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

December 4, 2019

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2019-Dec-04 (PDF)

L136 - Wed 4 Dec 2019 / Mer 4 déc 2019

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Wednesday 4 December 2019 Mercredi 4 décembre 2019

Orders of the Day

Legislative reform

Wearing of hockey jersey

Introduction of Visitors

Wearing of hockey jersey

Oral Questions

Teachers’ labour dispute

Teachers’ labour dispute

Teachers’ labour dispute

Teachers’ labour dispute

Teachers’ labour dispute

Medical clinic

Transportation infrastructure

Addiction services

Home warranty program

Anti-racism activities

Volunteers

Vaping products

Farm safety

Tenant protection

Forest industry

Ambulance services

Arts and cultural funding

Tabling of sessional papers

Deferred Votes

Legislative reform

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Vaping products

Project Spotlight

Teachers’ labour dispute

Infrastructure funding

Pediatric cancer treatment

Local business

Teachers’ labour dispute

Mann Cup

Waterloo region

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on General Government

Petitions

Noise pollution

Fish and wildlife management

Public sector compensation

Fish and wildlife management

Public sector compensation

Equal opportunity

Fish and wildlife management

Education funding

Curriculum

Public sector compensation

Veterans memorial

Sclérose en plaques

Addiction services

Orders of the Day

Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur les services provinciaux visant le bien-être des animaux

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Legislative reform

Resuming the debate adjourned on December 3, 2019, on the amendment to the amendment to the motion, as amended, regarding amendments to the standing orders.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): When we last debated the amendment to the amendment to the motion, I understand the member for Beaches–East York had the floor. I recognize her to resume.

Ms. Rima Berns-McGown: Indeed, we are discussing the amendment and the context in which the amendment was necessary. In that context, I’d like to relay to the House a really interesting conversation that I had last evening. I was at one of the receptions that are regularly held at Queen’s Park, and I chanced to fall into conversation with a gentleman who was a former government House leader of a Progressive Conservative government, that is not this one, in a province that is not Ontario. This gentleman was saying something that was very interesting and that I think all of the government members should take heed of as they push these standing order changes forward.

What this gentleman was saying was that it was imperative to him as House leader to understand that it was always a good idea, when you were putting forward a piece of legislation, to allow it to sit in the ether and in the public arena in order to allow people to comment on it, whatever those comments might be, whether they were in support of it, whether they were deeply opposed to it, for whatever reason that might be, or whether they thought that, in general, it was a decent piece of legislation, but that it needed some alterations here and there.

It was only by allowing that legislation to sit in the public ether, to let people of the province absorb it and think about it and talk about it and argue about it in whatever way they need to, that the bill gained consensus, number one—at least public consensus in terms of being able to move forward—but also that things could be made better, errors or omissions, that alterations could then be incorporated in it with the amendments.

I think that is such a profoundly important piece of advice that he passed on through me to the members of this government, also Progressive Conservatives. I think it’s something that members of all political parties really need to take to heart. When we are putting forward standing orders and thinking about what those standing orders do, I think that it is absolutely imperative. It goes to the core of what we’re doing in this building, because I firmly believe that everybody here is here because they want to make the province of Ontario a better place.

The question is, how are we going to go about doing that? In that mode, I go back to the very first thing I said, which is that process matters. Process is profoundly important.

Allowing time—time for the members of the House to debate motions of bills fully; time for thoughtful amendments and history to be brought forward that may cause the government to adjust a bill in one way or another; time in committee so that stakeholders, people who are on the front lines of an issue, people who have dealt with it day to day, can come forward and bring their perspectives and give the government an opportunity to say, “Hey, you know what? I didn’t think about that, so let’s incorporate this idea.

Let’s make the bill better”; time to travel bills so that people who don’t live in Toronto have an opportunity to participate in the debate and to feel that they are being heard.

The issue here is that elections are not the only time that a government is being held accountable. That accountability needs to carry on throughout a government’s term in office, and it’s our job as the official opposition, of course, to hold the government to account on a daily basis, on an ongoing basis. That is our jobs—literally our jobs. But the people of Ontario also pay attention, and the people of Ontario also want opportunities to provide feedback to course-correct the government as needed as it proceeds on its way.

I think that this is particularly important when we’re debating sets of legislation that affect people who have lived experience in areas that go beyond that which the government members have.

The point that I was starting to make last evening was that the former Minister of Children, Community and Social Services used to speak often about how jobs are a real, key cure for poverty, and that was something that dominated her way of seeing the world, which makes sense when you understand that she grew up in a small town—New Glasgow, Nova Scotia—which had a fairly monochromatic population, and which did start to suffer when jobs began to decline as local industries shuttered.

For those people, absolutely, the provision or the re-emergence of those jobs would have done the trick, but the rest of the province is in a very different set of circumstances. Indigenous people, 90% of whom live in poverty in Toronto; Black people who face anti-Black racism from the time that they enter junior kindergarten, throughout school and the workplace and on the streets; and other people of colour face barriers that are very different from the barriers that didn’t exist in the situation that people were dealing with in New Glasgow, Nova Scotia.

So I think that when we have processes that allow for adequate input from people with different perspectives, from Ontarians who desperately care how their laws are made but that have perspectives different from that of the government, we’re going to get better legislation.

I implore the government to allow the time to reconsider these standing orders to allow adequate time for deputations, for consultation and for input so that we will have better laws, fewer mistakes and less damage.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further debate?

What are the standing orders? When we first arrived here in the Legislature there were these green books on our desk. It really told us the rules of what we do every day and how we do it. A good book to read—it’s always good to know the rules of where you are.

Today we rise to speak on the proposed changes to these standing orders. Rules of Parliament direct how we shape the debate in the Legislature, and it’s important to review those rules to make sure that we can conduct business in a modern and efficient manner. These rules are a little bit out of date and we believe they should be changed.

To paraphrase Winston Churchill: We shape our houses; therefore they shape us.

We are here today to talk about how we shape the debate around issues from the largest to the smallest. I followed politics for many years and have been honoured to be a member of this chamber since June 2018. I know that we can do better; however, most of the time rules don’t let us do so. Often we are bogged down by Byzantine procedures which limit our collective effectiveness and waste some of our people’s time.

Perhaps the most common thing I’m asked about by my constituents, friends and even my family—who are probably watching this morning—is why we don’t actually debate things. Currently, we give speeches that can rarely be called debate, and they often sometimes fill time.

Our current rules are not unlike two hockey teams playing a game of hockey on the same ice but ignoring the puck. Our debate rules encourage members to talk about things that are irrelevant because you really aren’t going to be questioned on it. The rules don’t ask us to think on our feet or allow us to challenge other members’ opinions and assertions. We read statements; we don’t debate. The government recognizes that if we open debate it will encourage people to watch and follow what we do more closely, and that’s good for all of us.

Now, Mr. Speaker, as we have now reached the 10 hours of debate on this motion, I would actually like to move that the question now be put.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Ms. Hogarth has moved that the question be now put. There being approximately 10 hours and 19 minutes, over five days, I am satisfied that there has, in fact, been sufficient debate to allow this question to be put to the House.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.

All those in favour of the motion that the question be now put, please say “aye.”

All those opposed to the motion that the question be now put, please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

A recorded vote being required, this vote will be deferred until after question period today.

Vote deferred.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Orders of the day. I recognize the government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: No more business, Mr. Speaker.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): There being no further business, this House stands recessed until 10:30.

The House recessed from 0913 to 1030.

Wearing of hockey jersey

Mr. Dave Smith: Point of order.

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

Mr. Dave Smith: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m seeking unanimous consent to wear my Peterborough Lakers jersey today, because the Lakers are here.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Peterborough–Kawartha is seeking unanimous consent of the House to wear the Peterborough Lakers sweater. Agreed? Agreed.

Introduction of Visitors

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: I’d like to welcome Marie Cabral from my riding, Kim Kanmacher from North Bay, and everyone from the Canadian Cancer Society to the House today.

Mr. Dave Smith: I’d like to introduce the 2019 Mann Cup champion and Canadian national champion Peterborough Lakers.

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: I’d like to welcome John Cox, Bradley Stevenson and Nuala McKee from the Canadian Cancer Society, as well as Dave Westaway and Patsy Agard from the Ontario Principals’ Council. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Vincent Ke: I would like to introduce Dr. Philip Laird, the vice-president of Trinity Western University from Vancouver, and Mr. Geoffrey Feng, the executive director of global recruitment and partner relations at Trinity Western University.

I would also like to introduce Mr. Nathan Zheng and Professor Guishan Li, the president and the vice-president of the Fountain Internationalization Education Group, Maple Leaf Collegiate.

Also I would like to introduce my executive assistant, Christina Liu. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Faisal Hassan: I would like to welcome students of St. Matthew Catholic school, who will be joining us a little bit later, and Dave D’Oyen. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: I would like to welcome Gordon Landon and his wife, Rositta Landon, a very close and dear friend of mine. Mr. Landon served as a York region councillor for 31 years: the longest-serving councillor in the history of Markham. Thank you, Mr. Landon, for your passion and many years of public service. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

M. Guy Bourgouin: Je voudrais souhaiter la bienvenue à Mauricio, mon assistant, mais aussi spécialement à sa petite fille, Nina, qui est ici aujourd’hui. Bienvenue à Queen’s Park.

Mr. John Fraser: I’d like to welcome the following people from the Canadian Cancer Society: Amy Desjardins, director in the Ottawa region; David Schneider, public issues; and Leanne Brown, volunteer. I’m looking forward to our meeting later on today.

Ms. Rima Berns-McGown: It is my enormous pleasure to welcome to Queen’s Park today the mom and sister of our page captain, Ally. Welcome, Millicent Ler and Mya Hao. Also, a little bird has told me that it’s Millicent’s birthday, so happy birthday, Millicent, and welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Jim McDonell: I’d like to introduce a co-op student of my voiceless seatmate here, Vadym Kravchenko. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Laura Mae Lindo: I’m excited to welcome Carly Pettinger, my outreach coordinator, all the way from Kitchener Centre.

Also, a special shout-out to my daughters, Sofia and Danica, who are watching from home today. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I would like to welcome one of my number-one volunteers from Mississauga–Lakeshore, Kristian Velkoski.

Ms. Catherine Fife: It’s my pleasure to welcome Sydney Piatkowski and Fiqir Worku, who are my constituency assistants in Waterloo. Welcome to Queen’s Park today.

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos: It’s my pleasure today to recognize page Suhani Surya from Oakville North–Burlington, who is serving as the page captain. She is joined by her father, Nanda Surya, and mother, Shubha Narasimhan, who are watching today’s question period from the members’ gallery. Welcome.

Ms. Marit Stiles: It gives me great pleasure this morning to welcome here in this House the executive of the Ontario Principals’ Council, led by the president, Nancy Brady. Welcome to your House.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: I have the privilege of welcoming to the Legislature today my legislative assistant, Michael Zwiep, as well his family: Victoria Zwiep, his wife; as well as his two children, Ezra and Josiah, who are here today in the gallery—and Laura, who is here as well. Welcome to the Legislature. It’s a privilege to have you here.

