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

December 10, 2019

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2019-Dec-10 (PDF)

L139 - Tue 10 Dec 2019 / Mar 10 déc 2019

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 10 December 2019 Mardi 10 décembre 2019

Orders of the Day

Better for People, Smarter for Business Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 pour mieux servir la population et faciliter les affaires

Introduction of Visitors

Oral Questions

Teachers’ labour dispute

Teachers’ labour dispute

Climate change

Interprovincial trade

Post-secondary education

Government spending

Justice system

Legal aid

Health care

Government spending

Food safety

Government appointments

Amateur sport

Autism treatment

Consumer protection

Tenant protection

Deferred Votes

Plan to Build Ontario Together Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur le plan pour bâtir l’Ontario ensemble

Better for People, Smarter for Business Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 pour mieux servir la population et faciliter les affaires

Royal assent / Sanction royale

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Tenant protection

Senior citizens

Christmas wish list

Sarnia Shoebox Project

Human rights

Bob Rumball Canadian Centre of Excellence for the Deaf

Thomas Cavanagh

Northern Ontario

Palliative care

Tibet

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Government Agencies

Standing Committee on Social Policy

Introduction of Bills

Food Day Ontario (Food Day Canada in Ontario) Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur la Journée des terroirs du Canada en Ontario

Protecting Vulnerable Persons in Supportive Living Accommodation Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur la protection des personnes vulnérables dans les logements supervisés

Motions

Adjournment debate

Committee sittings

Consideration of Bill 6

Petitions

Autism treatment

Great Lakes protection

Correction of record

Affordable housing

Real estate industry

Affordable housing

Community hub

Education funding

Government’s agenda

Climate change

Highway bypass

Education funding

Food safety

Orders of the Day

Security from Trespass and Protecting Food Safety Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur la protection contre l’entrée sans autorisation et sur la protection de la salubrité des aliments

Adjournment Debate

Workplace safety

Government accountability

Health care

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Better for People, Smarter for Business Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 pour mieux servir la population et faciliter les affaires

Resuming the debate adjourned on December 9, 2019, on the motion for third reading of the following bill:

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): When we last debated Bill 132 at third reading, the member for Oshawa had the floor. I recognize, again, the member for Oshawa.

Ms. Jennifer K. French: I am glad to be able to continue the thoughts that I had started yesterday, on behalf of the fine folks in Oshawa, but generally across the province. Here we are discussing Bill 132, the Better for People, Smarter for Business Act, and as I mentioned yesterday and as we have heard, this government, ad nauseam, has been heralding this bill as something that is going to make the world easier for business and somehow better for folks, and interestingly, that isn’t what came out at committee.

For the team that was there at committee—well, for everyone that was at committee; the government side as well—they heard over and over that people had real concerns about this, whether they be environmental, whether they be about penalties, and certainly I hope that this government has paid attention, as they have heard so loudly about the problems with the process, in this bill, of course, and with others. This has been very challenging.

I will read something from the regional municipality of Durham speaking to the process and how to even get information on the record to be able to be heard by this government and make the suggestions that they so desperately need when it comes to their legislation. This is what they’ve said: “As a general observation, a 30-day comment period is insufficient for a municipality to properly review a lengthy bill such as Bill 132, assess the effect on our operations, and provide a submission endorsed by regional council to the province.”

They also said, “We were disappointed to see that changes proposed to the Aggregate Resources Act, posted for 30 days of public review and input on October 4, 2019, were already incorporated into a bill introduced on October 28, before the public consultation on the Aggregate Resources Act had even concluded.”

Speaker, when I had the opportunity to be in this room last week and heard the remarks from my colleague from Waterloo and my colleague from London West, they very clearly were getting on the record the voices at committee—and not just the chastising that the government should have heard at committee, but also the suggestions and the expertise that this government seemingly just wasn’t interested in having.

They made the commitment—“they” being the government—to have consultations. But “consultations” is more than a word and a tick box on your list of things that you have to do. Consultations are supposed to be about engagement and they’re supposed to be about hearing from folks, whether it’s criticism or whether it is reinforcement or encouragement for government ideas.

If I were the government and was putting forward such a massive omnibus piece of legislation, I would want to hear from the broader community the pieces that were good and strong and were going to hold water, and the pieces that maybe deserved a second look, or even a third look, or should be repealed altogether or challenged before it goes out into the world and causes harm. I’ve never understood that.

This government kind of frames itself as different—but they don’t seem to be—from the last majority government that I stood across from. That last government had this sense of, “Well, we know what we’re doing, so just trust us,” and, “Well, we’re just going to put this piece of legislation out and na-na-na-na-na, there’s nothing you can say that’s going to stop us in this.” Then, of course, we would see the damage and the harm caused by rushed legislation or problematic legislation.

I’m going to read something from Hansard, actually, from my colleague from London West, because there’s no point in reinventing the wheel; it was said so well. She was talking about process as well and said:

“Some serious concerns were raised about process. This is an omnibus bill—17 schedules, 80 acts, and citizens were given virtually no time. We, as legislators, as MPPs, were given very, very limited time to analyze the changes that are set out in this bill and to really thoroughly understand what the impact of those changes will be.

“When the Canadian Environmental Law Association appeared before the committee they started out right upfront and said, ‘In particular, Bill 132 proposes to change 14 different environmental laws. However, only a 30-day public comment period has been provided under the Environment Bill of Rights for all of these significant legislative changes. CELA submits that this fast-track approach is both unacceptable and unwarranted, and that it is inappropriate to bury the proposed changes in a 100-page omnibus bill containing 17 different schedules.’”

Speaker, just think about that. It’s a significant bill that makes a lot of changes, and to not do your due diligence is really disappointing, to say the least, and damaging in reality.

I’ve got a packet that I’m actually happy to share with the government if I thought that it would be helpful, except that we’re already at third reading, it has already been through committee, they’ve made the changes that they’re willing to make and stubbornly are refusing to make any changes that they should make.

This is a breakdown, by proposed changes to schedules, from the region of Durham about

schedule 8. That is an amendment to change the energy and water reporting and benchmarking program to eliminate the rollout of a reporting requirement for smaller commercial, industrial and multi-residential buildings under 100,000 square feet. It’s very specific, but just an example, and not something that we’ve heard in this Legislature before:

“The region does not support this change. Exempting buildings under 100,000 square feet does not align with the Durham community energy plan or water conservation efforts.

“Benchmarking helps building owners understand how they compare to similar buildings in the marketplace and helps identify opportunities for water and energy efficiency and emissions reductions.

“From the perspective of Durham region and local area municipalities, good data on building energy performance is essential to be able to track the impact of local and regional climate policies and programs.”

Right, that makes sense. Here’s a proposed change, they gave their input, but so what, right? It is disappointing time and time again.

I’m not going through all of this, because I have limited time.

We’ve heard a lot about dogs on patios. Fine. We’ve had that conversation, but, again, there are a few suggestions here from the region:

“The province needs to clearly define low-risk foods and create a process for determining if food premises meet the

definitions.”

They’re asking:

“—Will there be an application process for establishments to fit in this new category of low-risk food premises?

“—Will signage and separate entrance be required?

“—Number of dogs permitted per person....”

It goes on, but it’s specifics that they would like clarification on.

I wonder if the government has considered this as they are moving forward with regulation. I wouldn’t imagine that they’re considering anything because they’ve made their decisions, but I’m an optimist—I’m a New Democrat; I have to be.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: It’s in your DNA.

Ms. Jennifer K. French: It is in my DNA.

Schedule 16: We’ve heard a lot about

schedule 16 in this Legislature—significant amendments to the Aggregate Resources Act. It says here, “The region has significant concerns about several of the proposals in the

schedule as they may affect:

—protection of sources of drinking water from contamination by aggregate operations;

—the ability of municipalities to negotiate haul routes and financial agreements with extraction companies;

—safety and upkeep of municipal roads that are used as aggregate haul routes;

—well-being of residents and businesses near extraction sites or along haul routes.” They outlined these concerns in a very detailed response to the ERO posting by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry.

Maybe I should get some of that on the record in the two and a half minutes that I have left, Speaker. Time flies when you’re giving them heck, eh?

There’s so much, Speaker. And that’s the thing: There were so many groups that came to committee and gave huge presentations and made major submissions. It’s really frustrating to know that, as I said in that very first letter from Durham region, much was already incorporated into a bill before the public consultation on the Aggregate Resources Act had even concluded. That is not consultation in good faith; it really isn’t. “Hey, guys, we want to hear from you but the decision has already been made.

Just sign your name here so we can tick this box and tell folks that we consulted and travelled this bill.” You can’t pat yourselves on the back if the job isn’t well done, and it’s not being well done—cursory at best.

This is from a letter that is in response to the proposed amendments to the Aggregate Resources Act: “Region of Durham staff appreciates the opportunity to comment....” This is about the province proposing changes related to below-water-table extraction applications and the regulatory system that governs aggregate licences and all of that. It’s pages and pages long, Speaker. It’s very concerning. They give a full breakdown of why this is so concerning, but as they said, “In 2017, 9.3 million tonnes of aggregate were extracted in Durham region, making it the third-largest aggregate-producing upper-tier municipality in the province.”

This matters to our community. This matters a lot. As we’ve heard so eloquently from our critic for the environment, the member from Kingston and the Islands, this matters to the whole province. We heard from the member from Sudbury yesterday what it is like growing up in a community that was so polluted that it took government initiatives—the government said “thou shalt” when it came to cleaning that up and taking proper green steps not just to clean up the air but to clean up everything, to create and grow, to literally plant and grow a healthful future for the children in that community.

It took, basically, his generation—he talked about when he was a kid and what it looked like versus now when you go and visit Sudbury.

This is a government that has decided to go entirely in the opposite direction from that. Instead of saying, “How do we make things better?” it’s saying, “Ooh, what can we take advantage of, and how much damage can we do and how fast?” That is shocking and disappointing. You will wear this, but the rest of us have to breathe this and live this. Shame on you.

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

Mr. John Fraser: I’m pleased to say a few words on third reading of Bill 132.

While I appreciate the government’s efforts to reduce red tape, I have very, very serious concerns with schedules 9 and 16 and the impact that this is going to have on public health and our environment, especially as it relates to pesticides and the government’s loosening of rules, eliminating the advice that we’ve been getting for decades on things like pesticides.

So I want to caution the government that they’re moving backwards as far as things like land protection, source water protection, pesticides, and that’s going to have an impact on Ontarians—not tomorrow, but five or 10 years from now.

We heard from the Auditor General the other day that the government doesn’t have a valid plan for climate change, that the underpinnings of what they call a plan aren’t underpinnings at all, that they based their projections on numbers that don’t hold water, that don’t exist. This piece of legislation, with 17 schedules—two in it that are going to have serious impact on our natural environment—is a step backwards, and I won’t be supporting Bill 132.

I appreciate your time, Mr. Speaker.

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

Mr. Toby Barrett: I appreciate the opportunity to address Bill 132, Better for People, Smarter for Business Act. It’s an opportunity to address the plethora of rules and regulations, red tape, the unnecessary hoops that one has to jump through, the forms to fill out and the i’s to dot and the t’s to cross.

