus colleagues. Hugh served as Liberal caucus chair for a long time. These were people who you’re on a journey with.

They’re like a family. By virtue of the office, you need to back away. You don’t spend as much time together. That’s a big sacrifice.

Speaker, I think the people who make the greatest sacrifice are actually our families. They give up a lot to allow us to be here and try to build better communities and a better province for everybody. So to Hugh’s family—his late wife Nancy; his children Susan, Katie, Bob, and Jan; his grandchildren and his great-grandchildren; his sisters Maxine, Mary and Lloy and their families—we can’t thank you enough for allowing Hugh to be here, to support him, to do the kinds of things that he did here to make Ontario a better place, to make his community a better place, and to make this assembly a better place for all of us here.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I want to thank the members for their tributes. I know that all members join me in giving thanks to the family of Hugh Edighoffer and offering thanks for his life in public service. Thank you very much.

Order of business

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Point of order, government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to move a motion without notice respecting the arrangement of House business to accommodate the Indigenous art unveiling ceremony this Thursday.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to move a motion without notice respecting the arrangement of House business to accommodate the Indigenous art unveiling ceremony this Thursday. Agreed? Agreed.

Government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Thank you, Speaker.

That, immediately following the afternoon routine on Thursday, November 18, 2021, the House shall adjourn to allow for an unveiling ceremony to take place in the chamber; and

That the ceremony be broadcast on the ONT.PARL network and a full Hansard transcript of the ceremony be prepared; and

Notwithstanding standing order 101(a), that ballot item numbers 12 and 13 be considered consecutively on Tuesday, November 23, 2021, during the time for private members’ public business.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader has moved that, immediately following the afternoon routine on Thursday, November 18, 2021, the House shall adjourn to allow for an unveiling ceremony to take place in the chamber; and

That the ceremony be broadcast on the ONT.PARL network and a full Hansard transcript of the ceremony be prepared; and

Notwithstanding standing order 101(a), that ballot item numbers 12 and 13 be considered consecutively on Tuesday, November 23, 2021, during the time for private members’ public business.

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

Motion agreed to.

Question Period

Child care

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, my first question this morning is for the Premier.

Yesterday, Alberta signed the deal for $10-a-day child care with the federal government, and families here in Ontario are asking about what’s happening here in this province. Does the government not get the urgency here, that families actually need a break—and $10-a-day child care would be a great break.

The costs of everything are going up. I think everybody acknowledges that. Child care expenses are one of the biggest that families have, sometimes costing more than the mortgage.

Yesterday the federal minister said this: “We are still waiting on that action plan and while I very much welcome the letter from Minister Lecce, we’re still waiting for more details from the province of Ontario.”

Why has Ontario still not done its homework, leaving families to wait even longer? Why do we not have that child care deal right now?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To respond, the Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you to the member opposite for the question.

Indeed, Ontario wants to get a good deal, a fair deal for the families we serve.

Mr. Speaker, the offer by the federal government would not get us to $10 a day—not in year 1, not in year 5, not at any point in the duration of that agreement.

I would hope that every member of this Legislature is resolved to stand up for families who want a deal that gets us to $10, a fair share that reflects the interests of families and the fact that this province has one of the most comprehensive child care systems in the world—in this country, no doubt, and we’re proud of that, including the $3.6 billion we expend for 260,000 four- and five-year-olds. We want that recognized by the federal government. We want an investment that does not penalize Ontario because we happen to have the most progressive, comprehensive system in the nation.

We want a better deal that is sustainable, that is flexible and that truly achieves the objective of the federal mandate, which is $10 a day for all families in this province.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, yesterday the government was spinning something like $21 or $22 an hour, and they’re so out of touch that they don’t realize that would immediately reduce costs by about 50% for families right here in this city and around the province. It would reduce them significantly.

We know that child care is not just about children and families. It’s also about the economy, especially on the heels of this pandemic, when many, many women still have not returned to work. The Centre for Future Work says that a child care deal could create literally thousands of jobs and increase the GDP significantly. More importantly, it helps young children to succeed. That is the evidence-based reality about what child care offers, Speaker.