We also have members from the Ontario Craft Wineries association, Richard Linley, Len Pennachetti and Carolyn Hurst, who are here from my riding of Niagara West. Welcome to the Legislature.

Ms. Jessica Bell: I’d like to welcome Roland LeBlanc, Julian Kitchen and Victor Chen to Queen’s Park. Thank you for joining us today.

Wearing of hockey jersey

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: This is actually for unanimous consent—not to point fingers over at the MPP from Peterborough, but he was also supposed to seek unanimous consent for the Minister of Sport to wear the Lakers jersey as well, so I am seeking unanimous consent.

Before we do that, I wanted to also acknowledge the fact that not only are they here, but the Mann Cup will be available in the government caucus room at—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. The Minister of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to permit her to wear the Peterborough sweater. Agreed? Agreed.

Does the minister have an introduction as well?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: No, it’s not an introduction, Speaker. I’m just inviting all members of the Assembly to see the Mann Cup in room 247 over lunch.

Oral Questions

Teachers’ labour dispute

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My first question is to the Premier. Last night, parents watched with dismay as the Ford government scuttled any hope of a resolution that would keep schools open today. Last night, the minister claimed he had presented a new offer to high school teachers at the bargaining table, only to admit, hours later, that no offer had been made.

Why did the Ford government tell the public they had made an offer when, in reality, the government made no effort whatsoever to avert today’s strike?

Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: This strike is not fair to parents or students in this province. We’ve been clear through this process that we want to turn to private mediation to get a deal. Parents deserve predictability. Throughout this process, the government has made significant moves. From online learning, we announced a change from four in the mandate to two. That was rejected. With respect to classroom sizes, we’ve announced a move from 28 as a provincialized average to 25. That was rejected—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Hamilton East–Stoney Creek will withdraw.

Mr. Paul Miller: What did I say? Withdraw, I guess.

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

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Mr. Speaker, the point is that we remain focused on getting a deal because parents deserve that predictability. It is unacceptable that this strike is proceeding, given that there’s a tool in the tool box: private mediation that worked for CUPE, we hope, in good faith. I remain hopeful that the unions will accept this, that we can get a deal and provide predictability for the children of this province.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: What seemed clear to parents watching last night is that teachers were waiting at the bargaining table, ready to work, while the Ford government was organizing yet another press conference for their minister, one where the minister claimed he had made an offer that he in fact had never made.

Why is the government working so hard to avoid blame here, when they could have been working hard to actually resolve this mess?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Every time our government has made significant, reasonable proposals in good faith to the OSSTF, not only have they rejected our proposals but actually neglected to advance any new proposals since the first day our bargaining commenced. You can’t have it both ways. They cannot outright reject every proposal of the government but not bring any new proposal to the table. The onus is on OSSTF to bring forth a new option if they reject the current ones we’ve changed.

We’ve made many changes to our proposals because we are listening to parents. Our commitment to the parents of this province is to stand with them against escalation. Their kids deserve to be in class. I remain hopeful we can get a deal, because parents, students and the teachers themselves should be in class today.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, here’s what people see: The Ford government rolled into office and announced they’d be firing 10,000 teachers. They said larger classes—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: —would make students tougher. They said Alabama-style mandatory online learning was coming to Ontario.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Government side, come to order.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: They attacked teachers who disagreed with them.

Now, they’re scrambling to avoid blame for the job action that they have been pushing for since day one. So why won’t the Ford government stop putting their energy into avoiding blame, and start working to avoid further strikes by fixing this mess that they have put us all in?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: I think parents in Ontario know, irrespective of the political party and the government of the day, that unions, teacher unions and their leadership choose to escalate, irrespective of the Premier. That is what unites Bob Rae, Mike Harris and Kathleen Wynne, as well as, now, Doug Ford. That is the fact and parents know it to be true.

However, with respect to how we move forward, we looked to a private mediator, a mechanism we used just a month ago with CUPE to get a deal. What is true through the process is that they have not made any new proposals, but in addition to that, they have sort of hardened their position on the increase in compensation to $1.5 billion across teacher tables. We’re offering for taxpayers a $750-million increase.

Teachers are well compensated—the second-highest in the country. We value their work. Mr. Speaker, $750 million is a reasonable offer; however, they’ve insisted to get a deal that requires a $1.5-billion increase. I think that’s unreasonable. We’re going to continue to focus on our students and invest in their futures.

Teachers’ labour dispute

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also to the Premier. An agreement can only be reached through a fair bargaining process, but this government is ignoring the key issues. Teachers are worried about class sizes, and so are parents. Teachers are worried about e-learning, and so are students. Teachers would rather be instructing kids, and yet this government has always wanted to pick a fight.

Will this government stop ignoring the key issues and get back to the bargaining table with a sincere effort to fix the mess and reverse their damaging cuts?

Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: It is under this government that we’ve increased public expenditure in the defence of public education at the highest levels ever recorded. We are on track to spend $1.2 billion more this year than we did last year.

With respect to classroom sizes, the evidence overwhelmingly suggests that in the early years, classroom sizes ought to be smaller. Under our government, we are maintaining the smallest classroom sizes for the early years of education for the youngsters of this province. When it comes to the provincial average, we moved that from 28 to 25, and that was opposed by unions. We announced a change to the online courses from four to two. That was rejected.

The constant is the escalation by the union leadership against students, and the casualty of these impacts are them out of class today. I’d hope every member of the Legislature would oppose further escalation, and stand with parents. We remain hopeful on getting deals that keep kids in class.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: All the members of this government need to do is look in the mirror to see what escalation looks like. They started picking the fight a year ago.

Across Ontario this morning, however, working moms and dads had to scramble for child care options, which are tricky to pin down at the best of times. Some parents have had to take a vacation day or go a day without pay, all because this government has created chaos in our education system.

This strike absolutely could have been avoided. Why has the Ford government added more chaos into the hectic lives of working families at the same time they can least afford it?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The Leader of the Opposition has so appropriately underscored why this government believes that strikes hurt kids, and that’s why we’re working hard at the table. We’re going to stay at the table. We’re looking to private mediation in order to get a deal. Now, I find it bizarre that the teacher union leadership would make a decision to escalate to keep kids out of class today, knowing that there’s a tool in the tool kit that can keep students in class by getting a voluntary agreement.

We’re going to continue to invest in public education. We’re going to continue to be reasonable at the table. We’re going to continue to show a student-centred posture because kids in this province should be in class.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Students are losing out on a day of instruction today. The government could have absolutely avoided this, but they’d rather have a showdown with teachers and education workers in this province than keep the classrooms open. The government knew of the negative impacts on students, but chose to go down this path. In fact, they chose this path some time ago. Just like they chose to introduce Alabama-style e-learning, even though the evidence suggests that it’s not going to work.

Why has the government pushed this narrow, ideological approach to education rather than what is best for the students of Ontario?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: We have made a decision to be reasonable at the table. That’s why we moved from a mandate of four to two. We’re also ensuring more time for students to be able to take more online courses, a gold standard of online courses, to provide more STEM-focused classes for students, particularly in rural and remote parts of the province. Every student will benefit from higher class options and more time to do them.

But, Mr. Speaker, fundamentally the issue at the table is not about online learning, because the day we made that announcement it was swiftly rejected. What it is increasingly about is compensation: a request, a demand, by the unions, for a $1.5-billion increase to teacher pay, the second-highest paid in the nation.

We value their work, Speaker, but we think as taxpayers that the fair option, the right option forward, is to put more money into front-of-class to help our kids succeed. That’s the priority of our government. I hope all members of the Legislature will stand with us as we invest in the future of our province.

Teachers’ labour dispute

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is for the Minister of Education. For over a year, this government has pushed forward a radical agenda for our schools, one that’s asking students and families to settle for less: fewer teachers, fewer courses and fewer resources to support their learning. Their plan pushes kids into a risky online e-learning experiment, while eliminating 10,000 caring adults in our schools. But instead of backing down, the minister has only doubled down. Today, their devastating cuts have led to the first province-wide strike by education workers in this province in 22 years.

Speaker, did the minister really think that this would end any other way?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: To the member: It is clear, obviously, that strikes hurt kids. It’s regrettable that they’re out of class today. We stand with parents against any further escalation.

The fact is, Speaker, they need all parties to be reasonable and to focus on their kids, not on ourselves. That’s why we made a decision to move from a 28 provincialized average to 25. It’s why we announced the move in online learning from four mandated to two. It’s why we’ve added another $200 million in new investment into front-of-class just a month ago in the fall economic statement.

We’re going to continue to invest in education, to defend the future of our province and to ensure that the students of this province can get ahead. We’re going to do that at the table, and we remain hopeful that we can get a deal through private mediation.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Perhaps if the minister dedicated as much energy to negotiations as he does to defending this Premier’s cuts, we wouldn’t be in this position. In interview after interview he has complained about the lack of a deal. All the while, he couldn’t be bothered to show up at the bargaining table to try to reach one.

Speaker, Ontarians have made themselves abundantly clear. They don’t want this government’s cuts to our classrooms. Will the minister drop the spin, work today to keep this to a one-day strike, and reverse his cuts to our classrooms?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The parents of this province have been abundantly clear that they oppose escalation that keeps their kids out of class. I ask the members opposite to stand with them against further escalation, because kids should be in class.

The focus of this government is to be reasonable, to be focused on getting deals. We did this with CUPE. We turned to a private mediator. I’m asking OSSTF in good faith to do so. The fact is, they put a priority on a $1.5-billion compensation increase, where we think it is reasonable and it is fair to give them a 1% increase—a $750-million increase—while ensuring that additional dollars go to help our kids get ahead.

That’s the focus of the government. We’re going to continue to be reasonable. But most importantly, Mr. Speaker, we’re going to continue to focus on keeping kids in class.

Teachers’ labour dispute

Ms. Christine Hogarth: My question is for the Minister of Education. Parents across my riding of Etobicoke–Lakeshore and across Ontario fell victim to significant disruptions in their lives at the hands of the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation. The OSSTF’s irresponsible one-day strike has created headaches for parents and for students alike, with many parents scrambling to find child care options for their children.

Parents know that the best way for their child to reach their full potential is to remain in the classroom. Strike action caused by unions impedes the learning environment. The union may think this posturing will help it win at the bargaining table, but this strike is only putting our children at a disadvantage.

Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Education tell the Legislature where the government stands on the OSSTF’s one-day strike?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you to the member from Etobicoke–Lakeshore for the question. Mr. Speaker, 100% of parents want their kids to be in class today and every member of this government agrees. It is why we stand with parents against escalation. Regrettably, it seems to be that we’re the only political party that has made that clear in this Legislature.

For 205 days since we started bargaining—months ago—the OSSTF has tabled a proposal; they’ve not made any changes at all. Our government has, however: on online learning, for classroom sizes, for new investments, and new commitments when it comes to mental health and STEM education.

The focus of our government is to get deals that keep kids in class. Contrary to the assertions by the members opposite, we’re going to continue to invest more in public education than any government in the history of this province.