Many of these procedures, really, have built up over—well, going back to 1792 and the days of our first Lieutenant Governor, John Graves Simcoe. I’m one of his biggest fans. I would add that Simcoe was a leader who clearly got things done. He got things done as King George III’s representative and as our Lieutenant Governor. I feel, if he were around today, he would appreciate the effort the government is doing with Bill 132 to help this province get things done in an efficient way and in an effective way, creating jobs and prosperity—and, of course, much of the purpose of this legislation to cut red tape and the burdensome, unnecessary, duplicative regulations.

In keeping with John Graves Simcoe—getting things done and recognizing his loyalty to the crown—we see in this legislation a process to streamline the accession of a new sovereign. In order to facilitate that work, the proposed changes would allow government to continue the business of governing uninterrupted following the change of a sovereign. Under the current legislation, the change requires administrative, formal procedures to be carried out. As we would know, a change of sovereign occurs when the King or Queen of Canada is succeeded by a new monarch.

Public officers in Ontario already swear or affirm to bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors, according to law, as do every one of us who are elected in this Legislature. We’ve got changes now that don’t change our loyalty to the crown but will increase the speed, the efficiency to continue business uninterrupted during the change of a sovereign. I think it’s appropriate. It’s going to be a few years yet—God save the Queen—before Her Majesty shifts responsibility to the Prince of Wales and the Earl of Chester, her son Charles.

Last Friday, Stats Canada released their monthly job numbers. Again, I see a connection with this type of pro-business legislation. Since taking office in June 2018, employment has increased by 271,600 jobs in Ontario. We’re leading the nation. That’s good news. With our Open for Business, Open for Jobs strategy— I like to think that John Graves Simcoe would approve. Our cutting of the reams of red tape, much of it left to us by the previous government, I feel is working. There’s still more to do. Bill 132 would just assist in that regard.

Our government has a plan to attract investment, encourage innovation, grow small business and create quality jobs. You don’t do that by gumming up business and entrepreneurs with red tape and duplicative regulations. The number of entrepreneurs who have chosen Ontario has also increased by 85,300 since the election. Again, in my view, this celebrates the confidence business has in this province. Most of the jobs we’re talking about are full-time jobs. They’re private sector jobs. Careers are being cultivated and people are being given something that was previously lacking before: People are being given a modicum of hope.

Red tape is not a good thing. Bill 132 has the power to liberate us from that. It’s a good thing to wrap Christmas presents with, obviously, but in the kind of work that we do, we don’t necessarily need so many of these bureaucratic regulations.

I’d like to remind the chamber of where this term “red tape” originated. One popular belief: the Spanish administration of Charles V, King of Spain and Holy Roman Emperor. Now, this is the early 16th century. He started to use red tape to modernize the administration. He was running quite an expansive empire. Red tape at the time was considered cutting edge as an administrative protocol. Essentially, red tape was used to literally secure and fasten those critical administrative files that needed immediate attention and to separate them from much of the mundane, ordinary business of government. The rest of it was wrapped up in string.

Other European monarchs copied Charles V and used red tape, believe it or not, to speed up administrative procedures. It’s kind of hard to fathom. But we now see, in the use of that term, exactly the opposite, something that really doesn’t belong in a progressive, prosperous, modern society.

Removing red tape makes Ontario increasingly attractive in a highly competitive world. We’re up against some really big shooters, and we’re doing the right thing taking a proactive approach, prioritizing the province’s role in trade, ensuring markets—and certainly letting the world know we’re open for investment.

Now, many on both sides of this chamber are animal lovers, as are so many of our constituents. People love their pets. My wife loves her little dog. Her little dog doesn’t pay attention to me. It’s her dog. She loves taking her dog for a walk. You can envision it: You’re walking down the street, there’s a patio in the city—there are so many patios and places set aside—and you can’t stop in and enjoy what that patio has to offer with your dog. You’re not allowed to bring it in unless it’s a service animal, so business owners are missing out on potential customers.

You’re not allowed to bring a dog into a brewery where, for example, only beverages and, in that case, low-risk, prepackaged foods are on offer. It’s frustrating, since dining rules in other parts of Canada, like British Columbia and New Brunswick, are more relaxed, not to mention cities like Tokyo, New York, London and Paris.

Further to this change in legislation, the Ministry of Health will be developing an awareness campaign for business owners and to make sure public health are aware of these changes. But it’s going to mean more business for those who serve food and it will make it easier for dog owners to enjoy a meal with their furry little best friend. Again, I can’t wait for the warm weather either. We’re going into winter, and patio season is a few months down the road.

Businesses offering personal services, like barbershops and hairdressing salons, are required to have a dedicated sink for cleaning their tools. They are required to keep a record of the names and contact information for their customers. That might make sense in a tattoo parlour or a tanning salon, but for barbers that’s a burden with very limited benefit to them and to their business—a very limited benefit to society overall. So we’re making changes to make it easier for these people to do business and reduce the need for people to share their personal information for something as routine as getting a haircut.

Speaker, we are in a true land of plenty, a bountiful part of the world, and Bill 132 has a share in that and takes that into account.

With respect to community feeding organizations—food banks, faith-based charities—helping those who are less fortunate, the current legislation doesn’t make a distinction between these organizations and, say, a fast-food restaurant. So various not-for-profit soup kitchens, after-school programs, new and innovative delivery organizations through schools, community centres, churches, mosques, temples and synagogues are left with a bit of a confusing, convoluted set of rules. They’re forced to spend needless hours trying to understand how to follow these rules.

Ontario will be launching a consultation on additional exemptions for these organizations that serve low-risk foods—most baked goods, fruit, vegetables—at the same time, protecting our health and safety.

We’re proposing to repeal the Line Fences Act, legislation that was created to help resolve fence disputes. We feel that much of this can and does lie with municipal bylaws and standards. There’s always the courts—not the best way to go. We’re proposing to maintain provisions for fencing lands on former railway lines to protect farmers. I do talk to farmers and municipal councillors about how best to work this one out.

Just about everybody’s home has a road in front of it. The greater Golden Horseshoe region is projected to grow by approximately four million people by 2041. There’s a need for aggregate. There’s a need for this kind of infrastructure. Half of my riding, Haldimand county, is under the economic moniker of the greater Golden Horseshoe region. We need aggregate. We have to support the development of homes, schools, roads and transit systems. We’ve developed a plan to not only protect the environment, but to address impacts on communities.

This legislation takes a look at the Aggregate Resources Act and various municipal processes. It improves flexibility for accessing aggregate, enhances a process to better protect groundwater, and facilitates a streamlined approval process to better clarify the roles of the province, the municipalities and the operators themselves.

I’ve just come out of a stint as parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry. We consulted with the aggregate industry. We’ve also done a lot of work, obviously, with the forest industry. That’s something that generates $16 billion in revenue and 155,000 jobs across our province. Through this legislation, you see support for the forestry sector.

As it stands now, some non-forestry activities, like building infrastructure for northern communities, become mired in forestry permitting processes. This proposal would create a new permit to remove forest resources, which would streamline the authorization process for cutting trees on crown land for approved non-forestry activities like electricity transmission lines and roads to Far North communities.

Speaker, I know the member for Markham–Unionville is also addressing this bill and I’ve got to be cognizant of my time. I’ll take a look at my seatmate to see if I’m—

Interjection.

Mr. Toby Barrett: It sounds like my time is up.

Interjection.

Mr. Toby Barrett: No? I can keep going. Is that okay, member?

This government understands that sustainable forestry management is critical to the long-term health of Ontario’s forests. It also provides social, economic and environmental benefits for us all. Again, the law is there. Forest practices now are required to be acquired and processed sustainably.

Ontario divides its crown forests into management units and they all require a 10-year sustainable forest management plan. They’re prepared by foresters with input from Indigenous, stakeholder and public groups. These plans take more than two years to be developed and approved. Bill 132 proposes changes that will streamline the approval process once a sustainable management plan is officially adopted.

Further drilling down on Bill 132: It addresses the lack of clarity in the Oil, Gas and Salt Resources Act, something that is very important legislation. In my riding alone, Haldimand county, as far as the natural gas drilling, we have more holes punched into the ground than Saudi Arabia. But there’s confusion, so we’re looking at amendments to allay these concerns by placing new requirements on pre-existing activities, reducing ambiguity of what constitutes the definition of a well for geological testing.

These changes would benefit businesses in the oil, gas and salt sectors, providing that clarity and potentially reducing the time, the costs and the uncertainty connected with doing that kind of business.

Wildlife: Again, I represent a heavily forested part of the province of Ontario. Many here have heard of CWD, chronic wasting disease. It’s a progressive, fatal brain disease that affects mostly deer and elk. It was recently discovered in deer in Quebec and it has also been found in six nearby states within the Great Lakes region. A rapid response is critical in eradicating CWD, and I’m heartened this government has developed a plan so we can act quickly if CWD, heaven forbid, is detected in Ontario.

Another question, fish: Again, I’m a Port Dover lad. It’s a commercial fishing town. It makes it easier for those in the business of catching fish. I think we’ve all had perch and pickerel in a restaurant, for example. So for those holding a commercial fishing licence, it provides greater clarity and more efficiency.

I just want to jump on a few other things. We’re proposing to repeal the Fish Inspection Act. The timing of this repeal would coincide with implementation of a new regulation under the Food Safety and Quality Act, 2001.

Down in my rural riding of Haldimand–Norfolk, off-road dirt bike and motorcycle activity are very popular and support tourism and our local economy. At this point in time, these vehicles are not allowed to cross the road, they’re not allowed to ride on the road or along a municipal road, so we’re expanding the authority of municipalities so they can decide to create bylaws to allow the use of off-road motorcycles on local roads to support Ontario’s trail system.

I will wrap up there. There’s an awful lot more I could talk about: the Fish Inspection Act, the Food Safety and Quality Act, the Milk Act and the Livestock and Livestock Products Act.

This is a very good piece of legislation because it covers so many different areas, and we know there are just so many different unnecessary rules and regulations that have to be dealt with.

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

Mr. Billy Pang: First of all, I would like to give my deepest thanks to all the members who have spoken to Bill 132. This is a bill which will affect all of our ridings, and especially those like mine which are increasingly reliant on businesses and entrepreneurs. The Associate Minister of Small Business and Red Tape Reduction and his team have done an incredible job with this bill, and being able to speak to it for its third reading is a personal pleasure.

I would like to explain what this bill really does and how it fits into our plan of making Ontario the best place to live, work and open a business.

Businesses are the most important part of our economy. They are the critical part of our communities, our cities and our province. They provide services that we need and create services that we didn’t know we needed.

Much has been said so far about the benefits of business and small businesses. I’m sure all of us can think of goods and service businesses that we rely on every day. From your local coffee shop and dry cleaner to your favourite local stores, food places and online services, businesses make our lives easier, cheaper and better. And this government cares about businesses. This government cares about the young entrepreneurs and business owners. Our government cares about our innovators, our graduates and our investors. We care about making their lives easier. We care about doing what we should do to improve the business climate in our province.