Why does this government not understand that helping young families afford a quality life here in an increasingly unaffordable Ontario should be a priority? Why is the Premier still refusing to bring a $10-a-day affordable child care plan to this province?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The Premier is very committed to affordable child care. It’s why in the first budget we unveiled the Ontario Child Care Tax Credit, which provides roughly $1,500 per child in savings, a measure that was opposed each and every year by the New Democrats and Liberals in this House.

But with that said, Speaker, we know there is more that can be done. The federal government contributes roughly 2.5% of Ontario’s contribution of child care. They should be doing much, much more.

Now, we agree that childcare is expensive. It is an inherited legacy of the former Liberals—roughly 40% higher than the national average here in Ontario. That is absolutely unacceptable. We agree. It’s why we’re at the table with the feds. It’s why we’ve made the case that we’re being shortchanged. And I thought the New Democrats at least would want to stand up to the Justin Trudeau Liberals to say, “Look, Ontarians are being shortchanged billions of dollars that will not lead us to $10 a day.” That’s the commitment the federal government made.

That’s what we expect of them: to invest in a program that delivers a sustainable, flexible, long-term, affordable program that all families can enjoy and, more importantly, all families can benefit from.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: With all due respect, who New Democrats stand up for is the families who desperately need affordable child care in this province. That’s who we stand up for, Speaker.

The question is, why won’t this government actually get its act together and bring $10-a-day child care to families in Ontario who continue to struggle with the rising cost of everything? When will the government prioritize child care?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: We’re putting the priority on Ontario families that expect their MPPs in this House to stand up for the best deal possible. It’s an abdication of leadership for the members opposite to want us to sign any deal—the first deal that comes to the province—that would have ensured a shortchange of billions of dollars. That just seems inconceivable when we were sent here to stand up for the provincial interest.

I didn’t expect the leader of the NDP to be the champion for the federal Liberals. I expected her and every member of this House to say to the federal government we want a better deal, one that actually invests in the children of this province, a comprehensive system that is more sustainable and more flexible, and a program that actually gets to $10 a day, not $21 or $43 a day; that’s not what they committed to. We want a commitment that is long term, not a five-year program that creates short-term savings, no doubt, but long-term challenges for families.

We want the feds to be at the table and stand with the province through a program that is sustainable, that is flexible and that truly delivers on their commitment of affordable child care for all families in Ontario.

Affordable housing

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier. Yesterday afternoon, this government voted against making life more affordable for Ontarians, so it’s not surprising that they don’t care about getting that child care deal to take the burden off of families. Not only are they totally out of touch with how hard it is for everyday folks to build the life that they’re working towards, but this government is making it absolutely worse. Low-wage policies, high housing costs, the price of everything going through the roof: auto insurance, hydro, food.

Now they are polling on how to politically take advantage of a housing crisis that’s been unfolding in this province for years now. The Liberals ignored it. The PCs are making it worse.

Will this Premier stop polling on housing and actually help people to be able to afford a roof over their head in this province?

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

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. Of course, I would submit that 760,000 Ontarians who received a minimum wage increase to $15 is something that makes their lives more affordable. That’s over $1,300 for those at the minimum wage. That’s over $5,000 for a liquor server. I think if you talk to the three quarters of a million workers in this province who face, every single day, prices going up—there’s no question about that, and it’s something that we’re always very concerned about.

But this government is very focused on helping the workers in this province and helping those who help us build this province into a more prosperous province for all families and for all Ontarians.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, in fact this government’s low-wage policies make it harder and harder for people to afford to put a roof over their head. But instead of trying to fix the problem, this government continues to poll on what it is that needs to be done with the housing crisis.

The Premier shouldn’t need to poll to understand that we are in an extremely problematic housing price crisis everywhere in the entire province. In Mississauga, a single-family home is now $1.4 million. In Hamilton, the average condo price is $577,000. You can’t even get a house in this city, in Toronto, for less than a million bucks.