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

Ms. Christine Hogarth: Mr. Speaker, I firmly believe the spirit of compromise must prevail if we’re going to reach an agreement. So I am tremendously encouraged that our government has been reasonable and student-centric, and is calling on unions to provide predictability to parents.

But I think there is a lot of confusion about what’s really going on. I’ve heard from parents who are upset, and as a step-parent, we want our kids in school. Parents and guardians aren’t sure why teachers are on strike today. Parents want answers, and they deserve answers, because the minister is right: Strikes do indeed hurt our children.

Could the minister please give an example or two that demonstrates how the government has been reasonable and flexible in these negotiations?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Mr. Speaker, this strike, led and initiated by the teachers’ union, is unfair for parents and unfair for students. The single victim of strikes led by teacher union leadership is our kids, the most vulnerable in our classroom. For middle- and low-income families, finding child care is very difficult. We find it unacceptable that they are put in this position.

Our focus is to get a deal through mediation. We actually remain hopeful and focused on getting a deal, ensuring our team stays at the table, through our mediator, to get a deal that provides predictability. We’ve reduced our classroom size average. We’ve reduced the online learning amount from four to two. We’ve invested more in education than any government in the history of this province. We’re going to continue to focus on our kids. We’re going to continue to focus on getting deals that provide predictability for every child in this province.

Teachers’ labour dispute

Ms. Sara Singh: My question is to the Premier. It’s not just high school students losing a day of education today. In communities across Ontario, elementary and secondary schools are also closed. For example, the Ottawa Citizen reports that parents are scrambling to find care for their kids as schools across the Ottawa region close for the day. These parents don’t want to hear the Minister of Education play the blame game, and they certainly don’t want to hear him talk about making offers that were actually never made.

When will the Ford government stop playing politics with these negotiations and start reaching a real deal?

Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: In the context of the families in Ottawa region, I’m proud to report, Mr. Speaker, that all four boards in Ottawa have received increased expenditures from the government, in addition to the province-wide commitment to increase spending by over $1.2 billion this year than we did last year.

We’re committed to getting a deal. For the families in Ottawa, and for families in every region of this province, it is unacceptable that teacher union leaders have decided to escalate, hurting our kids. We stand with parents against escalation. We call on unions to stay at the table and to stay focused on getting a deal that provides predictability, that ensures children in this province remain in class.

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

Ms. Sara Singh: Back to the Premier: In Ottawa alone, classes are cancelled for about 100,000 elementary and secondary school students. In my community, hundreds of students will be missing school across the Peel region. Parents are scrambling and they are frustrated, and the government’s response is to hold press conferences about offers that they actually never made.

When will the Ford government stop playing games, admit that their reckless cuts have created a crisis and chaos in our classrooms, and make a sincere offer to resolve this issue at the bargaining table?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Mr. Speaker, I want to continue to reaffirm my commitment to examining innovative solutions to avoid a strike. I’m open to a framework from the teachers’ union that reaches the goal of keeping our kids in class. I’ve said that for months, Mr. Speaker. That remains true today.

I’ve also asserted that there is a legitimate interest in seeking a private mediator as a mechanism to get a deal. Parents deserve to have that predictability, and the fact that families in this province have to contend with a strike led and initiated by the teachers’ union leadership is unacceptable. We stand with them against escalation. We will continue to invest in education. We’ll continue to be at the table, we will never turn our backs on our students and we will fight hard to ensure students of this province remain in class.

Medical clinic

Mr. Jim Wilson: My question is for the Minister of Health. Minister, for a year now, the town of Wasaga Beach has operated and funded an after-hours medical clinic as a trial project. The clinic has been well-received, and the residents of Wasaga Beach and the broader health community would like to see it continue. Mayor Bifolchi, council and town staff are working collaboratively with the LHIN, the community health centre, Collingwood General and Marine Hospital, and the family health organization to find a way to extend the clinic beyond December 30. There is, of course, a cost to operating the clinic, and municipal taxpayers can’t bear the burden of this cost alone.

With the news that a local doctor has just recently had his licence suspended, the need for the clinic is even greater. So I ask the minister, Mr. Speaker, if the government could provide some immediate financial assistance so the clinic can remain operational in 2020 until the town pursues and is successful with a doctor recruitment campaign.

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank the member very much for his question. We are certainly aware of the situation in Wasaga Beach, and we are committed to making sure that everyone in Ontario who needs a primary care provider is given that opportunity.

We do have initiatives in place that are designed to assist local communities and organizations to recruit physicians and improve the geographic distribution of physicians and services. We also offer residency training to internationally trained physicians in exchange for a commitment for them to practise medicine in a community other than in Ottawa and Toronto.

So we do have some initiatives in place. Our plan to transform our public health care system is also going to improve the coordination of every aspect of patient care.

I’ll offer some more suggestions in the supplementary.

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

Mr. Jim Wilson: Thank you, Minister, for that answer. As you know, the shortage of family physicians is rather acute in my riding at this time. To highlight the need there, I just want to quote from some constituents.

Dino from Wasaga Beach writes: “Just found out that our doctor has been suspended, which leaves us without a doctor, yet Wasaga is closing its after-hours clinic. Where is the justice here?”

Susan from Wasaga Beach says, “The Wasaga Beach pilot project for the after-hours clinic will come to a close at the end of December. Demand has been clearly demonstrated. What are the provincial funding plans for this clinic.”

Joe wrote to me on November 15. He says, “My family”—a wife and two children—“moved up here a year ago and we’re still without a family doctor. We have been on the list with Health Care Connect but there doesn’t seem to be anything we can do.”

Minister, perhaps in the supplementary you could tell us whether the government is able to help us out with the clinic. It needs to operate for at least a few more months until we can attract some doctors to Wasaga Beach. Again, with the help of your ministry, we would like to do just that.

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank you for the question. As you know, in the future, Ontario health teams will be responsible for delivering all of their patients’ care, making sure it’s connected and integrated. They will improve care in communities like Wasaga Beach.

But I recognize that’s not an answer for right now, so I look forward to working with you and your community to see what can be done, with this one physician now being out of the picture, with the existing clinic to continue it on until other arrangements are made for new physicians to come into the community.

I would appreciate the opportunity to speak with you later about that, but we look forward to working with you, as I said.

Transportation infrastructure

Ms. Natalia Kusendova: My question is for the Associate Minister of Transportation. As our population in the region of Peel and around the GTA increases, it is imperative that we continue investing in our transit and highway infrastructure to keep up with economic demands.

Highway 401, as we know, is a major artery in our region and sees hundreds of thousands of commuters and commercial vehicles each and every day. Gridlock and heavy traffic make travelling frustrating for us all. Under our government, we have seen some historic improvements and investments that are reducing congestion and finally getting Ontario moving.

How is the associate minister continuing to solve gridlock challenges in the GTA, including in my city of Mississauga?

Hon. Kinga Surma: Thank you very much to the member for the question. As the Associate Minister of Transportation for the greater Toronto area, it is my responsibility and my priority to encourage our government to make key investments in critical infrastructure to get Ontarians moving. Last week, I joined my Mississauga and Brampton colleagues to announce a $640-million investment in the widening of Highway 401 on one of its busiest stretches. This project includes the widening of an 18-kilometre stretch of the 401 from Credit River in Mississauga to Regional Road 25 in Milton and will also include the reconstruction of bridges and other features.

The 401 is one of the busiest highways in North America. It is absolutely critical that we continue to invest in this highway so that we can provide relief for commuters and also so that we can ensure we improve economic development across this province.

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

Ms. Natalia Kusendova: Through you, Speaker, I thank the minister for her answer and for her hard work in making our morning commute just a little easier.

Approximately 250,000 vehicles travel on Highway 401 in Peel and Halton regions on a daily basis. The

section of Highway 401 between Mississauga and Milton that she mentioned is one of the busiest stretches of highway in the GTA. It affects the lives of so many workers and hard-working families and business owners in Ontario.

I know that my residents and constituents are welcoming this important project with open arms. With that said, when can we expect to see the completion of the $640-million project, Minister?

Hon. Kinga Surma: Thank you to the member for the question. I’m very pleased to announce that construction is already well under way. Drivers will be able to expect to use the expanded highway by the end of 2022. Commuters will expect to see a mix of 12- and 10-lane collector systems from Credit River in Mississauga to Regional Road 25 in Milton. This will also include a median HOV lane.

Mr. Speaker, everyone recognizes how busy the 401 is. This is why this is absolutely critical to ease congestion and improve the traffic flow along the 401 and to ease that congestion on the west side of the GTA. Our government recognizes how critical these investments are so that we can get Ontarians moving.

Addiction services

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: My question is to the Deputy Premier. Earlier this week, the Conservative member for Mississauga Centre signed a letter stating that, as a registered nurse, she calls on Windsor’s police chief to demand a consumption and treatment services site in Windsor. The member for Mississauga Centre wrote, “Accidental opioid-related overdoses are killing sons and daughters, moms and dads, friends, neighbours, co-workers. Nurses urge you to use your office to help put an end to this public health crisis in your community. Saving lives is everyone’s job.” Speaker, I couldn’t agree more. These sites save lives.

Windsor’s public health unit issued three alerts for high overdose-related emergency department visits in the first two weeks of November alone. Will the Deputy Premier, who is also the Minister of Health, listen to the advice from her caucus colleague and fund a consumption and treatment services site in Windsor?

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank the member very much for the question. There is no doubt about the opioids issue that we’re facing in Ontario right now. It’s happening in communities across the province. What we need to do, though, is to make sure that we respond to the applications that we’ve received.

We have received and set up already 16 consumption and treatment services sites. We are waiting for municipalities to submit their applications to us. When they do, we will review them, and we will apply the same criteria that we’ve applied to the previous 16. We await any news or any applications that we will receive from Windsor.

If there’s a serious concern there—and I have no doubt of what you’re saying—we want to be able to help and we want to be able to make sure that people can receive the wraparound treatment services that they need in order to be able to remove themselves from—not taking opioids anymore—but also to be able to receive the other health and social services and treatment that they need.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Parkdale–High Park: supplementary.

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: Back to the Deputy Premier: It’s not just the member from Mississauga Centre who echoes the calls made by New Democrats, health care professionals, front-line crisis workers and those with lived experience. This past summer, the member from Peterborough–Kawartha said that he would help gather 10,000 signatures and bring a petition to Queen’s Park to request a consumption and treatment site in Peterborough.

Are the members from Peterborough–Kawartha and Mississauga Centre knowingly giving Ontarians false hope that help is on the way, or is the minister finally ready to reverse her course?

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

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Response?

Hon. Christine Elliott: We are actively involved in dealing with this issue. This is a concern for all of us as legislators in this place. It’s happening in all of our communities, and we want to make sure we can provide the supports that are necessary.

One is consumption treatment services sites. There are still several that are being reviewed, and we anticipate issuing licences for them to continue the work they’re doing. But it’s not just that. It’s when people indicate a wish to be rehabilitated, who are going to these sites, that we need to make sure that those other support services are there. That’s why we’ve indicated that we are putting $3.8 billion over 10 years into mental health and addictions services treatment, because what often happens when people go to these sites and they want to get into a rehabilitation program, there aren’t any detox beds available and so that opportunity is lost.