Under the Liberals, more and more regulations were put on businesses. It has become more and more difficult and expensive to start and maintain a business over the last 15 years. And yet, Ontario has begun to move past this. Across Ontario, MPPs in their constituencies are being thanked for the efforts this government has done to make life easier for businesses. Barely a week goes by in my riding when a business or organization does not thank us for the work we are doing. It has been an absolute pleasure to tell them that things will only get better.

Earlier this year, the MaRS centre did a report on Markham and York region. They said, “The greater Toronto region is ready to break out as a leading global tech hub, outpacing established regions like Seattle and San Francisco’s Bay Area in job creation, talent and workforce diversity.” The position that York region finds itself in is a direct result of our government’s initiatives.

Over the past year, I have had the opportunity to see so many people in my community open the doors to new businesses all across Toronto and the GTA. I’ve travelled all around this region congratulating my constituents on finding a home for the start-ups, an investor for their incubator, finding the capital to open a noodle shop or celebrate a year of great profits. In fact, just this past weekend, the Markham, Richmond Hill and Vaughan Chinese Business Association expressed to me just how grateful they were for the support that our government has provided for businesses.

This bill was never about protecting the interests of certain individuals or corporations at the expense of others. This bill was not about setting up hurdles for those trying to enter the market. It was about making life easier. Our job as a Legislature is to make the lives of individuals better, but we forget that we are responsible for how businesses affect lives. As we affect businesses, we affect the outcomes of employees and their families.

Businesses and markets create prosperity. They create wealth. They create wealth locally, provincially, nationally and internationally. We are a top destination for trade, investment and employment on this continent. The tech companies in my riding, such as IBM, ATI and AMD, just to name a few, have been enjoying tremendous success over the past year. As a result, the possibilities of growth and expansion are now on the table. I have had entrepreneurs from around the world discuss the possibility of doing business in Ontario and in my riding, and at each conversation, I have the honour of telling them about our accomplishments and our intentions.

It has been said that Ontario is the best place to live, work and raise a family, but, Speaker, I am proud to say that the passage of this bill will make Ontario the best place to live, work and do business. Regulations have forced companies across the continent to move from their homes. Companies such as Amazon have been looking to Ontario to locate their campuses because we are a place where their rights are protected, where they are free to generate wealth, profit and prosperity for themselves and all of us. In fact, back in September, they announced their newest fulfillment centre will be located in Ontario.

That will mean that seven out of the 12 Canadian centres will be located in this province.

But with this bill, we will accelerate growth, create more jobs, create savings, and pass these savings on to employees and consumers. By reducing unnecessary regulations, we are supporting businesses of all sizes to deliver services, innovate and create. And when our businesses do well, our communities do well. Communities all across rural and urban Ontario will benefit from being able to produce in their communities.

Big businesses, small and local businesses, from beekeepers to industry giants, will be able to be more efficient in the way they operate without having to deal with the mountains of red tape the Liberals buried them under. We plan to take that red tape and sew it into beautiful red carpets that will bring jobs and investments to Ontario.

If this bill passes into law, it will be one more step in making this province the number one business destination in North America. But to be the best, a government should be working with businesses, not against them, because at a very real level, businesses and industry groups are engaged in strategic planning. Most often, these plans work to better the distribution of goods and services. Allowing businesses to plan with their partners ultimately benefits everyday Ontarians in the same way that the other self-regulated industries have helped us.

Earlier this fall, I had a chance to visit with Professional Engineers Ontario. Engineering in Ontario is a self-regulated industry because such a highly specialized field needs a highly specialized group of regulators to govern their practice. In the end, no one quite understands engineers like engineers. They have unique responsibilities, pressures and expectations that only their peers can truly understand. The governing principles of the PEO were created by engineers for engineers, and the results speak for themselves.

By their mandate, every licensed engineer in Ontario will have learned the importance of respect, teamwork, integrity, professionalism and responsibility. These are the values which the PEO has held dearly for nearly 100 years—values that professional engineers will carry for the rest of their careers.

These values that have been instilled have helped make Ontario one of the best places in the world to live, because self-regulated engineers are the ones building it. No government, no bureaucrat, will ever be able to produce so much quality so consistently or be able to manage and support those in this field like the PEO. For the PEO and its members, excellence is no longer unique. For Ontario engineers, excellence is the norm. In Ontario, we take elevators, cross bridges and fly great distances without fear.

We have so much faith in their designs, inventions and projects that we don’t give them a second thought. Ontarians can live their lives in full confidence that the world being built around them is one that is good and that is safe. In Ontario, a licence is not just permission to practise. It is a certificate of distinction, which can only be earned through great effort and commitment. I’m sure that the values instilled in all of them will be manifested in new innovations and inventions that will make York region and Ontario even better places to work and to live.

I know that many of us, myself included, are not experts on everything. In fact, there are things that I know almost nothing about, and in those things, I trust the experts, like engineers. The government is an amazing tool to better the lives of those it governs, but like any individual, a wise government knows when to leave things to the experts. The 2014 jobs and growth act was a piece of legislation that did the opposite. It made strategic planning harder for companies. In fact, the following year, the Fraser Institute published a landmark study about how Ontario, under the Liberals, lost its position as a North American powerhouse:

“The deteriorating competitiveness of Ontario’s economy is reflected in how business investment in manufacturing and finance, its traditional bastions of industry, has been surpassed by utilities and transportation, both driven by government investment in infrastructure. The reluctance of the private sector to invest reflects a range of government policies that hurt business....

“The real problem in Ontario is the wide array of government policies that mistakenly signal that the public sector, not the private sector, is the engine of economic growth.”

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): I apologize to the member for Markham–Unionville.

Pursuant to the order of the House dated November 7, 2019, I am now required to put the question.

Mr. Sarkaria has moved third reading of Bill 132,

An Act to reduce burdens on people and businesses by enacting, amending and repealing various Acts and revoking various Regulations. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no, no, no, no, no.

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.

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

Third reading vote deferred.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Orders of the day. I recognize the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services.

Hon. Todd Smith: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Good morning to you. No further business.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): There being no further business this morning, this House stands in recess until question period at 10:30.

The House recessed from 0948 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I want to draw members’ attention to the fact that we have a former member of the Legislature with us today: Terence Young, who was a member of provincial Parliament in the 36th Parliament. Welcome, Terence. It’s good to have you back.

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: I’d like to welcome the president of Lakehead University, Dr. Moira McPherson, and Heather Murchison, associate vice-provost, institutional analysis, to the House this morning. Today at 5 p.m., Lakehead University will be hosting a reception in the legislative dining room, and I encourage all members to come.

I’d like to welcome Northern Autism Families Matter and Alina Cameron from my riding. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to introduce Paul Norris from the Ontario Waterpower Association. It’s great to have you here today.

Miss Monique Taylor: I would like to do my daily welcome to autism families today. It’s especially special; they’ve travelled very far from the north. With us, we have Lisa Devine, Elizabeth Wallis, Antonio Stravato, Amy Moledzki, Adrianna Atkins, Alina Cameron, Sean Staddon, Michau van Speyk, Silvana Cacciatore, Bruce McIntosh, Ed Arvelin and Cindy Mazan. Welcome back to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Ross Romano: I’d like to introduce very special guests to the House today: the president of Lakehead University, Moira McPherson, seated in the gallery to my right, and Richard Longtin. I also want to let everyone know that there is a reception from 5 to 7 p.m. that I’d like to invite everyone to in the legislative dining room. Hopefully, everyone can join as well. Thank you very much.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Good morning. It gives me great pleasure to welcome to this House my constituency assistant Peter Gatti in the members’ gallery over there, along with a George Brown placement student, Murtaza Ebrahim, who has been working in our office for many months now. It’s wonderful to have you here. Thank you for being here today.

Also, we have in the gallery with us today the amazing students of Bloor Collegiate—the grade 10 students and teachers. Thank you for being here. Welcome to your House.

Later today, we’ll be joined by the grade 5 students of Regal Road public school.

Mr. Vincent Ke: I would like to welcome Ms. Anita Stewart, the food laureate from the University of Guelph. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I, too, wish to welcome Anita Stewart, who is a constituent of mine. Welcome here today.

Introduction of visitors?

Hon. Rod Phillips: It’s my pleasure to welcome a member of the Ajax community, a very important individual who works very hard for our community every day, Anthony Stokes. Anthony, welcome.

Mr. Jamie West: I want to welcome a member from Sudbury, a proud steelworker and a member of the Northern Ontario Autism Alliance, Brother Sean Staddon. Welcome to Queen’s Park, Sean.

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: I want to take the opportunity to introduce Don Fusco from the Chemistry Industry Association of Canada, as well as Paul Norris from the Ontario Waterpower Association, as well as Frank Mcdonald, who is here from Brampton.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: It’s my special honour today to welcome my new legislative assistant, Bria John, to Queen’s Park. Welcome to the Legislature.

Oral Questions

Teachers’ labour dispute

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My first question is for the Premier. This morning, students and parents across Ontario woke up wondering whether their schools will be open tomorrow and how they’ll manage to make the day work if they aren’t. It has already been a tough year for them, filled with disruption and classroom cuts.

After over a year of doing his utmost to pick a fight with teachers in the classroom, the Premier has fallen silent as parents and students face Ontario’s first province-wide education strike in 22 years. Will the Premier break his silence today and say what he’s willing to do to fix the classroom crisis that he has created?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The objective of this government is to keep kids in class. We are negotiating in good faith to achieve that objective, as we did with CUPE one month ago.

My message to OSSTF is to call off this needless strike. They have an opportunity to stay at the table, to invoke private mediation to work with all parties to keep students in class. That’s what our focus should be.

The fact is, we’ve been told so clearly that if the government of Ontario does not give an additional $750 million of your money—the taxpayers of this province—they will continue to strike. That is unacceptable. It’s time we put students first in this province.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: It’s time this Premier takes responsibility for his leadership role here and deals with the crisis that they’ve created. High school teachers and education workers have been crystal clear about how this can be resolved: They want the government to back away from their reckless classroom cuts and reverse plans to increase class sizes and impose Alabama-style mandatory online learning.

If the Premier wants to de-escalate the situation and get back to the table, that’s the simple solution: Get rid of those cuts; get rid of that mandatory online e-learning. Will he actually do that?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: And also give a $1.5-billion increase to the second-highest-paid teachers in the nation.

Ms. Catherine Fife: That is not true.

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

Ms. Catherine Fife: I withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Education, please conclude your reply.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The OECD put out a report recently which demonstrates that Ontario educators are amongst the highest paid in the industrialized world.

The fact is, we’re being reasonable with the taxpayers of this province. We’re offering a $750-million increase. We think that’s fair. We also believe that students should not be in the middle of this discussion.

What they should do is call off the strike. What OSTFF should do is stay at the table and invoke private mediation without preconditions.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: With all due respect, the Premier needs to respond to the concerns of Ontarians in this regard. Teachers are not the only ones opposed to these cuts. Parents made it clear that they don’t want their kids forced into online learning courses that won’t work for them. Students marched out of schools across Ontario to protest larger class sizes and fewer course options.

The Premier has no mandate to make these cuts. No one in our schools has asked for them. Why is he so determined, then, to impose these cuts?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The Premier is determined to keep kids in class. That’s why we have been negotiating in good faith. It’s how we got a deal with CUPE just one month ago.