Why won’t the Premier stop worrying about himself and his political advantage—or future, for that matter—and actually focus on making life more affordable in Ontario for people who are trying to pay the mortgage or even just have a roof over their head?

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

Hon. Steve Clark: Driven by a severe shortage of housing supply, rental housing and affordable housing has become unattainable for many Ontarians. Despite all the efforts by the government as part of our housing supply action plan, despite all of the improvements we have seen in terms of housing starts, construction starts and rental housing starts, we know as a government that there is much, much more we can do.

As the finance minister said in his fall economic statement, we will be appointing in the near future a housing affordability task force to give us further suggestions to build upon the success that our housing supply action plan moves forward. I will have more details in the near future, Speaker. Thank you for the question.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I invite the minister to look at our housing policy, which we put out over a year ago now, because we knew that Ontarians needed some hope in terms of the rising housing costs in this province.

But look, those costs are going through the roof, and the Premier continues to keep wages low in the meantime. The Canadian Real Estate Association forecasts that Ontario’s average house will skyrocket to $942,000 in 2022, and that’s almost a quarter of a million higher than in 2020—a quarter of a million dollars more in a matter of two years.

Everyday Ontarians can’t even afford to get into a home. They’re struggling to make their mortgage payments. Some 37,000 people left this province, the greatest number in 30 years. They abandoned an unaffordable Ontario. Instead of fixing this crisis, the Premier is busy polling on what might be popular for him politically.

How can the Premier stick to this wrong-headed, low-wage policy when everything—especially the cost of the fundamental need that everyone has, the price of housing—is getting out of control and going through the roof?

Hon. Steve Clark: Despite COVID-19, housing starts are still up significantly since the pandemic. In fact, the housing sector invested over $25.6 billion in new housing in 2020, which is about $4.5 billion more than the previous year. Right in the Leader of the Opposition’s city of Hamilton, housing starts in 2020 were up 7% over 2019, and year-to-date in 2021 shows that they’re currently 38% higher.

I acknowledged in the previous answer that there is much more to do. Our government, again, is going to be building upon the success of our housing supply action plan. We’re not done yet, Speaker.

Optometry services

Mr. Chris Glover: My question is for the Minister of Health.

November is Diabetes Awareness Month, and we know that the Minister of Health knows about it because she tweeted about it. But does she also know that diabetes is the leading cause of blindness in Canada? That’s why it’s so important that people with type 1 diabetes, like Thomas Young and Jacob, who are Spadina–Fort York constituents, can get an eye exam. But they haven’t been able to get an eye exam because of this government’s unwillingness to negotiate a fair deal with Ontario’s optometrists.

Ontario’s children and seniors are also not able to get the eye care that they need, including the seven-year-old daughter of Jagbir, who needs her first prescription glasses so that she can read the chalk board at school; and seniors including Gita Schwartz, Rob Whelan, Myrna Copeland, Candi Gill and her husband, who are experiencing vision loss. In fact, it has been 77 days since anyone has been able to receive OHIP-covered eye exams.

Will the government stop spinning excuses, truly value our residents’ health and eyesight and enter into good-faith bargaining to achieve a fair deal with Ontario’s optometrists?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Well, I can certainly agree with the member’s question. It is very concerning that many young people are not receiving the treatment they need, and many seniors aren’t as well. But that is not because the government is not paying for these OHIP-covered services. We continue to pay for them. The fact of the matter is that the Ontario Association of Optometrists has decided not to provide these services. They are demanding certain outcomes before we even start into negotiations.

They broke off the negotiations with the mediator of their choice. They asked for $39 million in back payments because their previous agreement ran out in 2011 under the previous government. We want to make things right with them. We paid that $39 million into their account. They’ve asked for an increase going forward on the same basis that physicians would receive. We are offering that at 8.48%, retroactive to April 1 of this year, and we want to go into negotiations with them to discuss their overhead costs.