It’s not just the consumption and treatment services sites. It’s the entire progress that people need to take until they can be completely rehabilitated. That is something that we are working on as part of our total mental health and addictions plan.

Home warranty program

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: My question is for the Minister of Government and Consumer Services. Buying a home is one of the largest and most significant investments that Ontarians make. Many Ontarians have been eagerly awaiting improvements to the new home warranty program in this province after years of Liberal inaction. I know that many of my constituents and Ontarians across the province are eager to hear more about our government’s plan to take action on reforming the broken new home warranty system in Ontario.

Many Ontarians, and the Auditor General, have pointed out that the governance of Tarion played a central role in the problems with the warranty system. Could the minister please tell this House and new homebuyers across Ontario what our government is doing to fix governance at Tarion?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: I’d like to thank the member from Scarborough–Rouge River for this very important question because new homebuyers in Ontario and new homeowners need to have confidence in the system.

Our government has made a commitment to take a look at Tarion and make changes that will better protect new homebuyers across this province, and that is what we continue to do. Our ongoing reform of new home warranties in Ontario is focused on providing better practices for new homebuyers.

We inherited a mess, quite frankly, and our plan addresses this by ensuring—again, I really stress this—that the right leadership and oversight is in place once and for all. That is why, last week, I wrote a letter to the chair of Tarion and instructed Tarion to change its governance. These changes will overhaul Tarion’s governance so there is a proper balance of consumers and home builders at the board table.

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

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: I want to thank the minister for her answer, her leadership and taking this important first step that will help put an end to the serious accountability and transparency concerns at Tarion. Our government must ensure Ontarians can have trust in their home warranty system.

It was obvious to many that the leadership at Tarion is causing hardship and adding barriers for Ontarians who are seeking help during a vulnerable time in their lives. Ontarians need to know that the government is taking sufficient steps to ensure Tarion is fulfilling its mandate to protect Ontario homebuyers and that their intentions are in the right place.

Could the minister please tell this House about the changes that she instructed Tarion’s chair to make and how these changes will transfer into needed improvements to the new home warranty program in Ontario?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: Again, thank you to the member from Scarborough–Rouge Park for this important question. We have taken decisive action, Speaker. Since receiving my letter last week, Tarion’s CEO and board chair have stepped down to make way for new leadership. This will be a team that, in terms of the new leadership, would be committed to implementing a new mandate focused on consumer protection. We have listened, and we have acted.

Additionally, before Tarion’s next annual general meeting, home builders will no longer dominate the board. There will be a new board with members who have specific competencies.

Again, we have listened. An overhaul of the board, Mr. Speaker, is an important first step in rebuilding the trust and confidence of Ontarians when it comes to new home ownership. We want people across this province to have better-built homes, and we want to ensure that we have the right leadership in place to bring forth that change.

Anti-racism activities

Mr. Kevin Yarde: My question is for the Minister of Education. There is a long history of complaints of anti-Black racism in the Peel District School Board. Since the minister announced the review, Black community members not only in Peel but across the province have pushed back against the minister’s decision to not appoint Black reviewers. They know that you need Black reviewers at the table to not only contextualize what the community is saying, but to provide recommendations on what is necessary to address anti-Black racism in Peel schools.

Mr. Speaker, my question is very simple: Why did the minister not find it necessary to appoint independent Black reviewers to review anti-Black racism in our schools?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Yesterday, as I was asked this question, I was very pleased to confirm that the government has deputized my associate deputy minister, Patrick Case, who is a human rights leader who is now going to be part of every single review process, who is a Black leader across the province as well as a human rights advocate in the province. He’s one of my ADMs for equity. He’s been asked to lead the process of the review—hands-on, in every single review. Over 120 to date have been requested. He’ll be at every single review.

The question, fundamentally, I think, is knowing that we have these two reviewers in place, one of which had been doing this in York region just previously in a similar issue, knowing that we are immediately and swiftly taking action. I think the point is, we should have confidence in the three of them, in Suzanne Herbert, in Ena Chadha, as well as in Patrick Case, to sit in to make sure that these parents, students and educators have a voice, that they’re able to listen and that they’re ultimately able to take immediate action to end systemic racism in Peel.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary? The member for Kitchener Centre.

Ms. Laura Mae Lindo: Back to the minister: Just to be clear, deputizing the ADM is not the same as having an independent Black reviewer assigned to this.

Black community members continue to speak out because we have been here before: ministers who talk a good talk, then return to their offices and ignore report after report telling them how to address the root causes of anti-Black racism.

The minister announced this review two weeks ago and has still failed to appoint an independent Black reviewer. Because of public pressure, we’re watching the minister scramble, and he’s still failing to address the community’s concerns.

Again: How are we supposed to trust this minister to help the Peel District School Board address the root causes of anti-Black racism when even public pressure has not made the minister recognize that it is mandatory to have independent Black reviewers at the table?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Mr. Speaker, allegations of discrimination and prejudice are unacceptable. When I found out about these reports brought forth to the government, we took immediate action by calling in reviewers.

In addition to the two reviewers who have been involved—Ena Chadha, who you will know is from Brampton, is the former vice-chair of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. She is a leader of the South Asian community who will make a difference in that process. In addition, we have appointed Suzanne Herbert, who is a former deputy minister, who’s been involved in a review at the York Region District School Board; as well as appointed and ensured that the lead reviewer, the lead individual involved in this process is Patrick Case, a leader in the Black community of this province.

He’s at the table, he’s hearing every voice and he’s working with the government, of course, as well as with the reviewers, to ensure that we crack down on systemic racism.

Volunteers

Mr. Aris Babikian: My question is to the Minister of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries. Minister, I know you are passionate about volunteerism and recognizing those who have selflessly donated their time to support others. We know recognizing those who give so freely of their time can go a long way to keeping them motivated and encourage others to donate their time to causes in communities across Ontario. It is why I was proud to recognize dedicated constituents in Scarborough–Agincourt during my local volunteer service award ceremonies last month. Minister, can you please tell us how your ministry is recognizing volunteers across the province?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I want to commend the member from Scarborough–Agincourt for his question, for attending his local volunteer service awards and for his dedication in working with the ethnic media in the province of Ontario. He’s put many, many hours of volunteerism himself into this province.

Margaret Mead once said, “Never doubt a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”

We like to talk about our spectacular double bottom line in the Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries. We have a fuelled economy of a $71-billion economic imprint, but more importantly than anything, we actually assist those across the province of Ontario with the cultural fabric of what it means to be an Ontarian. So much of what it means to be an Ontarian and a Canadian is giving back to your fellow citizens.

Speaker, that’s why the ministry is pleased that we were able to recognize 7,100 committed citizens across the province in more than 50 ceremonies to recognize their good work, including over 700 volunteers who are youth. Since 1986, we have recognized over 250,000 Ontarians who have been committed to giving back to their communities and I can’t wait to talk a little bit—

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

Mr. Aris Babikian: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for her work recognizing some of Ontario’s most deserving and hard working volunteers. While I was proud to celebrate those worthy recipients for their hard work and years of dedication during my local ceremony, I know that there are many more volunteers who go unnoticed across the province.

Minister, you were able to present a number of volunteer service awards in your riding of Nepean, honouring some who have donated their time to causes for over 25 years. Can you tell us about a few of these amazing volunteer service award recipients and how our government will continue to honour their generosity?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: We will absolutely commit to honouring our volunteers across the province. That’s why I’ll be reaching out to all members on both sides of the aisle to ensure that we are continuing to do that in the best manner possible.

Let me tell you about a few people we were able to recognize in my own community of Nepean. Tony Lawson has given 25 years of his life to the Barrhaven Lions Club to make sure we have things like our annual Christmas parade, and they fundraise for so many other people. Victor Chan is a veteran who actually started, with a number of other veterans, the newest Legion in the province of Ontario, the Barrhaven Legion, which has one of the top numbers of members in the entire country.

Let me tell you a little bit about Malusi from Brantford, with the Polish Alliance Ladies Circle. She has given 65 years of her life to dedicate to her community. We had three members who have given over 50 years, including Bill from Sarnia–Lambton, with the Sarnia Silver Sticks; Don from Thunder Bay, with the St. George’s Society; and Krista from Etobicoke North with the St. Patrick’s Catholic Church.

Speaker, this is the life blood of our province. We all should thank our volunteers because they are what makes—

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

Vaping products

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: My question is to the Minister of Health. Today we have the Canadian Cancer Society with us. Among the issues they highlighted this morning are the health risks that children and youth face because of vaping. Just last week, the NDP tabled a private member’s bill that would strengthen regulation on vaping and help protect the health of young people and all Ontarians, but this government says it needs more time to review studies.

Minister, time is of the essence. Will the minister do the right thing and support the NDP’s vaping legislation?

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank the member very much for the question. The uptick in vaping among our youth is very serious and alarming to all of us because we know that there are situations where vaping can sometimes lead to smoking, which is in the exact opposite direction that we want to see our young people move. I have had a number of consultations with groups of people, including several groups with young people, understanding why young people are starting to vape and what it would take to get them to stop vaping.

We have taken several steps already, which you would know, with a ministerial order, which was issued in September, requiring hospitals to report to the ministry any issues that seem to be vaping-related pulmonary illnesses.

But there’s more going on than that. We know that many young people have not sought help yet for their health-related issues. We want them to come forward and seek help. There is an education program, I believe, that’s going to be necessary here for young people as well as for their parents as well as for their teachers. There’s a lot of work yet to be done. I look forward to speaking more about it in the supplementary.

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

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: The government may boast that they’ve responded to this growing health crisis by banning the promotion of vaping products in convenience stores and gas stations, but what the health minister won’t say is that the ban was supposed to come into effect more than a year ago, until the government stepped in and paused the ban, despite warnings from health care experts.

Let me remind the Minister of Health of what she said when the NDP asked this exact question months ago. The health minister said, “I want to protect children as well. That is very important. No one wants to see a young person get started with nicotine.”

My question is, will the health minister acknowledge that, one year later, she must do more to protect children from vaping by strengthening regulations?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Well, the short answer to the member’s question is yes, of course we recognize we need to do more. We have taken the steps with the ministerial order. We have taken the steps, as of January 1, to ban vaping products from being advertised in convenience stores as well as in gas bars. But there’s other work that needs to be done, including working with the federal government.

The federal government controls a lot of the other types of advertising that you might see at Union Station, that you might see on billboards in other areas. It is an issue that I plan to bring forward with the federal minister as soon as we have our first meeting, which is going to be held early in the spring.

We are also looking at other issues. I certainly look forward to reviewing the private member’s bill. I know that the issue of flavoured vapes that seem to be targeting young people is a matter of concern. When you call something “peach juice” or “cotton candy,” you’re not looking at targeting adults that are trying to use vaping as a smoking cessation product. There’s also the issue of the nicotine content. The nicotine content is very high. In some cartridges, it’s as high as a pack of cigarettes. We are looking at all—

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

Farm safety

Mr. Robert Bailey: My question today is to the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Mr. Speaker, every member in this House that comes from a rural riding knows that it’s not easy being a farmer. The whole province relies on them to provide good, safe food each and every day, and yet we are continually hearing concerns that they’re not feeling safe in their own homes, in their own workplaces and on their own farms.