The government of Ontario is offering a $750-million increase to educators in this province, whom we value. What we’re told by OSSTF is that if we do not give them an additional 750 million more tax dollars, they will strike again. That is totally unacceptable to this government.

We are being reasonable. We’re trying to put students at the centre of this discussion. It’s why we’re on track to spend an additional $1.2 billion more this year than last year in the defence of public education.

My message to OSSTF is clear: Cancel this needless strike.

Teachers’ labour dispute

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier, but I can tell you, if the Premier is determined to solve this crisis, he knows very well what he needs to do: He needs to stand in his place today and let the people of Ontario know that he has a real, serious desire to fix the mess that he has created.

Students and their parents have already dealt with a lot this year. They’ve seen courses vanish before their eyes. They’ve seen classes growing in size. They’ve even learned that water in their schools might not be safe to drink. The Premier can’t hide from this, Speaker, especially after doing so much to create the conflict that we’re seeing today.

So I’d like to hear from the Premier directly: What steps is he willing to take to bring people to the table and solve this crisis?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The step we’re asking OSSTF to accept without preconditions is private mediation, and every member of this Legislature should be encouraging them to do so. They should not have gone on strike last Wednesday, knowing that that tool remained in the tool kit.

Mr. Speaker, Statistics Canada today put out a report. What it said is that salaries for Ontario public teachers with 10 years of experience are amongst the highest in the nation—$10,000 more than the average Canadian. We have been reasonable, offering a $750-million increase to teacher pay. The fact is, what we’re hearing is that if we do not accept an additional 750 million in tax dollars, they will strike again. That is unacceptable, and it’s time we put students first in this province.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, I’m going to attempt to go back to the Premier.

For weeks, the Ford government has focused on dodging blame and scoring points in the press when they should have been focused on kids in the classroom. Elementary teachers were forced just yesterday to correct the education minister when he claimed that he was “laser-focused” on bargaining, while they were actually waiting a week between bargaining dates.

Why is the government more interested in organizing press conferences and dodging blame than in actually finding a solution?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The focus of the government is to keep the children of this province in class. We’ve been negotiating in good faith. It’s how we got a good deal with CUPE that ensured that students remain learning in positive learning environments. The priority of the government is to keep the focus on our students. It’s why in the last economic statement we announced an additional $200 million more in the defence of public education.

Mr. Speaker, let the facts be part of this discussion. Since 2003-04, there are 12% more educators in this province and less than 1% more students. We have invested in education. We are offering a $750-million reasonable and fair increase to our educators, some of the best educators in the world. What we’re told is, if we don’t give another $750 million more, they will strike. This is $1.5 billion. We think that’s unfair to the students of this province.

I’m urging OSSTF to work with us in good faith and cancel this strike.

Mr. Paul Miller: Wow. Wow.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Hamilton East–Stoney Creek has to come to order.

Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: If the focus of the government is to keep kids in the class, their strategy has been nothing short of an abject failure. At the end of the day, Speaker, this comes straight down to leadership, and the buck stops with the Premier of this province. He can’t sit silently and hope that this all goes away. Teachers have been clear that we can avoid a strike tomorrow if the Premier reverses his plans for classroom sizes to increase and reverses his plan for Alabama-style mandatory online courses.

Will the Premier actually show some leadership here, stand in his place today and say that he will do that?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The Leader of the Opposition left out another element of their top-three priority list: a $1.5-billion request or demand of the taxpayers of this province. If we give them that, if we give an additional $750 million more, paid by the taxpayers, then they will consider private mediation, not even get a deal. Mr. Speaker, that’s unacceptable.

Parents are demanding every member of this Legislature to stand up against escalation. We believe that OSSTF should cancel this needless strike, should stay focused on our students, should remain focused on keeping them in class. That’s what we’re going to do every single day.

Climate change

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier, but I think the government needs to realize that nobody—nobody—trusts their numbers. They have not been very good with having trustworthy numbers.

The former Environmental Commissioner, the officer of the Legislature who used to provide independent research on the environment before the Premier fired her, has joined the Auditor General in slamming the Ford government’s made-to-fail climate change plan. She describes the Premier’s defence of the plan as complete nonsense. Does the Premier think that she should also wait until 2030 before offering her opinion?

Hon. Doug Ford: The House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: I appreciate the question. What the Auditor General did say was that this government remains on track to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. That’s actually really good news for the people of the province of Ontario. Obviously, we thank the Auditor General for her work.

She also did highlight that there need to be some improvements in the plan. The minister himself has said that this is a living, breathing plan that will change as circumstances change. Just last week, the Premier announced that Ontario, New Brunswick and Saskatchewan would partner up in SMR and expanding SMR technologies. That’s also good news. That wasn’t in the original plan, but it’s good news. And we’re talking about transit and transportation.

We’re on track because the Premier has made this a priority. He has said we will meet our targets. He said that to our caucus and to our cabinet, Mr. Speaker. We will meet our priorities and we ask the opposition to help us do that.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, I’m going back to the Premier on this question.

At a time when the world is coming together to confront the climate crisis and the stakes could not possibly be any higher, Ontario’s Premier is not just defending a plan that is accurately described as “not based on sound evidence,” but then telling people demanding urgent action that he won’t listen to them until 2030.

I’m asking the Premier directly: Why is he dragging Ontario backwards exactly when the rest of the world is moving towards action on climate change?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, this government and previous Ontario governments have always been leaders when it comes to the environment. We’re leading the nation in terms of our GHG emissions reduction. We’re at 22.5%, and the Premier has said very clearly we will meet our targets.

But let’s look at what the NDP have to offer. They said that they want to offer a new green deal, but not until 2022. We’re making progress right now. We’ve got our Made-in-Ontario Environment Plan, Mr. Speaker. What else do the NDP have on the table? They say that we have to take urgent action on floods, but what do they have on the table? Nothing. We have put it on the table. We’ve focused on the conservation authorities. They said they wanted to talk about species at risk of extinction, but what did they put on the table? Nothing.

On every single point, they’re telling the people of Ontario to wait until 2022—probably why they’ve only won one election since Confederation, Mr. Speaker.

Interprovincial trade

Mr. Billy Pang: My question is to the Premier.

Premier, we have spoken before about the need to unite this country economically. You have said previously that what is good for Ontario is good for Canada, and vice versa. You even put these words into action recently in your leadership role at the Council of the Federation meeting, demonstrating how our provinces should be working together against the world and not competing against each other. Even the governor of the Bank of Canada, Stephen Poloz, was recently quoted in the Globe and Mail saying, “There are so many fronts on which federal/provincial collaboration could be better.”

Premier, can you speak more to the Legislature about the importance of ending interprovincial trade barriers and the positive impacts that it will have for all Canadians?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Members, please take their seats. Order. The clock is ticking. Order. Stop the clock. Order.

Restart the clock. Premier to reply.

Hon. Doug Ford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the opposition for the standing ovation. I know we’ve been doing a great job. Thank you. I also want to thank our great, all-star MPP from Markham–Unionville.

I want to give a special shout-out to Bloor Collegiate. I met the students downstairs. They have a bright future under our government. They don’t have to worry. They can go home and tell their parents they don’t have to worry about the high taxes they’ve seen over the last 15 years. They don’t have to worry about the 300,000 jobs the previous government and the NDP ran out of this province, because our province is booming. People are—

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

Mr. Billy Pang: My question is back to the Premier.

Premier, those are very powerful comments by Governor Poloz, who is one of many respected economic voices in this country on this issue.

But Canada and Ontario do not work in isolation, and we are impacted by the global economic community and their impressions. Premier, you were recently in Washington and experienced first-hand the important role and impact that international financial markets have on Ontario’s and Canada’s trade regulations.

Premier, can you elaborate on what the international economic community has said regarding the impact that interprovincial trade is having on Ontario and even Canada?

Hon. Doug Ford: I thank our great MPP for that question.

Yes, we had a great meeting of the Premiers—by the way, making sure that we have a nation that is united, not divided, like we saw after the last election. Every single Premier left here feeling positive, having a little bit of certainty that they can bring home to their province. We discussed interprovincial trade; that’s $50 billion sitting on the table—to make sure that each province can trade freely amongst the country. Mr. Speaker, it’s easier to trade with the United States than it is amongst the provinces, but we’re going to fix that.

We had a great meeting in Washington, met Governor Hogan—and for the first time, US governors are coming to Toronto. Our province is thriving. We’re the envy of North America right now. He couldn’t believe that we were doing $390 billion a year in two-way trade with the United States, Mr. Speaker. Again, prosperity is here in Ontario.

Post-secondary education

Ms. Sara Singh: Good morning, Speaker. My question is for the Premier.

Yesterday, we learned that this government is appealing a ruling that overturned their attack on post-secondary students, universities and college campuses across the province. The courts were clear: This government’s terrible policies were struck down as a huge overstep by the government.

Mr. Speaker, will the Premier abandon his unnecessary appeal and stop wasting taxpayer dollars with yet another losing lawsuit?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Colleges and Universities.

Hon. Ross Romano: Our government is committed to ensuring that tuition is affordable for all students in Ontario. We’ve spoken about this for a very long time, back to the time of our election. We wanted to make sure that people had more money in their pockets.

We wanted to make sure that education was affordable for all students. That is why we took the measures we took, Mr. Speaker—measures to reduce people’s costs for tuition; measures like the Student Choice Initiative, which were geared towards making sure that students have a choice with respect to what they spend their money on. That was all it is about.

As the process is presently under an appeal, it would be inappropriate to comment on the details of the matter at this time, Mr. Speaker. But again, we reiterate the importance of ensuring that our students have access to affordable education. That’s what we want to ensure.

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

Ms. Sara Singh: I think students and the courts were pretty clear about this government’s decision, and the damage has already been done. We’ve seen campus food banks closed, and spaces for LGBTQ students, racialized students and women closed. Campus life has been disrupted. This government’s attacks and cuts on education are hurting students both in the elementary school sector and in the post-secondary education as well.

Instead of going to court and trying to tear universities and colleges down, we should be investing in them, Speaker, in the world-class education that students and families in this province deserve.

Instead of taking our students to court again, will the Premier stop his attacks and restore the funding for the campus programs he has forced to close?

Hon. Ross Romano: Thank you for the question. I’m happy to stand up and speak about the great things our government is doing to ensure that students have access to affordable education, and I am proud of the system that we have in Ontario.

When students from around the world want to come to Ontario to get an education, that is an incredible testament to how outstanding our universities and our colleges are in Ontario. Our brand is recognized worldwide.

We want to ensure, though, that our students can access that education and that it is affordable for them. That is our goal. That is why we made the initiatives we made towards OSAP, ensuring that it was sustainable for future generations. It was clear—listen to the Auditor General—that the system was falling apart. It was unsustainable. We are making sure that it’s sustainable for future generations. We’ve provided a 10% reduction in tuition. We’ve done a number of things and we will continue to do things to make school affordable for our students.

Government spending

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: My question is to the Premier.

Yesterday’s FAO report showed that over the next five years, this government plans to spend 10% less on programs and services—that’s $1,070 less per person.