These are all things that they’ve asked for. These are all things that we’re willing to discuss. We ask them to come back—

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

Mr. Chris Glover: The government continues to give excuses, like the 8.48% that they just mentioned, which would increase funding to $48 per exam. But an independent audit says that they need at least $75 per exam just to cover their costs, without optometrists actually being paid. The government says that they are open to negotiations, but they refuse to even offer cost recovery funding to restart those negotiations.

My leader, the leader of the official opposition NDP, and the president of the Ontario Association of Optometrists both wrote to the minister last week, asking for a fair deal. Even a member of the government’s own caucus publicly admitted the government uses “heavy-handed tactics” and “opted to ignore this important file.”

When will the government stop spinning excuses and negotiate a fair deal so that Spadina–Fort York optometrists like Dr. Deepak Malkani, Dr. Shannon Fernandez, Dr. Melissa Yuen, Dr. Mario Santos and Dr. Abraham Yuen can get back to doing what they want to do, what they were trained to do, which is to assist people with their eye care?

Hon. Christine Elliott: The fact of the matter is our government is very anxious for optometrists to continue providing these services to people under 18, to people over 65 and everyone else in between. We have offered to go back to the table. The mediator has set out some terms that he wants to see abided by in order for the arbitration to continue. We’ve agreed to do that. We have agreed with all of those conditions, but the optometrists have not.

We want to make sure that we can cover as many of their costs as possible, but we need to see what their overhead costs are to do our proper due diligence as custodians of public funds. We want to reach a deal that’s going to be fair to the taxpayers of Ontario and fair to the optometrists.

We want to put a group together to work with the optometrists to look into these issues. All we need at this point—because we are ready, willing and able to pursue those negotiations—we need the optometrists to come back to the table. So if you’re speaking with those optometrists, would you please ask their association to come back to the table so we can complete a deal and make sure everyone receives the eye care they need in the province of Ontario?

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

The next question.

Research and innovation

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: My question is for the Minister of Colleges and Universities.

Speaker, as you are well aware, the COVID-19 pandemic has emphasized the importance of research. Conducting research here at home would allow Ontario to discover, commercialize and advance technologies and remain competitive. Additionally, research leads to the creation of new knowledge and insight, which can bring high-quality change to society.

Speaker, through you to the minister: What is this minister and the government doing to keep Ontario competitive in research and innovation?

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Thank you to the member from Scarborough–Rouge Park for that important question. Our government is committed to investing in research and innovation in order to compete and thrive in the global economy. The Ontario government, in the fall economic statement, is investing an additional $48 million over two years to support groundbreaking research initiatives across the province, from London to Kingston to Sudbury and beyond.

Funding will go to support the work being done at the Perimeter Institute, SNOLAB and advanced research computing facilities. These initiatives will put Ontario at the forefront of innovation and ensure that research and research infrastructure continue to be competitive, to attract the best and brightest researchers to this province. Ontario is committed to supporting research to advance new discoveries and innovation, foster a skilled labour force and promote new business opportunities across the province.

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

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: Thank you to the minister for the answer. It is great to hear that our government is investing in the future of research here at home in Ontario. When we think about research, we think about knowledge, data and information. It is essential for Ontario’s research institutes and post-secondary institutions to discover, commercialize and adopt advanced technologies to remain competitive.

Speaker, through you, can the minister tell us how this funding will benefit Ontario’s research institutes and post-secondary institutions and our province as a whole?

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Thank you to the member for your interest in this exciting initiative. It is essential for Ontario’s research institutes and post-secondary institutions to discover, commercialize and adopt advanced technologies to remain competitive. Advanced technologies have the potential to increase productivity and create new revenue opportunities to deliver high-quality products and services. This, in turn, helps create highly skilled jobs and enhances the global competitiveness of Ontario’s companies.

Our government is saying yes to investing in research to solve complex problems. This research will lead us to addressing climate change, improving cyber security or finding cures for cancer right here in Ontario. Our government is thrilled to see this $48-million investment to support research excellence to support key research initiatives.

I’d like to thank the Perimeter Institute for hosting me last week, Ranil Sonnadara from Compute Ontario, and Dr. Virtue from SNO