I know farmers in my own riding who deal with issues of trespassing on an ongoing basis. I’m even proud to say that in my riding, the city of Sarnia, as well—an urban area—passed a resolution highlighting their concern with the safety of farmers and their businesses.

The fact is, Mr. Speaker, we rely on farmers to produce and process safe food each and every day. Their own safety and that of their animals and families is a priority. Mr. Speaker, will the minister tell us about our government’s proposed legislation on this issue and how it will help farmers in Ontario?

Hon. Ernie Hardeman: I want to thank the member from Sarnia–Lambton for that excellent question. Mr. Speaker, we’ve received hundreds of letters about trespassing on farms and agri-food premises and obstruction to livestock transport trucks. We cannot sit back and allow farmers to continue feeling unsafe in the vital work that they do. That’s why our proposed legislation, if passed, will create the necessary deterrents against trespassers, with fines of up to $15,000 for the first offence and $25,000 for subsequent offences.

Our message is clear: People with unauthorized access or who obtain access under duress or false pretense should not be trespassing on farms and livestock transport. We’re protecting farmers, we’re protecting animal health and safety, and we’re protecting the integrity of our food.

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

Mr. Robert Bailey: Thank you, Minister, for that response. People who joined us in the Legislature on Monday when this bill was introduced saw the overwhelming response and positive response from our rural community and farm organizations. However, many people in Ontario wish to know more about how this government and your ministry, through this proposed legislation, are encouraging animal welfare and safety.

Farmers maintain sensitive protocols to ensure that their livestock are not exposed to undue stress or disease. This process is crucial to keep our food system and standards safe.

I don’t think a single member of this House would disagree that food safety is a paramount issue. I also don’t think that anyone here would disagree that animal welfare and safety are also important. Will the minister please tell us about how the proposed legislation will address these issues?

Hon. Ernie Hardeman: Again, thank you to the member for the exceptional supplementary. We want everyone to know that animal welfare is a top priority for our government.

Mr. Speaker, first I want to remind people that anyone who suspects animal abuse should immediately call the authorities to report it. Our proposed legislation provides that the people who are enforcing animal health and welfare legislation have access to private property. Our government has always been deeply committed to animal welfare. Trespassers may not realize how their actions could lead to the introduction of disease among livestock and provide them with undue stress in the process.

Animal cruelty is a serious issue. If passed, our legislation would strike the right balance and ensure protection for farmers, as well as for their animals and the integrity of Ontario’s food supply.

Tenant protection

Ms. Jessica Bell: My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. I want to introduce you to Roland. Roland is an 86-year-old senior who lives by himself in a one-bedroom apartment on Walmer Road. Roland has lived in that apartment for nearly 50 years, but Roland just received an eviction notice which says that he has to move out because the owner, an anonymous numbered corporation, wants the building to be renovated. The property manager says all tenants have to be out, even though none of the permits for the renovation have been filed.

Roland has built his life on Walmer Road, and he doesn’t think he’ll be able to afford another place on his fixed income. Minister, why is this government doing nothing to protect vulnerable seniors like Roland from losing their homes?

Hon. Steve Clark: I want to thank the honourable member for the question. I want Roland to know that our government is doing a lot in the housing space. We’ve worked very diligently since the first day we were elected, recognizing that this province has a housing supply problem. It’s a crisis right across Ontario. No matter where you go in this province, we need more housing and more choice for people.

We made some very quick decisions. We worked on the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe almost immediately upon being elected, and we’re going to continue to work in that space to provide intensification around major transit zones and to build more housing and provide more housing opportunities. We’re reviewing the provincial policy statement, because as the planning playbook for the province, we need to work with our municipal partners on getting more housing built as fast as possible, and we’ve got a great uptake by our 47 service managers and our two Indigenous program administrators.

Speaker, I want to say to the member, I want to say to Roland, I want to say to everyone in the province that we need to all work together. We need to leverage every single dollar that we have in the system provincially, that the federal government has and that our municipal partners have.

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

Ms. Jessica Bell: Back to the minister: Minister, Roland is not going to be able to afford a 500-square-foot bachelor condo right next to a transit development that costs up to $3,000 to rent, because that is what this government is building.

Since taking office, this government has sided with developers time and time again, and they have done nothing to make life better for tenants like Roland. This government has scrapped rent control on new units. They have sat by and allowed rents to skyrocket, and they have done nothing to stop the rise of renovictions like the one that is happening to Roland and thousands of people across this province.

Minister, what are you going to do to help people like Roland and the people all across this province who are suffering from illegal renovictions?

Hon. Steve Clark: Over the first 10 months in 2019, there have been 3,838 rental starts in the Toronto area. That’s the most rental starts since 1992. Developers have nearly 53,000 new units of rental housing planned for the Toronto area in the third quarter of 2019 alone.

Again, don’t take my word for it, Speaker. RBC Economics states that over the past 12 months, purpose-built rental apartment completion surged to a quarter-century high of 4,300 units in the Toronto area.

Speaker, even with those statistics, there is much more work we need to do. We need to work with every single person, not just people who build homes but also all three levels of government. We need to ensure that we’re doing everything possible to build non-profit housing, to build community housing, to retain, repair and also grow.

I just got off the phone, Speaker—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Opposition, come to order.

Hon. Steve Clark: —over the heckles—with my federal colleague, Minister Hussen. We had a tremendous conversation before—

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

Forest industry

Mr. Randy Pettapiece: My question is for the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry. For 15 years, the previous Liberal government ignored and neglected an industry that is extremely important to communities across rural and northern Ontario, all the while supported by the NDP.

I was pleased to see the minister announce today the release of a draft forest sector strategy as a first step to unlocking the full potential of Ontario’s forestry sector. It is easy to see how much passion the minister has for the forestry sector, and I am confident that with his hard work, the sector will finally be back on the right track.

Can the minister please inform the House on the next steps, now that the new draft strategy has been released?

Hon. John Yakabuski: Thank you very much, Speaker, and I want to thank the great member for his question as well.

Yes, I am passionate about this industry, and I was really pleased to announce today that we have a plan to help the forest industry grow and thrive. Throughout the past year, I held seven round tables across the province, speaking directly with industry, Indigenous communities and other stakeholders, which led to the development of this plan.

Our draft forest strategy will aim to stimulate job creation and promote economic growth, reduce unnecessary burden and cost for businesses while ensuring that our forests continue to be managed in environmentally conscious ways and with a focus on sustainability.

Our government is committed to consulting on this draft strategy, and everyone can comment on it until February 5, 2020, on the EBR registry. I’m looking forward to hearing from the people of Ontario about how we’re continuing to move forward and build Ontario together.

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

Mr. Randy Pettapiece: Thank you to the minister for the answer. I’m glad to hear how committed the minister is to creating an environment that will help the forestry sector succeed in the province of Ontario. It’s unfortunate that the Liberals gave up on forestry in Ontario, costing the sector both jobs and further investment in the province. However, it is clear the minister and our government are focusing on regaining those jobs and making Ontario open for business.

Could the minister please explain how the draft strategy will support a sector that is critical to so many communities across this province, generating over $16 billion in revenue and supporting approximately 155,000 direct and indirect jobs across Ontario?

Hon. John Yakabuski: Thank you to the member again for his supplemental.

Ontario is recognized as a global leader in sustainable forest management, and the draft forest strategy outlines our plan to help the sector grow and adapt to the needs of an emerging and future market. The draft strategy is built on four main pillars: promoting stewardship and sustainability; putting more wood to work; improving cost competitiveness; and fostering innovation, markets and talent.

The draft strategy also outlines an $84-million investment our government is making to improve Ontario’s forest resource inventory, which will inform forest management planning and decision-making in the future. This is a critical step that will help support future work, put more wood to work and ensure that we are doing sustainable forestry—recognized around the world as a leader, right here in Ontario.

Ambulance services

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is to the Minister of Health. Last December, the Cambridge ambulance communications centre was relocated to Hamilton due to staffing shortages. Staff were told the move would be temporary, but ministry delays have dragged this process out for a full year. Today, there are finally enough staff to return to Cambridge, but because of a black mould problem and technical issues, they’ve been delayed yet again to January 2020.

Ambulance dispatch staff, whether they’re in Cambridge or Thunder Bay, play a critical role in our health care system. The government shouldn’t be making their lives more stressful.

Can the minister provide assurances to dispatchers that those issues will be addressed and that staff will be able to return to Cambridge by January 2020?

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank the member very much for the question. I agree with her that ambulance staff and the services they provide are fundamental to the operation of our health care system.

We know that there have been some issues in your area and that they are being resolved. We want to work with them to make sure they can continue to do the great work that they do. As the member will also know, we are doing a complete review and updating our technology across the province to make sure that we can respond in a timely manner when there’s a request for emergency services. We are working with Mr. Jim Pine, who is consulting with municipalities across the province to understand the best method of moving forward.

We are continuing to make our investments in ambulance services. We’re increasing by 4% our investments over this year and will continue to invest—because the member is absolutely right that these are absolutely essential services.

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

Ms. Catherine Fife: Again to the minister: Over the last year, Cambridge dispatch front-line workers have gone above and beyond their scope of duty. Despite their hard work, persistent delays from management and this government and a lack of direction mean another holiday away from their families. For the ministry, this means incurring thousands of dollars in additional costs, including mileage, travel time and accommodation.

This decision was never fully thought out. It was not in the best interests of the dispatchers, who have a very stressful job, and indeed, this is absolutely a waste of money.

Why hasn’t the government done more to return Cambridge workers back to their homes, Minister?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Well, work has already been done. We are working to make sure that they can return and they can be in their home communities and continue the services that they’re doing.

Patient safety is our top priority. We are committed to reducing ambulance off-load delays and other delays that are related. I recognize there’s a particular issue in your community. That is something that we are working hard to rectify, because we want to make sure that our ambulance personnel are able to continue the work that they’re doing to be able to focus on the needs of patients, which is what our system is about at the end of the day.

We will make sure that we offer whatever services we can to make sure that they are up and running, that people are back in their home communities and that they’re able to offer the services that patients and families need in their own home jurisdictions.

Arts and cultural funding

Ms. Natalia Kusendova: My question is to the Minister of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries. In my riding and throughout the whole city of Mississauga, I am lucky to see the beauty that art and culture create, as well as the joy it brings to families and fellow citizens. In fact, in addition to the various programs that are offered throughout the city and supported by our government, we have permanent public art that is accessible and available to be enjoyed by all. These permanent pieces, like the Gala Gateway and the Gala Procession sculptures, tell many stories and draw their inspiration from elements of Canada and the dynamism of performing arts.

Minister, you speak so passionately about our need to support all artists so they can share their stories with others across the province. Can you please tell us how your ministry’s support for art and culture is allowing artists to continue to share stories that shape Ontario’s cultural identity?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I appreciate the question from the member from Mississauga. It is incredibly important that we continue to support our artists and our emerging athletes. One of the opportunities I had just last week with her colleague from Mississauga, Rudy Cuzzetto, was attending an event with a number of artists from Canada who were nominated for awards in Hollywood.