Mr. Speaker, since this government took office, we have seen a rise in homelessness, poverty and reliance on food banks. Ontarians are increasingly dependent on precarious work—we know that many young people are working in the gig economy—and that stagnation of wages is hurting, which has left many people feeling hopeless and helpless.

How can this government justify cuts that deprive Ontarians of the programs and services that they need and that their lives depend on? Why are you cutting to create efficiencies that are harming people?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Finance.

Hon. Rod Phillips: I thank the member for the question, and I thank the FAO for his incisive review of the situation in the province of Ontario.

Mr. Speaker, because of the previous Liberal government, we found ourselves in a very, very challenging financial situation. That’s exactly what the FAO pointed out. That’s why we’ve been balancing three priorities. The priority of investing in critical services—we’re spending more on health care, $1.9 billion more, and more on education, $1.2 billion more. We’re putting money back into the pockets of Ontarians, $3 billion more, by getting rid of the cap-and-trade carbon tax and adding the other advantages we’ve had for individuals and families.

We’re also making sure that we are on track to balance the budget by 2023. Those are three priorities that the previous government ignored—the priorities of Ontarians, the priorities we were elected on.

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

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: This government’s priorities are out of whack.

Across this province, there are children going to school hungry, and people are living in substandard homes and can’t afford heat.

I recently heard from a young person who grew up in rural Ontario that when he was in high school, a friend of his did not always go to school, as his parents were scared that children’s aid would take their son if he went to school unfed.

Mr. Speaker, ’tis the season of giving, but instead this government has taken away services. This holiday season, many Ontarians will be deprived of food, of shelter, of warmth because of this government’s reckless cuts—not just cuts to services, but now the FAO has pointed out that they are planning to cut revenues, which will further starve program expenses.

Will you tell this House which programs you plan to cut to keep your promise of cutting—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. Minister to reply.

Hon. Rod Phillips: As I said before—increases in health care, $1.9 billion; increases in education, $1.2 billion.

We put in place one of the most progressive tax reductions—the low-income tax credit. It’s going to help 1.1 million Ontarians. Some 580,000 people working for minimum wage are going to be taken off the tax roll. But the member from Scarborough–Guildwood and the members of the opposition voted against that. They voted against a child care tax credit that’s going to be putting money into the pockets of the very people she purports to be supporting.

Mr. Speaker, I think it’s time for the opposition and, frankly, for the members of the independent caucus to think seriously about what needs to be done to help low-income families, to help all Ontarians—not just create over 250,000 jobs, but support them in the way that this government is supporting them, to make sure that affordability is at the top of the agenda for this government.

Justice system

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos: Speaker, my question is for the Attorney General.

I hear from constituents all the time who have had to deal with the legal system and who ask why their experience could not have been easier, faster and more affordable. They wonder why they need to hire someone to manage matters that seem simple, only to find out just how complex and outdated the court system is.

The Auditor General’s report outlined the same concerns about the slow and antiquated nature of our justice system.

Speaker, can the Attorney General tell us what our government is doing to improve and modernize the way our justice system works to make it simpler, faster and more affordable for people to access justice?

Hon. Doug Downey: Thank you to the fantastic member for the question.

Mr. Speaker, there is no question that we inherited a badly neglected and overly complicated justice system—neglected by the previous Liberal government, supported by the NDP. We agree with the Auditor General, and we’ve heard loud and clear from people across Ontario that the justice system has grown too complex and outdated. It needs better support. We need to support the growth of safer communities. We need to stand up for victims of crime. We need to stand up for law-abiding citizens.

That’s why I was proud to table the Smarter and Stronger Justice Act yesterday, a bill that proposes over 20 smart and sensible reforms that will make Ontario’s justice system work better every day for law-abiding citizens, consumers and businesses. It will make our communities safer while getting tough on crime to ensure that criminals aren’t profiting from their own illegal activity.

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

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos: Speaker, I think we can all agree that crime should not pay. When the Civil Remedies Act was first created in 2001 by the Progressive Conservative government, it was an innovative crime-fighting piece of legislation intended to deter, and successful in deterring, unlawful activity. This act allows police to seize property and funds used in or gained from illegal and criminal activity and redirect them into the hands of victims and police programs that fight crime.

Unfortunately, while Ontario was once at the forefront of civil forfeiture rules, our province now lags far behind other jurisdictions that have updated their forfeiture laws. Criminals have taken notice.

Can the Attorney General tell this House what he is doing to address this growing problem?

Hon. Doug Downey: Thank you to the insightful member from Oakville North. The member is absolutely right: Our province’s civil forfeiture laws, along with our province’s entire justice system, were left neglected under 15 years of Liberal government. Their focus was elsewhere—I don’t know where—and they weren’t ensuring that the justice system kept up with criminal activity.

Mr. Speaker, we are the first government to take on the important work of modernizing our laws around civil forfeiture so that Ontario can support victims and front-line police officers by making it harder for criminals to hold on to the proceeds of their own illegal activity. Yesterday, I introduced the Smarter and Stronger Justice Act into this Legislature. In the act are reforms that, if passed, will simplify the process to seize those proceeds of crime, allowing funds to be redirected faster and more efficiently to victims and support programs that fight crime.

Legal aid

Mr. Gurratan Singh: My question is to the Premier. Yesterday, this Conservative government confirmed that the 30% cut to Legal Aid Ontario will be made permanent—a cut that threw the legal community into chaos, undermined access to justice for the lowest-income Ontarians and put in jeopardy specialty clinics like the ones that serve injured workers.

Why is this Premier plowing ahead with cuts that will hurt Ontarians, clog our court systems and cost more taxpayer dollars in the end?

Hon. Doug Ford: Attorney General.

Hon. Doug Downey: After years of Liberal mismanagement supported by the NDP, legal aid was left on an unaccountable, unsustainable path that jeopardized the needs of the most vulnerable clients where and when they needed it the most.

Our government took immediate steps to consult widely across the province with those who are providing the service, those who are receiving the service, clinics, private-pay lawyers, duty counsel, judiciary, lawyers across the system, stakeholders and vulnerable victims’ groups. Mr. Speaker, we consulted with everybody. We came up with a plan that will modernize legal aid for the first time since 1998, when it was brought in—1998 was the year that Google was incorporated. It was before the first BlackBerry. It had not been touched for that long.

We have modernized legal aid. I’m so proud to stand behind it. We’ve put it on a path to sustainability and accountability and to serve the people of Ontario.

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

Mr. Gurratan Singh: Only this government would have the gall to celebrate not cutting legal aid by a further $31 million at the same time as announcing that the $133 million that they already have cut will be made permanent.

Yesterday the government tabled omnibus legislation that is yet another attack on Legal Aid Ontario. The bill tears away the words “access to justice” and “low income” from anything to do with legal aid services. But, Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what legal aid is supposed to do: provide access to justice to low-income Ontarians.

Why is this Premier setting up low-income people to fail in our justice system?

Hon. Doug Downey: I can tell you what our government has done. We have gone out and talked to the people who operate in the system. We have heard the people in the system who are receiving the service. Each year we increase the eligibility by 6%. We’re expanding eligibility year over year over year.

We want to make sure that these programs are available for those who need them the most, in the form that they need them, whether it be duty counsel within the courts, whether it be private-pay lawyers through certificate programs, making sure it’s working better. We want to make sure the clinics are sustainable. They’re the foundation and part of the three pillars of legal aid, Mr. Speaker; we recognize that. We want to put them on a path of success to provide services where and when they need them the most.

Now, the challenge I have is when we get into facts. When we get into facts, it’s very difficult to have a conversation with those who are not fully aware of the facts. Yesterday, after the press conference, the member from Brampton East stood up and said that our moves have closed clinics. I challenge the member from Brampton East to mention one clinic that has closed under our watch.

Health care

Mr. Rick Nicholls: My question is to the hard-working, caring and compassionate Minister of Health. Across Ontario, we’re fortunate to have some of the finest health care professionals dedicated to delivering the highest-quality care. But we all know our health care system is facing capacity pressures and patients and families are getting lost in the health care system. They’re falling through the cracks, waiting too long to get the care they need. That’s why our government made a commitment to fix Ontario’s public health care system.

The minister has been very busy over the last two weeks announcing the next step in making our commitment a reality. Can the minister please tell this House more about what she’s been focused on over the last two weeks?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you to the member from Chatham-Kent–Leamington for the question and the great work he’s doing in his community.

Speaker, our government made a commitment to the people of Ontario to build a sustainable and connected public health care system and to end hallway health care. As a key component of our plan, we’ve announced the first series of Ontario health teams. These 24 teams will better support patients and families by connecting care providers to work as a single team. In doing so, Ontario health teams will create a seamless experience and better transitions for patients through our health care system.

Each individual team will create a local health care system that provides coordinated care for patients, reduces wait times and leads to better health outcomes for patients. This model provides an opportunity for front-line health care professionals to do the work they do best: delivering excellent-quality patient service.

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

Mr. Rick Nicholls: Thank you, Minister, for delivering on our government’s commitment. It’s so great to finally see this much-needed change become reality within our health care system right here in Ontario.

As we finally break down the long-standing barriers that have prevented care providers from working directly with each other to support patients throughout their health care journey, the patient experience will be greatly improved, and navigating the health care system will be easier and more convenient. I know the people in my riding of Chatham-Kent–Leamington are thrilled to have an Ontario health team and are excited to enjoy the benefits that having one will provide them.

Speaker, as part of our commitment, being focused on ending hallway health care—can the minister expand on how Ontario health teams will help bring an end to hallway health care?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Once fully operational, Ontario health teams will contribute to ending hallway health care by making it easier for Ontarians to move through the health care system. This will help ensure that those patients who are ready to leave hospital can do so, hopefully at home with the supports and services they need. And by better connecting hospitals and primary care providers with community-based supports, they will help to ensure that people receive the right care in the right place.

Speaker, I would like to thank all of our health care partners for their enthusiasm, partnership and dedication to working together to provide Ontario patients and families with the best-quality connected health care. There is still a lot of work to be done, but we are confident that all of us working together will be able to provide all Ontarians with the excellent-quality care that they expect and deserve.

Government spending

Ms. Sandy Shaw: My question is to the Premier. Yesterday we learned that this government’s reckless cuts are leaving a $5-billion hole when it comes to health care and education in order to pay for a tax cut for the highest income earners in the province. To be perfectly clear, the Premier is setting aside money to pay for a tax cut for the rich. Everyday families will get just $18—$18—while wealthy people will get well over $1,000 a year.

My question is simple: Why does the Premier want to give away thousands of dollars to his wealthy friends while gutting services for everyone else?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Finance.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Members please take their seats.

The question has been referred to the Minister of Finance.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The House will come to order.

Minister of Finance?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Thank you to the member for that question.

Mr. Speaker, as I’ve said before today in this Legislature, we are investing in critical services. We’re investing $1.9 billion more in health care and $1.2 billion more in education.

I’ve also talked about balancing those three priorities. Yes, we’ll invest in critical services. Yes, we’ll balance the budget. But we think that one of the best things that we can do for working Ontarians is put money back in their pockets.