Last week, I had the opportunity to see a number of artists-in-residence at Harbourfront with the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services, as well as the Associate Minister of Children and Women’s Issues. Speaker, I always say that we’re the world in one province. We have world-class artists from Ontario who are showcasing their talents around the entire world. That’s why we’re very excited to be supporting the Ontario Arts Council with a total of $61.1 million in grants that go to emerging artists throughout the entire province.

Our artists across Ontario are contributing to the spectacular double bottom line that we talk about. They’re creating great works that we’re exposing to the rest of world, but they’re also contributing to the bottom line of our economy to the tune of $71 billion.

Tabling of sessional papers

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that the following documents have been tabled: a report concerning the review of the cabinet ministers’ and opposition leaders’ expense claims, complete as of December 2, 2019, from the Office of the Integrity Commissioner of Ontario, and the 2019 annual report from the Office of the Auditor General of Ontario.

Deferred Votes

Legislative reform

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We now have a deferred vote on a motion for closure on government order number 26 relating to changes to the standing orders.

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

The division bells rang from 1140 to 1145.

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

On November 27, 2019, Mr. Calandra moved government notice of motion number 73, now government order 26, as amended, relating to changes to the standing orders. On November 28, 2019, Mr. Bisson moved an amendment, and on December 2, 2019, Ms. Singh, Brampton Centre, moved an amendment to the amendment. Ms. Hogarth has moved that the question now be put.

All those in favour of Ms. Hogarth’s motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Baber, Roman

Babikian, Aris

Bailey, Robert

Barrett, Toby

Bouma, Will

Calandra, Paul

Cho, Raymond Sung Joon

Cho, Stan

Clark, Steve

Coe, Lorne

Crawford, Stephen

Cuzzetto, Rudy

Downey, Doug

Elliott, Christine

Fullerton, Merrilee

Ghamari, Goldie

Gill, Parm

Hardeman, Ernie

Harris, Mike

Hogarth, Christine

Jones, Sylvia

Kanapathi, Logan

Karahalios, Belinda C.

Ke, Vincent

Khanjin, Andrea

Kusendova, Natalia

Lecce, Stephen

MacLeod, Lisa

Martin, Robin

Martow, Gila

McDonell, Jim

McNaughton, Monte

Miller, Norman

Mitas, Christina Maria

Mulroney, Caroline

Nicholls, Rick

Oosterhoff, Sam

Pang, Billy

Park, Lindsey

Pettapiece, Randy

Phillips, Rod

Piccini, David

Rasheed, Kaleed

Roberts, Jeremy

Romano, Ross

Sabawy, Sheref

Sandhu, Amarjot

Sarkaria, Prabmeet Singh

Simard, Amanda

Smith, Dave

Smith, Todd

Surma, Kinga

Tangri, Nina

Thanigasalam, Vijay

Thompson, Lisa M.

Tibollo, Michael A.

Triantafilopoulos, Effie J.

Wai, Daisy

Walker, Bill

Yakabuski, John

Yurek, Jeff

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): All those who are opposed to Ms. Hogarth’s motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Armstrong, Teresa J.

Begum, Doly

Bell, Jessica

Berns-McGown, Rima

Bisson, Gilles

Bourgouin, Guy

Burch, Jeff

Fife, Catherine

Fraser, John

French, Jennifer K.

Gates, Wayne

Glover, Chris

Gretzky, Lisa

Hassan, Faisal

Karpoche, Bhutila

Kernaghan, Terence

Lindo, Laura Mae

Mamakwa, Sol

Mantha, Michael

Miller, Paul

Monteith-Farrell, Judith

Morrison, Suze

Natyshak, Taras

Rakocevic, Tom

Sattler, Peggy

Schreiner, Mike

Shaw, Sandy

Singh, Gurratan

Singh, Sara

Stevens, Jennifer (Jennie)

Stiles, Marit

Yarde, Kevin

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 61; the nays are 32.

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

Mr. Calandra has moved government notice of motion number 73, relating to changes to the standing orders.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry, as amended? I heard some noes.

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

All those opposed will please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1149 to 1150.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Calandra has moved government notice of motion number 73, relating to changes to the standing orders.

All those in favour of the motion, as amended, will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Baber, Roman

Babikian, Aris

Bailey, Robert

Barrett, Toby

Bouma, Will

Calandra, Paul

Cho, Raymond Sung Joon

Cho, Stan

Clark, Steve

Coe, Lorne

Crawford, Stephen

Cuzzetto, Rudy

Downey, Doug

Elliott, Christine

Fraser, John

Fullerton, Merrilee

Ghamari, Goldie

Gill, Parm

Hardeman, Ernie

Harris, Mike

Hogarth, Christine

Jones, Sylvia

Kanapathi, Logan

Karahalios, Belinda C.

Ke, Vincent

Khanjin, Andrea

Kusendova, Natalia

Lecce, Stephen

MacLeod, Lisa

Martin, Robin

Martow, Gila

McDonell, Jim

McNaughton, Monte

Miller, Norman

Mitas, Christina Maria

Mulroney, Caroline

Nicholls, Rick

Oosterhoff, Sam

Pang, Billy

Park, Lindsey

Pettapiece, Randy

Phillips, Rod

Piccini, David

Rasheed, Kaleed

Roberts, Jeremy

Romano, Ross

Sabawy, Sheref

Sandhu, Amarjot

Sarkaria, Prabmeet Singh

Schreiner, Mike

Simard, Amanda

Smith, Dave

Smith, Todd

Surma, Kinga

Tangri, Nina

Thanigasalam, Vijay

Thompson, Lisa M.

Tibollo, Michael A.

Triantafilopoulos, Effie J.

Wai, Daisy

Walker, Bill

Yakabuski, John

Yurek, Jeff

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): All those opposed to the motion, as amended, will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Armstrong, Teresa J.

Begum, Doly

Bell, Jessica

Berns-McGown, Rima

Bisson, Gilles

Bourgouin, Guy

Burch, Jeff

Fife, Catherine

French, Jennifer K.

Gates, Wayne

Glover, Chris

Gretzky, Lisa

Hassan, Faisal

Karpoche, Bhutila

Kernaghan, Terence

Lindo, Laura Mae

Mamakwa, Sol

Mantha, Michael

Miller, Paul

Monteith-Farrell, Judith

Morrison, Suze

Natyshak, Taras

Rakocevic, Tom

Sattler, Peggy

Shaw, Sandy

Singh, Gurratan

Singh, Sara

Stevens, Jennifer (Jennie)

Stiles, Marit

Yarde, Kevin

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 63; the nays are 30.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I declare the motion carried, as amended.

Motion, as amended, agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): This House stands in recess until 3 p.m.

The House recessed from 1153 to 1500.

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Paul Miller: I would like to introduce a group from my riding of Hamilton East–Stoney Creek. I’d like to welcome Cora Hurwich and the Parkview neighbourhood association to the Legislature this afternoon. They represent a wonderful part of our Hamilton community in Hamilton East, and they are here today to highlight some of the challenges they’re facing in the community regarding serious noise pollution and environmental distress in their neighbourhood. Welcome.

Members’ Statements

Vaping products

Ms. Doly Begum: Vape devices and e-cigarettes are continuing to grow in popularity in Ontario and around the world. Originally marketed as a harm-reduction product for adult smokers, more and more young people are taking up vaping, regardless of whether or not they were smokers in the past. Public health advocates have expressed concern that vaping is a new way to get youth addicted to nicotine, the active ingredient in cigarettes.

In 2018, soon after the provincial election, this Conservative government loosened regulations to allow advertisements for vapes and e-cigarettes in convenience stores and gas stations, despite numerous concerns raised at the committee on social policy—and I was sitting there—by experts and members of the public. Now the government is walking back this wrong-headed move with the announcement that point-of-sale advertisements for vaping products will be phased out again by fall of next year.

While eliminating point-of-sale advertisements is a step back in the right direction, we should go further. My colleague the MPP from Nickel Belt has brought forward a private member’s bill calling for increased regulation of vaping, including a full ban on advertising and restrictions on flavours and the amount of nicotine in e-cigarettes.

Vaping is a new phenomenon, Speaker, and the long-term health effects of this are not known yet. We simply do not have enough information to allow for it to be publicly advertised like this. So I’m asking this government to take a smart and educated approach to this public health issue and ensure that we keep vaping products out of the hands of our youth.

Project Spotlight

Mrs. Daisy Wai: Last Saturday, I was heartened to attend the second Project Spotlight, 2019, that was organized by Joy Beyond Vision Community, Across U-hub and BrokerTeam Insurance. This was an inclusive screening of the Hong Kong documentary film My Voice, My Life. It was directed by the Oscar-winning director Ruby Yang.

The success of this free event was not just the great movie but how it was presented—that touched the audience and myself the most. Through wireless headset systems, the movie was communicated to a group of visually impaired audience members. A group of young vocal talents from Across U-hub performed the live description. I was provided with a pair of tinted glasses to experience how much the visually impaired would have missed.

After the show, the audience members broke down in tears because the audio description allowed them to fully enjoy the movie with their loved ones.

This experience also teaches the young volunteers from Across U-hub to treasure what they have and how meaningful it is to support the people that need things the most. Thank you to Project Spotlight.

Teachers’ labour dispute

Ms. Jessica Bell: Today, high school teachers are on strike across our province to fight for public education and our children’s future. This government’s strategy is to try to divide parents and teachers and ram through these cuts. But parents are standing with teachers—parents like those in my riding who got together to start up a group called the West End Parents Network.

I have a statement from these parents that they wanted me to read at Queen’s Park today. This is what it says:

“By now, it should be obvious that parents and families will not give up, and they will not back down, until this government reverses all the harmful cuts it has made to our education system.

“Last night, over 100 parents and community members crowded around the Sheraton hotel as the OSSTF negotiating team waited the whole day for the government’s bargaining team” to turn up.

Guess what? They didn’t turn up.

“From stopping mandatory e-learning and restoring smaller class sizes, we know that teachers are on the side of parents, and let me tell you, we are united. We cannot be divided.

“We are so proud of teachers and support staff for standing up for our kids, and we will keep up the pressure until a fair deal is reached—one that reverses the cuts to education and respects our kids and our education workers.”

As a parent, I’m proud to stand up for teachers, for kids and for the West End Parents Network, and I encourage you to do the same.

Infrastructure funding

Mr. Aris Babikian: I rise today in the House to speak about our government’s support to invest in Ontario’s infrastructure.

In particular, I want to mention the recent process that allowed community organizations to apply for funding through the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program: Community, Culture and Recreation Stream. This allowed organizations in my riding of Scarborough–Agincourt to apply for funding to help ensure that our community is a great place to live.

I especially want to acknowledge and thank YMCA and United Way Toronto for spending months planning and applying to build the Bridletowne Community Hub in my riding. I know that, once completed, this project will have huge benefits for families in Scarborough–Agincourt.