We are not afraid to debate in this House and stand in this House and talk about the $3 billion that we have put back into the pockets of Ontarians through the low-income tax credit, through the child care tax credit, through getting rid of the cap-and-trade carbon tax. These are all things that we believe are supporting the affordability issue—and we can balance all three. We’re not a single-issue party; we can do three things at once. How about you?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

The supplementary question?

Ms. Sandy Shaw: While I appreciate the minister’s snark this morning, what I have here is a very serious question.

Back to the Premier: On top of blowing a hole in our budget, reckless cuts will mean fewer services, fewer front-line workers like teachers, and more kids in crumbling schools. It will mean even longer waits to see nurses and doctors, and it does nothing—absolutely nothing—to fix hallway health care. In fact, it will make it worse.

Everyday families are going to get further and further behind while this government continues to take things from bad to worse.

Do you really think that everyday families should foot the bill to pay for a tax break for the wealthiest among us?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, $27 billion for improvements in health care infrastructure—$27 billion that the NDP voted against; $1.9 billion more for front-line health care just this year: Again—and I’m hoping that on third reading, perhaps the NDP will vote for, but until now they’ve voted against.

We are putting more money into the vital services they’re concerned about, but we’re also dedicated to balancing the budget because that’s important. And we’re also dedicated to putting more money back into the pockets of Ontarians. We won’t apologize for it. It’s good for Ontario. It’s good for our province. It’s good for our economy. We’ll keep it up.

Food safety

Mr. Will Bouma: My question is for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. As a member of a riding with a large agricultural community, I always hear from my local farmers about how hard they work to ensure they are maintaining safe practices at work. Our province relies on our farmers to be able to provide us with some of the safest food in the world on a daily basis. Yet I have unfortunately heard stories about how farmers can sometimes feel that they are not safe when on the farm due to people trespassing onto their properties, particularly over the last year.

Farmers in my riding and across the province are eager to have a government that supports them and their industry and is willing to listen to their concerns.

Speaker, could the minister please inform the House about how our government is acting on the concerns of our farmers?

Hon. Ernie Hardeman: I want to thank the member from Brantford–Brant for the great question.

Last week I was proud to introduce the Security from Trespass and Protecting Food Safety Act, and I’m glad that second reading of the bill will begin later today. No one in Ontario should ever feel unsafe in their homes and at work. For the vast majority of our farmers, their home and their place of work are no different.

If passed, Bill 156 would keep Ontario farmers, their families, agri-food workers and farm animals safe by reducing the likelihood of trespassing on farms and processing facilities. If our farmers are to provide us with some of the best and safest food in the world, it is important that we support them and make sure that they have the tools to maintain a high level of biosecurity. If it is passed, that is what Bill 156 will do.

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

Mr. Will Bouma: Thank you to the minister for his response.

Mr. Speaker, I’m glad that the minister mentioned biosecurity, because I think all of us in the Legislature support the idea of having practices in place that keep our farm animals safe and healthy—whether you work on a farm, you’re a veterinarian or a livestock transporter.

I was glad to be part of an announcement back in September where Soil Solutions Plus, a small business out in St. George in Brantford–Brant, was receiving a grant of over $15,000 to install equipment to power-wash their vehicles to reduce the risk of spreading disease when driving between farms. This is just another example of how our farmers and workers in the agricultural sector make sure that our farm animals are safe.

Animal safety and welfare is a top priority for our government, and I appreciate the work being done to maintain animal welfare and health at the highest standards. Could the minister explain in further detail how Bill 156 will do this?

Hon. Ernie Hardeman: I thank the member for the supplementary question.

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.

Mr. Speaker, I want to make this point very clear: Anyone who suspects animal abuse should immediately call the authorities and report it. Animal cruelty is a serious issue, and I’m proud that our government has a zero-tolerance approach to animal abuse.

If passed, our legislation would strike the right balance and ensure protection for farmers as well as their animals and the integrity of Ontario’s food supply. In addition, it would, along with the recently passed PAWS Act, mean that Ontario would have some of the strongest animal welfare laws in Canada.

Government appointments

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Last June, the Premier proudly unveiled that he would be appointing experts, including the former PC Party president and a lacrosse-playing friend of Dean French’s son, as agents general, earning big bucks—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Pardon me, Speaker. I would very much like my question to be directed to and answered by the Premier.

Speaker, the Premier had to quickly fire two of the agents general days after they received their appointments, yet the other two are still collecting pay. Can the Premier update us on the work that they’re doing on location in Dallas and Chicago?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Economic Development.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: I’m very pleased to update this House on their progress, Speaker.

We have 15 international trade and investment offices around the world that raise the commercial profile of Ontario. I can tell you, in my direct experience with these men and women across India, across Korea and across Japan, that we had tremendous success.

These are people who have huge expertise, who helped us put the deal together with VVDN Technologies, for instance, which is hiring 200-plus engineers in the Kitchener-Waterloo area. That was an exciting announcement that came after months of engagement by our staff throughout the world. This was one of the results.

As I said in the Legislature yesterday, we had another tremendous result with the Korea Importers Association: 8,000-plus members and $535 billion worth of trade. Through our new members, we now have access to those markets.

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

Mr. Taras Natyshak: As much as I appreciate hearing about India, Japan and Korea, I asked about Dallas and Chicago in North America, if the minister is not aware of where these jurisdictions are.

Since June 20 of this year, former PC Party president Jag Badwal has been collecting $165,000 a year as Ontario’s agent general in Dallas. Yet on November 26, he was here in Toronto, joining the Ford cabinet at an event celebrating PC women in politics, and last October, Conservative Party activists were proudly taking photos with the Dallas agent general as he campaigned with them in Brampton.

Can the Premier explain why the party insider to whom he’s paying $165,000 to represent Ontario in Dallas seems to spend so much time campaigning for the Conservatives here in the GTA?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: We’re committed to ensuring that Ontario is open for business, open for jobs and open for trade—and quite frankly, open for trade with the US. It’s one of our essential economies. There’s no stronger trading partner to Ontario than the United States. In 2018, two-way trade between our jurisdictions was valued at $390 billion. We’re the top trading partner with 19 states and number two with nine other states.

The Premier has been leading this in a great way. With ongoing trade uncertainty, we need trade representatives; we need extensive experience. I can tell you, Speaker, that we have been doing a remarkable job with our trade in the United States.

When you think about $390 billion that Ohio, one of the number one trading partners we have—we do more business with Ohio than we do with several other countries combined.

Amateur sport

Mr. Dave Smith: My question is to the Minister of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries. Most of us know the minister’s passion for sport. We’ve heard her champion the Ottawa Redblacks and the Ottawa 67’s right here in the Legislature, but some may not be aware of her support for amateur sport. While sport is an important division of the Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries, she still finds time to coach a local hockey team in Nepean.

Supporting amateur athletics is important to me as well. In my riding of Peterborough–Kawartha, we recently celebrated the 17-time national lacrosse champion Peterborough Lakers.

Can the minister tell us how our government has helped not only lacrosse players but all amateur athletes across Ontario?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I want to, obviously, say thank you to the member from Peterborough–Kawartha for being a steadfast advocate for his constituency and for the Peterborough Lakers. I would be remiss not to say thank you on behalf of this entire House to our three-peat Mann Cup champions, the Peterborough Lakers. We all congratulate them for the national win that they brought to this assembly.

The Ontario Lacrosse Association received over $200,000 in annual funding last year as a designated provincial sport organization. That contributes to 170 teams and 22,000 lacrosse players across the province of Ontario. The Ontario Lacrosse Association is also a recipient of the Quest for Gold.

All members of this assembly should be aware that we have an Ontario athlete assistance program which supports 18 top-ranked provincial athletes with direct financial assistance to cover training and living costs. In 2018-19, these athletes received over $4,100.

Given some changes to the Mann Cup as a national designated trophy, it is now eligible in the Ontario Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries for sport hosting events.

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

Mr. Dave Smith: I’d like to thank the minister for her support of amateur sport across the province.

Every day in my riding, I see how amateur sport unites communities, creates lifelong friendships and helps develop our youth. As a supporter of amateur sport myself, specifically hockey, I founded the Under the Lock Hockey Tournament, served as the president of the Peterborough Community Church Hockey League, organized Hockey Day in Canada in Peterborough and chaired the Special Hockey International event.

I know that the Minister of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries is well versed in the benefits of amateur sports and what they offer for the development of our future community leaders. Can the minister tell us how the ministry’s investment in amateur sport pays dividends for all of us?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: That’s an important question, and I want to say thank you to him for stepping up to the plate and being a volunteer with the hockey association. I spent the entire weekend this past weekend coaching, myself, and enjoyed that, obviously.

Ontario has invested over $27 million directly to support athletes and provincial sport organizations across the province. When we hear names like Bianca Andreescu, Penny Oleksiak and Andre De Grasse, we know that we have invested directly into them through not only the PSOs, but also through the Canadian Sport Institute of Ontario in Scarborough, where we recently just invested $8.1 million—and to the Coaches Association of Ontario, in which we invested $1.1 million.

Mr. Speaker, in Ontario we are not only providing a great deal of recreational support, but we are also making sure that our athletes right here in Ontario are topping podiums, not just in Canada but around the world.

In Ontario we’re open for business, we’re open for jobs, and we’re open for athletes.

Autism treatment

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: My question is for the Premier. We are losing autism services in the north. Diagnostic capacity is decreasing. Children and their families have waited long enough. And thanks to this government’s cuts, service providers are laying off staff and discontinuing services—something this government knew would happen, but did it anyway. Meanwhile, this government says they won’t do anything to help until maybe next April.

Northern families cannot wait. Adrianna Atkins from Manitouwadge, who is here today, must travel with her son 400 kilometres to Thunder Bay for the services he needs. Adrianna needs our help now and not next year.

When is this government going to fix the problems it created for northern families?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Children, Community and Social Services.

Hon. Todd Smith: Thanks very much to the member opposite for the question, and thanks to the families, actually, who have travelled down from northern Ontario to be with us here today.

Mr. Speaker, we’re taking this issue very seriously. I can tell you that for the last 30 years, governments of all stripes in this Legislature have not gotten the autism file right. That’s why we’ve taken the time over the summer to ensure that—first of all, I went out and met with a lot of the families who are here, in the north: in Kenora, in Thunder Bay, in Sault Ste. Marie, Sudbury and also in North Bay, just a few of the stops over the summer.

But while I was doing that, in conjunction with that tour and meeting with families face to face, Mr. Speaker, our Ontario autism panel was meeting throughout the summer. They’ve made well over 100 recommendations. We’re working extremely hard to implement all of the recommendations that that panel has made so that we can have an autism program to be proud of—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much. Supplementary question? The member for Sudbury.

Mr. Jamie West: Back to the Premier: The north is in crisis. The government’s cuts have been devastating for families of children with autism in the north. Service capacity that took decades to build has been decimated in less than a year under this government. Providers like Child and Community Resources in Sudbury have had to let go of staff and discontinue services. This was the only provider for French-speaking children in Sudbury and in the riding of Nickel Belt.

Children and families are now left waiting because there’s nowhere to spend the money they receive for treatment—and those are the lucky ones that receive any support at all. The north cannot wait until April 2020. We need a needs-based system now.