Additionally, I have supported the Armenian Community Centre, the Chinese Cultural Centre, the Tamil Community Centre, the Chinese Professional Association of Canada and Carefirst in the process of applying for funding through this stream. I know that they all submitted excellent applications that will have immense benefits to the families of Scarborough.

I look forward to seeing all the projects come to fruition in the future.

Pediatric cancer treatment

Ms. Rima Berns-McGown: Speaker, I want to introduce you to Cindi Shoot and the son whom she calls Sweet Ethan. Ethan is seven years old, and Cindi is a single mom in Beaches–East York. Almost a year ago, on the eve of a long-promised vacation, Cindi took Ethan to a clinic for a fever that wouldn’t leave. It turned out that Ethan had a brain tumour that quickly spread to his spine. Cindi and Ethan’s lives turned upside down.

In the months since, Cindi has had to become an advocate for gentler treatments for childhood cancers, for more funding for childhood cancer research, and for a proton-beam therapy machine so kids don’t have to travel to the US, as Ethan did, to avoid harmful radiation long-term side effects.

Cindi is lucky. She has a union job that allowed her to take time off to care full-time for Ethan and his sister, but without a GoFundMe and community support, she would not have made it through the year once her EI ran out.

Government needs to listen to Cindi and to do better to support kids with cancer and their families. Cancer is stressful enough without worrying about how to keep a roof over a family’s head, and food on the table.

Ethan, who has kept his sweet smile throughout this ordeal and has been so very brave, is scheduled to begin his final round of chemo next Monday.

As we head into the holiday season, I want to ask all of you to please send prayers and light and love to Sweet Ethan and Cindi. May their next year be much smoother, healthier and happier.

Local business

Mr. Norman Miller: I rise today, as we approach the holiday season, to remind residents of Parry Sound–Muskoka and all Ontarians of the importance of shopping locally. This is particularly true in smaller communities, like the towns and villages in my riding. Buying your Christmas presents from a local store, manufacturer or artist supports jobs in your town.

Residents of Bracebridge have a great opportunity to support local jobs this year by shopping at the temporary location of Rich Hill Candles. Rich Hill Candles closed last year after a fire. While they wait for their main location to be rebuilt, they’ve opened a temporary store on Manitoba Street.

Buying locally grown food for your holiday festivities supports local farmers like Currie’s Corner Farm in Huntsville and the Muskoka Lakes Farm and Winery in Bala.

Speaking of the Muskoka Lakes Farm and Winery, I want to congratulate them on winning the Excellence in Innovation Ontario Business Achievement Award this year. This is a prestigious award from the Ontario Chamber of Commerce.

Buying locally produced maple syrup supports your neighbours who make maple syrup, and our area has a number of award-winning maple syrup producers. I want to take this opportunity to congratulate Mike and Sarah Clapperton of Loring on winning two awards for their maple syrup at this year’s Royal Agricultural Winter Fair, including the John David Eaton World Championship Cup.

These award-winning businesses demonstrate the high quality of products produced right in our backyard.

Whether you’re buying food, decorations or presents, I encourage everyone to give this gift to your community: Shop local this Christmas.

Teachers’ labour dispute

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Today, I would say unfortunately, the government has decided not to take bargaining seriously when it comes to what’s happening with bargaining with teachers across the province.

The government was pretty clear: Right from the outset, they decided that they wanted to pick a fight with teachers and teachers’ unions in order to advance whatever political agenda they had. Unfortunately, the people that are caught in the crossfire are students across this province and parents. I think that’s rather unfortunate, Mr. Speaker. We have a responsibility as legislators on both sides of the House—and the government should take that seriously as well—to be able to find a path forward to resolve these issues.

Now, the government tries to say, “Oh, it’s the unions and the teachers that are escalating everything that’s going on,” but when you look at what has actually happened, the government has said, “We want to increase the number of classes we teach without teachers. Instead, we’re going to teach by e-learning, and we’re going to increase class sizes.”

First of all, how do you expect students and parents to respond to that? I don’t think they’re very happy. Students do not want to be in classes that are larger in size and are not interested—by and large; most of them—to do e-learning. And when it comes to parents, they know that that’s not a good thing for their kids.

Teachers are out there on the picket line today trying to preserve a public system of education that has served this province well over the past number of years. I think the government has to understand it has a responsibility to make sure to preserve that system as well.

Mann Cup

Mr. Dave Smith: Since 1932, the Mann Cup has been awarded as the national championship trophy for Canadian box lacrosse. It’s currently valued at more than $175,000 to replace that cup, and it finds its permanent residence in the Canadian Lacrosse Hall of Fame.

In September 2018, I rose in this chamber to announce that the Peterborough Lakers major series lacrosse team had won their 16th Mann Cup, to tie New Westminster with the most national box lacrosse championships in Canada.

Today, I rise to inform the House that this past September the Peterborough Lakers did something that has only been done twice before in our country’s lacrosse history: They won a third consecutive national championship and now stand alone as the winningest franchise in Canadian lacrosse history. This victory marks only the third time in Canadian history that the franchise has won three consecutive national championships.

I’m sure everyone here wants to know who the other organizations were. Well, most recently, in 1994, 1995 and 1996, the Six Nations franchise from my seatmate’s riding won three championships. The only other franchise to have won it three consecutive times is—wait for it—my own community of Peterborough, in 1951, 1952, 1953 and a record-setting fourth time in 1954. Since the Mann Cup is coming back to Ontario this year, I’m excited for a four-peat in 2020.

Waterloo region

Mr. Mike Harris: It’s an honour to rise here once again and update the great constituents of Kitchener–Conestoga on how this government is making a significant difference for Waterloo region—progress that would not be possible without the strong partnership that currently exists between this government and our local municipalities, a relationship that has always been a top priority of mine.

I want to recognize Berry Vrbanovic, Les Armstrong, Joe Nowak and Sandy Shantz, the mayors of Kitchener, Wilmot, Wellesley and Woolwich, respectively, and also regional chair Karen Redman for their time and constructive dialogue on key issues since my election. With their help, this government has advanced the interests of Waterloo region by creating jobs, making key infrastructure investments and enhancing care for those who need it most. We have made significant progress on key initiatives, including:

—allowing fair and open tendering for public sector projects;

—protecting our rural fire services by eliminating discrimination against double-hatters and volunteer firefighters;

—approving a full slate of public transit infrastructure projects supplied for by the region through ICIP;

—expanding home, seniors’ and midwifery care;

—giving the green light to the new St. Boniface school in Breslau; and

—yes, Mr. Speaker, expansion to GO train services, getting us closer to two-way, all-day GO.

I look forward to continuing the partnership we have built over the past year so that we can maintain Waterloo region as one of the top communities in this province to grow and prosper.

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

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on General Government

Mr. Mike Harris: I beg leave to present a report from the Standing Committee on General Government and move its adoption.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Tonia Grannum): Your committee begs to report the following bill, as amended:

Bill 132,

An Act to reduce burdens on people and businesses by enacting, amending and repealing various Acts and revoking various Regulations / Projet de loi 132, Loi visant à alléger le fardeau administratif qui pèse sur la population et les entreprises en édictant, modifiant ou abrogeant diverses lois et en abrogeant divers règlements.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed? Agreed.

Report adopted.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Pursuant to the order of the House dated November 7, 2019, the bill is ordered for third reading.

Petitions

Noise pollution

Mr. Paul Miller: Speaker, this petition is to reduce the noise pollution in the Parkview West neighbourhood in Hamilton East.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas industrial noise pollution has increased greatly in recent years and remediation efforts have resulted in increased acoustic noise levels;

“Whereas residents’ increased exposure to noise causes stress, anxiety, depression, high blood pressure, and heart disease;

“Whereas provincial regulators and enforcement personnel have been unable to develop an acceptable solution to reduce this noise pollution;

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

“To take action by changing the acceptable operating noise levels in the Parkview West neighbourhood of Hamilton.”

I agree with this, and I’ll affix my signature.

Fish and wildlife management

Mr. Dave Smith: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the ban on hunting and trapping in sections of Ontario to protect the eastern hybrid wolf was put in place without regard for the overall ecosystem;

“Whereas this ban has adversely affected the ability of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), hunters and trappers to properly manage animal populations and Ontario’s ecosystem;

“Whereas this ban is no longer needed and is in fact causing more damage to Ontario’s ecosystem and increasing unnecessary encounters between wildlife and Ontarians;

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

“That the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry immediately lift the ban on hunting and trapping set in place to protect the eastern hybrid wolf.”

I agree with this petition. I will sign my name to it and give it to page Ally.

Public sector compensation

Ms. Marit Stiles: I’m pleased to present this petition on behalf of Emilia Fernandes of Mississauga. It reads as follows:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Ford Conservatives’ cuts represent an all-out attack on municipalities, health care, schools, universities and social services; and

“Whereas the Ford Conservatives’ cuts are harming families, children and the most vulnerable across Ontario, making the services we all rely on less accessible and accountable; and

“Whereas Bill 124 will strip workers of their charter-protected right to free collective bargaining; and

“Whereas Bill 124 will force front-line public sector workers to accept contracts below inflation, compounding cuts that make the delivery of services more difficult;

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

“That the government of Ontario stop dismantling our social infrastructure, properly fund our public services, withdraw Bill 124, and support communities, not cuts.”

This is signed by thousands of people, Mr. Speaker. I’m very pleased to affix my signature. I fully support it, and I’m going to hand it to page Augustine to table with the Clerks.

Fish and wildlife management

Mr. Mike Harris: It’s a pleasure to be able to read this petition into the House today.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the ban on hunting and trapping in sections of Ontario to protect the eastern hybrid wolf was put in place without regard for the overall ecosystem;

“Whereas this ban has adversely affected the ability of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), hunters and trappers to properly manage animal populations and Ontario’s ecosystem;

“Whereas this ban is no longer needed and is in fact causing more damage to Ontario’s ecosystem and increasing unnecessary encounters between wildlife and Ontarians;

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

“That the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry immediately lift the ban on hunting and trapping set in place to protect the eastern hybrid wolf.”

I again wholeheartedly support this petition and will pass it to page Sarah to bring to the table.

Public sector compensation

Ms. Doly Begum: I have a petition titled “Communities, Not Cuts.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Ford Conservatives’ cuts represent an all-out attack on municipalities, health care, schools, universities and social services; and

“Whereas the Ford Conservatives’ cuts are harming families, children and the most vulnerable across Ontario, making the services we all rely on less accessible and accountable; and

“Whereas Bill 124 will strip workers of their charter-protected right to free collective bargaining; and

“Whereas Bill 124 will force front-line public sector workers to accept contracts below inflation, compounding cuts that make the delivery of services more difficult;

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

“That the government of Ontario stop dismantling our social infrastructure, properly fund our public services, withdraw Bill 124, and support communities, not cuts.”

I fully support this petition, will affix my signature to it and give it to page Alexandra.

Equal opportunity

Ms. Suze Morrison: I have a petition here entitled: “Don’t Take Away Social and Economic Rights for Women and Marginalized People.

“Whereas Bill 47 erased many of the legislative gains achieved through Bill 148, the fairer labour laws and working conditions that had a particularly positive impact on women and marginalized people;

“Whereas statistics show that women, particularly women of colour, are most likely to be employed in precarious work, and the Bill 47 amendments to the Employment Standards Act, 2000 and Labour Relations Act, 1995 create conditions that lead to a growth in precarious employment while also eliminating protections for millions of Ontario workers;

“Whereas Bill 66 further erodes women’s and marginalized people’s social and economic rights; and

“Whereas the Ford government continues to remove, cancel or freeze funding for other supports, programs and regulations that would increase women’s equality in the workforce and beyond;

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

“—reinstate paid sick days, the scheduled increase to a $15 minimum wage, legislation to increase pay transparency, regulations that support equal pay for equal work, and all other worker protections gained under the Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act;

“—reverse changes to daycare regulations that allow more children per caregiver;

“—reverse the retroactive cuts to funding for the Ontario College of Midwives;

“—reinstate funding increases to sexual assault centres;

“—restore the” provincial round table on ending “violence against women; and

“—restore the child and youth advocate commissioner’s office.”

I fully endorse this petition. I will affix my signature to it and provide it to page Ally to deliver to the table.

Fish and wildlife management

Mr. Will Bouma: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the ban on hunting and trapping in sections of Ontario to protect the eastern hybrid wolf was put in place without regard for the overall ecosystem;

“Whereas this ban has adversely affected the ability of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), hunters and trappers to properly manage animal populations and Ontario’s ecosystem;

“Whereas this ban is no longer needed and is in fact causing more damage to Ontario’s ecosystem and increasing unnecessary encounters between wildlife and Ontarians;

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

“That the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry immediately lift the ban on hunting and trapping set in place to protect the eastern hybrid wolf.”

I fully support this petition, will affix my signature on it and give it to page Gio.

Education funding

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: The petition I’d like to read into the record is entitled “Stop Ford’s Education Cuts.” It reads:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas” the Ford Conservatives’ “new education scheme seeks to dramatically increase class sizes....;

“Whereas the changes will mean thousands fewer teachers and education workers and less help for every student;

“Whereas secondary students will now be forced to take ... classes online, with as many as 35 students in each course;

“Whereas Ford’s changes will rip over $1 billion out of Ontario’s education system by the end of the government’s term; and

“Whereas kids in Ontario deserve more opportunities, not fewer;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

“Demand that the government halt the cuts to classrooms and invest to strengthen public education in Ontario.”

I fully support this petition, will affix my signature and give it to page Laura to deliver to the Clerks.

Curriculum

Mr. Billy Pang: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Ontario government itself has predicted increasing demand for labour in the STEM sector;

“Whereas STEM occupations will be critical for the Ontario innovations, services and economic performance in the next decade;

“Whereas current EQAO results have indicated that the current education curriculum has inadequately prepared students for future job opportunities within STEM fields;

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

“That the Ontario government make meaningful changes to the current education curriculum so that the next generation will be better equipped to be competitive in the job market.”

I support this petition and I will pass it to the assembly through Leela.

Public sector compensation

Mr. Kevin Yarde: This petition is entitled “Communities Not Cuts.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Ford Conservatives’ cuts represent an all-out attack on municipalities, health care, schools, universities and social services; and

“Whereas the Ford Conservatives’ cuts are harming families, children and the most vulnerable across Ontario, making the services we all rely on less accessible and accountable; and

“Whereas Bill 124 will strip workers of their charter-protected right to free collective bargaining; and

“Whereas Bill 124 will force front-line public sector workers to accept contracts below inflation, compounding cuts that make the delivery of services more difficult;

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

“That the government of Ontario stop dismantling our social infrastructure, properly fund our public services, withdraw Bill 124, and support communities, not cuts.”

I fully endorse this petition and I’ll affix my name to it.

Veterans memorial

Mr. Mike Harris: I have a petition here entitled “In Support of Constructing a Memorial to Honour Our Heroes.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas over 40,000 Canadian Armed Forces members served in the war in Afghanistan including the 159 Canadians who made the ultimate sacrifice; and

“Whereas the Premier made a commitment to the people of Ontario to build a memorial to honour the bravery and sacrifice of our armed forces; and

“Whereas, by remembering their service and sacrifice, we recognize the values and freedoms these men and women fought to preserve; and

“Whereas the memorial will show our gratitude to our veterans, their families and to their descendants; and

“Whereas the memorial will be a place of remembrance, a form of tribute, and an important reminder to future generations of the contributions and sacrifices that have helped shape our country;

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

“That the government of Ontario immediately construct the memorial to honour the heroes of the war in Afghanistan.”

I fully endorse this petition. I’ve signed it and will pass it to page Isabella to bring to the table.

Sclérose en plaques

M. Michael Mantha: J’ai une pétition :

« Clinique spécialisée en sclérose en plaques à Sudbury

« À l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario :

« Alors que le nord-est de l’Ontario affiche l’un des plus hauts taux de sclérose en plaques (SP) de l’Ontario; et

« Alors que des cliniques spécialisées dans la sclérose en plaques fournissent des services de soins de santé essentiels aux personnes atteintes de sclérose en plaques, à leur fournisseur de soins et à leur famille; et

« Alors que la ville du Grand Sudbury est reconnue comme un centre des soins de santé dans le nord-est de l’Ontario;

« Nous, soussignés, pétitionnons l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario de :

« Mettre en place immédiatement une clinique spécialisée dans la sclérose en plaques dans la région de Sudbury, composée d’un(

e) neurologue spécialisé(

e) dans le traitement de la sclérose en plaques, d’un(

e) physiothérapeute et d’un(

e) travailleur(-euse) social(

e) au minimum. »

Je suis complètement d’accord avec cette pétition. J’y mets ma signature, et je la présente à la page Ally pour l’apporter à la table des greffiers.

Addiction services

Mr. Dave Smith: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas currently Peterborough city and county has seen a major increase in the amount of opioid-related overdoses, poisonings, and deaths;

“Whereas in Ontario and across the country it has been deemed that there is a current opioid crisis; and

“Whereas Peterborough currently does not have a consumption and treatment site to help in the reduction of overdoses and deaths in the area;

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

“Work to put forward an application for a treatment and consumption services site to follow the mandatory services....”

I agree with this petition and will sign my name to it and give it to page Suhani.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): That concludes the time we have available for petitions this afternoon.

Orders of the Day

Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur les services provinciaux visant le bien-être des animaux

Mr. Calandra, on behalf of Ms. Jones, moved third reading of the following bill:

Bill 136,

An Act to enact the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, 2019 and make consequential amendments with respect to animal protection / Projet de loi 136, Loi édictant la Loi de 2019 sur les services provinciaux visant le bien-être des animaux et apportant des modifications corrélatives concernant la protection des animaux.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I will look to the government side to lead off the debate. The government house leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, I’ll speak only very, very briefly, just to congratulate the minister and the parliamentary assistants who have been working on this bill. It is a very comprehensive bill that I know all members of this House are in agreement with. It is a rare opportunity that we can have a bill put together that everybody on both sides of the House agrees with.

With that, I will sit down, and I look forward to the debate that ensues for the rest of the day. Thank you.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further debate?

Mr. Kevin Yarde: It is with great pleasure that I once again stand up and speak about Bill 136, the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, and the much-needed overhaul of animal welfare in Ontario.

For over 100 years, the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty for Animals, a private charity, was the only organization providing the services of animal welfare enforcement and policing for the entire province. Animal advocates and stakeholders have demanded the need for change and for a revamped cruelty enforcement regime in Ontario for a very long time.

Animal welfare charities and their donors have been subsidizing this important work with a serious lack of government funding and oversight. That is a disservice to the people of Ontario. As a private charity, the OSPCA is not subject to freedom-of-information laws or the Police Services Act, unlike nearly every other law enforcement body in Ontario. Government underfunding and the dependence on the OSPCA’s fundraising from the public put a serious strain on the OSPCA’s capacity to do their job effectively.

When you force a charity to fundraise to do their work, and force members of the public, who are very passionate about the cause of protecting animals, to pay for it, you are taking advantage of their compassion instead of providing the adequate funding needed to make the system functional. The OSPCA did the best they could with what they had, but there has always been a need to move toward a more accountable public system.

The PAWS Act, along with the OSPCA Amendment Act, is in response to a Superior Court ruling that found the OSPCA’s enforcement powers in animal cruelty investigations in Ontario to be unconstitutional. In early 2019, a Superior Court judge found that the previous animal welfare legislation violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms because it effectively deputized the OSPCA, a private not-for-profit organization, into a policing role. The court, Mr.

Speaker, noted that “although charged with law enforcement responsibilities, the OSPCA is opaque, insular, unaccountable, and potentially subject to external influence, and as such Ontarians cannot be confident that the laws it enforces will be fairly and impartially administered.”

In the meantime, the Ontario government enacted a temporary measure to keep animals protected and ensure abusers would be brought to justice until a new framework could be established. While the decision was being appealed, the OSPCA announced it would no longer enforce the act, citing concerns over a lack of support and the safety of its officers. So on June 28, the OSPCA stepped back after 100 years of animal welfare enforcement, and the humane society took over in a temporary role. This led to the introduction of this bill, to make animal welfare enforcement a fully public function under provincial control and funding, including the hiring of public inspectors.

Those of you who have followed along with this issue will know that on November 14, the Ontario Court of Appeal decided to overturn the lower court ruling. They stated that the search and seizure powers of the OSPCA do not violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The court deemed the overall question a matter of public policy and out of the courts’ purview.

The appeal court stated, “The design of a proper regime of law enforcement, one that ensures that peace officers are accountable, that their actions are subject to public scrutiny and that the law is enforced with integrity, are questions of public policy, not individual legal rights” protected by the charter. Bill 136 will hopefully become that public policy—an animal welfare regime that provides accountability, integrity and transparency.

The PAWS Act was not introduced in response to or by the direction of any court decision. We hope that the government simply realized it was the right thing to do and the smart thing to do for the people and animals of Ontario. The decision of the Court of Appeal should not hinder but rather strengthen the will of this government to further build on the PAWS Act.

In response to the appeal court’s decision, Animal Justice executive director Camille Labchuk stated that this case “prompted a serious public discussion about how animal welfare laws should be enforced in Ontario and beyond. Animal Justice’s key concern was always ensuring that a robust, public, well-funded enforcement system be put into place, and we are pleased that the province of Ontario is moving toward such a system with Bill 136, the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act. A strong enforcement system sends a signal that our government agrees with citizens that animals matter, and that ensuring their protection is an important public value.”

The PAWS Act is a first step in implementing a new provincial enforcement model, a more detailed oversight structure and a modernized legislative framework for animal welfare in Ontario. This bill is just the beginning of what we hope will be an all-around better animal welfare system. There is no going back to the way it was before. Ontario is the only province to move toward a fully public model of animal law enforcement, and that is a significant step in the right direction. By employing public servants who are properly trained to handle the unique situations involved in animal welfare, it becomes much safer and more accountable.

This bill is introducing the st