Premier, how much longer will families be forced to wait to get help for their kids?

Hon. Todd Smith: Merci au député opposé pour la question aujourd’hui.

Mr. Speaker, I want to tell the families that are here—and I know they’re meeting with some of my staff a little bit later on today to talk about the rollout of the Ontario Autism Program and how that’s going to be occurring over the coming weeks and months.

I just want to let them know that we fully understand the situation in the north and we have been in constant communication with those service providers, those agencies that are actually going to be helping their children get the services that they need.

I can tell you that my staff have been working extremely hard in the ministry and in the department, Mr. Speaker, to take those over 100 recommendations and then figure out how we’re going to implement those so that, first of all, we do have a truly needs-based program, one that’s there for the families when they need it, and one that’s bigger than it’s ever been. A $600-million budget: that’s twice the amount that was invested by the previous government. It’s going to be a great—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much. The member for Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill.

Consumer protection

Mr. Michael Parsa: My question is for the Minister of Government and Consumer Services. Last week, the minister introduced our government’s plan to strengthen consumer protection for the people of Ontario at home, online and in our communities. A key component of this plan is to introduce changes to new home warranties in the province.

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 Tarion. Would the minister please tell this House and homebuyers across Ontario what they can expect from the legislation she introduced last week?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: Thank you to the member from Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill for this important question.

I am pleased to tell the people of Ontario that after years and years of inaction by the former Liberal government, we actually are finally going to have a new home warranty program here in Ontario. We listened, we have taken action, and the wait is over.

I think that the member from Humber River–Black Creek put it quite well a few days ago when he said that the Liberals failed new homebuyers in this province by taking no meaningful action on Tarion reform. We’re not just reforming Tarion; we’re absolutely overhauling it. We are going to be pulling together and working with our stakeholders to deliver a new home warranty program. We’re going to be following the findings of the Auditor General as well as Justice Cunningham, and we are taking into consideration the priorities that we heard in the consultations—

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

Mr. Michael Parsa: I want to thank the minister for her answer and her leadership and for bringing change to this province that, quite frankly, was long overdue.

I’d also like to acknowledge the fact that this legislation comes just over one month after the Auditor General announced her recommendations to reform new home warranties in Ontario. The minister has shown the people of Ontario that our government is a champion of new homebuyers who have been wronged by bad actors.

Would the minister please explain to this House and to the people of Ontario what actions our government is taking in the Rebuilding Consumer Confidence Act, which will improve the new home warranty system in Ontario?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: The member from Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill is absolutely right, because we are absolutely a champion. We’re standing with new homeowners, because we are overhauling the governance structure and we’re increasing government oversight once and for all. We’re also going to improve the warranty claim process so that it’s fair for consumers and timely. Our plan also includes increased oversight of the home building process so that Ontarians can move into their new homes without worrying about defects.

Buying a home is the largest investment an Ontarian can make in their lifetime, and that’s why our government found that it was important to bring in swift changes that will ensure effective oversight of new home warranty programs and curb the influence of builders. Because Ontarians can confidently move forward with our government, under the leadership of Premier Ford and our entire caucus, because the investment in a new home is so, so important, and—

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

Tenant protection

Ms. Suze Morrison: My question is to the Premier. Recently, tenants at 25 Montgomery Avenue in Eglinton–Lawrence were faced with a drastic rent increase of between 10% and 15%. This building is owned by Rockport Group, the same developer that tried to hike up rents by 25% at 22 John Street. These tenants, like many across the province, are in new buildings that are no longer protected by rent control because of the rent control loophole created by this government.

How can the Premier turn a blind eye to all of these tenants who are being gouged with double-digit rent increases because of a rent control loophole that you created?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Municipal Affairs.

Hon. Steve Clark: Thank you for the question.

Yesterday, we had, downstairs, an advocacy day at Queen’s Park by rental housing providers from all across this province. I appreciate the fact that members from all parties attended that advocacy day, including the opposition House leader. I actually agree with some of his comments. He talked about the need for landlords to be able to make a fair return on their investment, so I appreciate the comments of the opposition House leader.

I also appreciate the question from the member opposite. And I do appreciate the fact—we know better than anyone, as a government, that we need to have a fair system and create a fair system for both landlords and tenants. That’s why we kept our promise to maintain rent control for existing tenants but we also made a commitment, as a government, to create more housing supply.

I’ll have more—

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

The supplementary question?

Ms. Suze Morrison: Respectfully to the minister, what you’ve effectively created is two classes of tenants in Ontario: those with rent control and those without. Rents across this province are out of control and everyday working people simply cannot afford the cost of a one-bedroom apartment in cities like Toronto.

Last week, I introduced legislation that would restore rent control to all rental units in Ontario, closing the rent control loophole that this Premier created. Will the Premier finally see the damage that he has caused and support my bill that would restore protections for tenants that this government has cut?

Hon. Steve Clark: Quite frankly, since our announcement last November to exempt new units from rent control, we’ve seen exactly what our government promised, and that’s more purpose-built rentals being built in this province.

Speaker, we decided as a government that we were going to tackle the housing supply. That’s why we tabled our More Homes, More Choice: Ontario’s Housing Supply Action Plan. But don’t take it from me. Take it from the gentleman who was here yesterday that all parties met with in terms of advocacy for rental housing providers. I’m going to quote Tony Irwin, president and CEO of the Federation of Rental-housing Providers of Ontario.

Here is his quote: “This NDP-proposed policy change, what would be the third change in three years, serves as a disincentive to boosting investor confidence and bringing the desperately needed supply to the market. We are now at the highest level of GTA rental starts in almost three decades.” We—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much. That concludes our question period for this morning.

Deferred Votes

Plan to Build Ontario Together Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur le plan pour bâtir l’Ontario ensemble

Deferred vote on the motion for third reading of the following bill:

Bill 138,

An Act to implement Budget measures and to enact, amend and repeal various statutes / Projet de loi 138, Loi visant à mettre en oeuvre les mesures budgétaires et à édicter, à modifier ou à abroger diverses lois.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1137 to 1142.

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

On December 9, 2019, Mr. Phillips moved third reading of Bill 138,

An Act to implement Budget measures and to enact, amend and repeal various statutes.

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

Ayes

Baber, Roman

Babikian, Aris

Bailey, Robert

Barrett, Toby

Bethlenfalvy, Peter

Bouma, Will

Calandra, Paul

Cho, Raymond Sung Joon

Cho, Stan

Clark, Steve

Coe, Lorne

Crawford, Stephen

Cuzzetto, Rudy

Downey, Doug

Dunlop, Jill

Elliott, Christine

Fedeli, Victor

Ford, Doug

Fullerton, Merrilee

Ghamari, Goldie

Gill, Parm

Hardeman, Ernie

Harris, Mike

Hogarth, Christine

Kanapathi, Logan

Karahalios, Belinda C.

Ke, Vincent

Khanjin, Andrea

Kusendova, Natalia

Lecce, Stephen

MacLeod, Lisa

Martin, Robin

Martow, Gila

McKenna, Jane

McNaughton, Monte

Miller, Norman

Mitas, Christina Maria

Mulroney, Caroline

Nicholls, Rick

Oosterhoff, Sam

Pang, Billy

Park, Lindsey

Parsa, Michael

Pettapiece, Randy

Phillips, Rod

Piccini, David

Rasheed, Kaleed

Rickford, Greg

Roberts, Jeremy

Romano, Ross

Sabawy, Sheref

Sandhu, Amarjot

Sarkaria, Prabmeet Singh

Skelly, Donna

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

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

Nays

Armstrong, Teresa J.

Arthur, Ian

Begum, Doly

Bell, Jessica

Berns-McGown, Rima

Bisson, Gilles

Bourgouin, Guy

Burch, Jeff

Fife, Catherine

Fraser, John

French, Jennifer K.

Gates, Wayne

Gélinas, France

Harden, Joel

Hassan, Faisal

Hatfield, Percy

Horwath, Andrea

Hunter, Mitzie

Kernaghan, Terence

Mamakwa, Sol

Miller, Paul

Monteith-Farrell, Judith

Morrison, Suze

Natyshak, Taras

Rakocevic, Tom

Sattler, Peggy

Schreiner, Mike

Shaw, Sandy

Simard, Amanda

Singh, Gurratan

Singh, Sara

Stiles, Marit

Tabuns, Peter

Taylor, Monique

Vanthof, John

West, Jamie

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yarde, Kevin

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 65; the nays are 38.

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

Be it resolved that the bill do now pass and be entitled as in the motion.

Third reading agreed to.

Better for People, Smarter for Business Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 pour mieux servir la population et faciliter les affaires

Deferred vote on the motion for third reading of the following bill:

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): Call in the members. This is another five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1146 to 1147.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): On December 5, 2019, Mr. Sarkaria moved third reading of Bill 132,

An Act to reduce burdens on people and businesses by enacting, amending and repealing various Acts and revoking various Regulations.

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

Ayes

Baber, Roman

Babikian, Aris

Bailey, Robert

Barrett, Toby

Bethlenfalvy, Peter

Bouma, Will

Calandra, Paul

Cho, Raymond Sung Joon

Cho, Stan

Clark, Steve

Coe, Lorne

Crawford, Stephen

Cuzzetto, Rudy

Downey, Doug

Dunlop, Jill

Elliott, Christine

Fedeli, Victor

Ford, Doug

Fullerton, Merrilee

Ghamari, Goldie

Gill, Parm

Hardeman, Ernie

Harris, Mike

Hogarth, Christine

Kanapathi, Logan

Karahalios, Belinda C.

Ke, Vincent

Khanjin, Andrea

Kusendova, Natalia

Lecce, Stephen

MacLeod, Lisa

Martin, Robin

Martow, Gila

McKenna, Jane

McNaughton, Monte

Miller, Norman

Mitas, Christina Maria

Mulroney, Caroline

Nicholls, Rick

Oosterhoff, Sam

Pang, Billy

Park, Lindsey

Parsa, Michael

Pettapiece, Randy

Phillips, Rod

Piccini, David

Rasheed, Kaleed

Rickford, Greg

Roberts, Jeremy

Romano, Ross

Sabawy, Sheref

Sandhu, Amarjot

Sarkaria, Prabmeet Singh

Skelly, Donna

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

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

Nays

Armstrong, Teresa J.

Arthur, Ian

Begum, Doly

Bell, Jessica

Berns-McGown, Rima

Bisson, Gilles

Bourgouin, Guy

Burch, Jeff

Fife, Catherine

Fraser, John

French, Jennifer K.

Gates, Wayne

Gélinas, France

Harden, Joel

Hassan, Faisal

Hatfield, Percy

Horwath, Andrea

Hunter, Mitzie

Kernaghan, Terence

Mamakwa, Sol

Miller, Paul

Monteith-Farrell, Judith

Morrison, Suze

Natyshak, Taras

Rakocevic, Tom

Sattler, Peggy

Schreiner, Mike

Shaw, Sandy

Simard, Amanda

Singh, Gurratan

Singh, Sara

Stiles, Marit

Tabuns, Peter

Taylor, Monique

Vanthof, John

West, Jamie

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yarde, Kevin

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 65; the nays are 38.

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

Be it resolved that the bill do now pass and be entitled as in the motion.

Third reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): That concludes our business for this morning. This House stands in recess until 3 p.m.

The House recessed from 1150 to 1500.

Royal assent / Sanction royale

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Before I invite the members to introduce their guests, I beg to inform the House that in the name of Her Majesty the Queen, Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor has been pleased to assent to certain bills in her office.

The Deputy Clerk (Mr. Trevor Day): The following are the titles of the bills to which Her Honour did assent:

An Act to reduce burdens on people and businesses by enacting, amending and repealing various Acts and revoking various Regulations / 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.

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

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Gilles Bisson: I have the great pleasure of introducing the love of my life, one of our granddaughters, Elissa Wakeford, who is over here visiting. She’s from Timmins and she’s down visiting her sister, who’s at Bloorview right now, in rehab, and she’s with two of my staffers, Sylvie and Courtney, who are sitting with her. Please welcome her to the House.

Mr. Vincent Ke: I would like to welcome Ms. Anita Stewart again, the Food Laureate from the University of Guelph, and my legislative assistant, Heena Kapoor. Welcome to the Legislature.

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: I’d like to welcome to the Legislature the leadership of the Tibetan community of Ontario.

They are as follows: Tsering Wangyal, president of the Tibetan Canadian Cultural Centre; Sonam Chokey, national director, Students for a Free Tibet Canada; Sherap Therchin, executive director, Canada Tibet Committee; Sonam Tsering, vice-president, Regional Tibetan Youth Congress; Chemi Lhamo, SFT board member and president of the University of Toronto Scarborough’s student union; Lama Tenzin from Kagyu Gompa; Kunsang Tanzin, former president of the Tibetan Canadian Cultural Centre; Tsering Dhondup, former vice-president of the Tibetan Canadian Cultural Centre; Sonam Dorjee, former vice-president of the Tibetan Canadian Cultural Centre; Anthony Lama; Thupten Wangyal, former president of the Canadian Tibetan Association of Ontario; Rinchen Dolma, creator and founder of Made in Exile; Dorjee Wangchuk; Dolma Tso, Tibetan Youth Congress executive; Sonam Yangzom, Milky Way gardener; Sonam Lankar, former president of the Tibetan Canadian Cultural Centre; Tenzin Khedup, former executive member of the Tibetan Canadian Cultural Centre and Chushi Gangdruk; Gelek Gyalthong, former president of the Canadian Tibetan Association of Ontario; Jigme Lhamo, former Ontario Parliamentary Friends of Tibet student and SFT Canada member; Tenzin Norzin, former OPFT student and the Central Tibetan Administration’s youth ambassador; and Karma Gala, also of Kagyu Gompa.

I’d like to add that they are here to mark International Human Rights Day. Welcome.

Hon. Todd Smith: I have a special introduction of a guest: the brother of the deputy chief of staff to the Premier, Mark Lawson—my former chief of staff—Scott Lawson is visiting us here this afternoon. Scott is an OHL official. He has been an OHL official in the Ontario Hockey League for seven years. Should you fall ill or anything, Mr. Speaker, he could probably step in. He’s used to stepping in.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): What are you doing tomorrow? Thank you.

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I would like to introduce my intern here today, Meaghan Irons. Thank you for being here.

Members’ Statements

Tenant protection

Mr. Faisal Hassan: I rise today to speak on the urgent crisis of rent control. Tenants in my riding of York South–Weston are facing rent notices of double-digit increases. Making new units exempt from rent control was a mistake and should be reversed immediately. Renters in my community are worried. More and more tenants are sounding the alarm. They are being crushed by these double-digit rent increases.

Things are getting so bad that the city of Toronto passed a motion to formally ask this government to reinstate rent control. Last week, my colleague from Toronto Centre put forward a bill calling on the provincial government to reverse their rent control changes.

Things are going from bad to worse. Doug Ford, rather than keeping his promise to make housing more affordable, is lining the pockets of corporate landlords by allowing them to charge tenants as much as they want. It is high time that we in this House stand up for the rights of tenants and that this government reverse provincial legislation that lifted rent control on new buildings.

Landlords are evicting tenants to reclaim the property for personal use. Because of this, the number of evictions has increased drastically. What this province needs is a tenant bill of rights that includes new provincial rules that place rent control at the centre, limiting the incentives for landlords to evict, and a strong commitment to provide more funding for legal clinics and the creation of a provincial eviction prevention program.

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

I’m going to remind all the members that decorum is enhanced when we refer to each other by our ministerial title, if applicable, or our riding name.

Senior citizens

This includes Seniors Active Living Centres grants to the Clarkson Community Centre and the Mississauga Seniors’ Centre of over $52,000 each; and it includes two Seniors Community Grants—the maximum of $25,000 for each—for Clarkson Seniors Tours and Entertainment at Wawel Villa, and the MAY at Heart program, to encourage physical activities through visual arts and dance, like the tai chi class that the minister and I joined in.

My own mother lived a long and healthy life until she was over 90 years old because she was so closely connected with her community in Port Credit. However, we know that over 30% of our seniors in Ontario are at risk of social isolation, which can cause serious mental and physical problems. That’s why it is so important that we continue to work together to help our seniors stay physically active and engaged within our community in Mississauga–Lakeshore and across Ontario.

Christmas wish list

Mr. Percy Hatfield: Speaker, only 15 days until Christmas and I’ve been busy drafting my personal wish list:

The present I want for Christmas is a move to the opposition front row.

I’m high up now, but I want to go low.

That’s where the action seems to be:

The give and take—or so it seems to me.

That’s the legislative shop floor, Mr. Speaker,

Between you and the front door.

That’s where they cut and thrust and give and take,

Where the passion is real and never seems fake.

I watch it all from up here in the balcony,

Applauding with partisan neutrality.

But I wonder what it’s really like to be down there,

Up front and personal, just a few feet from the Premier’s chair.

Wait a minute—what am I saying? I must have been dreaming.

Speaker, I can’t be doing all of this seasonal scheming.

That’s more naughty than nice.

I don’t think I want to pay that leadership price.

There’s less pressure up here in the bleachers.

Give all my presents to the kids, the parents, the education workers and the teachers.

That’s my new, burning wish: No e-learning, just labour peace.

Classroom sizes should go down and never, ever increase.

Sarnia Shoebox Project

Mr. Robert Bailey: It’s hard to follow that.

I rise today to recognize the amazing work of two outstanding constituents in my riding of Sarnia–Lambton: Ms. Annabelle Rayson and her mother, Stephanie Lobsinger.

Annabelle, a former Queen’s Park legislative page and a current student at St. Patrick’s Catholic High School, and her mother, Stephanie, are coordinating the Sarnia Shoebox Project in Sarnia–Lambton for the second year in a row.

During her time at Queen’s Park, Annabelle was inspired to return to Sarnia and participate in the Shoebox Project—which aims to collect small care packages for women and mothers affected by homelessness—after learning about the charity from the Honourable Caroline Mulroney, one of the project’s founders.

However, when Annabelle returned home and started to make inquiries about how to get involved, she learned that there was no local coordinator. Undeterred, Annabelle enlisted the help of her mother, Stephanie, and together they started the Sarnia Shoebox Project themselves. In their first year, Annabelle and Stephanie collected 287 shoeboxes of gifts for women in Sarnia–Lambton. This year, they hope for another generous outpouring of support. All of these donations will go directly to women at risk in Sarnia–Lambton.

I want to commend the selflessness of Annabelle and Stephanie, and all who donate to this worthwhile program. Anyone interested in more information on the Sarnia Shoebox Project can contact my constituency office or email sarnia@shoeboxproject.com.

Human rights

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: I rise in the House today, as a proud Tibetan Canadian, to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the conferment of the Nobel Peace Prize to His Holiness, the 14th Dalai Lama. This honour was bestowed to His Holiness on December 10, International Human Rights Day, for “the struggle for the liberation of Tibet, and the efforts for a peaceful resolution” instead of using violence.

Tibetans continue to seek freedom and human rights through non-violence. However, the situation in Tibet is worsening, and there are ongoing human rights abuses by the Chinese government.

A-Nya Sengdra, an environmental activist, was recently sentenced to seven years. Tashi Wangchuk was imprisoned simply for advocating for the rights of Tibetans to learn their own language.

Since 2009, there have been over 150 self-immolations protesting China’s illegal occupation of Tibet.

The Chinese government’s human rights violations are not only in Tibet, but also in East Turkestan and in Hong Kong. Leaked documents confirm what the Uighur people have been saying for years about the mass detentions of Uighurs in camps for indoctrination and forced labour.

The movement for democracy in Hong Kong is in its seventh month, and despite the Chinese government’s attempt to shut it down through mass arrests and violence, people are continuing to take to the streets.

As His Holiness said when he accepted the Nobel Prize, “All of us human beings want freedom and the right to determine our own destiny as individuals and as peoples.”

As Canadians, we must stand in solidarity and join Tibetans, Uighurs and Hong Kongers in their call for freedom and human rights. We who enjoy and have freedom have a responsibility to support the fight for the freedom of others.

Bob Rumball Canadian Centre of Excellence for the Deaf

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne: Tomorrow evening in Don Valley West, I will host Derek Rumball as the third speaker in my community speaker series.

Derek is the president of the Bob Rumball centre of excellence for the deaf. I know that many MPPs and many, many Ontarians have had the opportunity to visit the centre on Bayview Avenue, where families, seniors and children can take

part in programs for the deaf and hard-of-hearing, where sign-language courses are available year-round and where mental health and developmental services are available for hard-of-hearing children and adults with intellectual disabilities. It’s a remarkable place, supported by brilliant, innovative staff and volunteers.

Derek will tell the story of the Rumball centre that has served so many since 1979. It’s the vision of Reverend Bob Rumball, Derek’s father, that is at the heart of the centre. In 1956, Bob realized the extent of the challenges facing the deaf community when he became the minister for the Evangelical Church of the Deaf. He fought for services and funding for the deaf community his whole adult life, opening the Bob Rumball camp in 1960 and eventually opening the Bob Rumball long-term-care home for the deaf in 2007.

Bob was a bit of a renaissance man. He played with the CFL. He consulted Pierre Trudeau on the drafting of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and was named to the Orders of Ontario and Canada.

There are family businesses, Mr. Speaker, and then there are family callings. Derek Rumball is as fierce a defender of the rights of the deaf community as his father.

I feel privileged to have been connected to the Bob Rumball centre as the local MPP, but in truth, the centre belongs to the community all across Ontario.

We owe a debt of gratitude to the work of this fine family and their team.

Thomas Cavanagh

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: It’s with a heavy heart that I rise today, Mr. Speaker.

On December 5, 2019, Thomas James Cavanagh came to the end of his road, paved with passion and generosity. He passed peacefully and beautifully, surrounded by his closest loved ones, including his beloved wife, Kay.

According to his obituary, Tom loved NASCAR and country music, and for fun, he worked. Starting with a single dump truck in 1953, he grew his company—Thomas Cavanagh Construction—to over 800 employees, whom he considered his extended family. Tom was proud of the many people and their families that made their livelihoods with Cavanagh construction.

But Tom was more than just the founder of Cavanagh construction; he was actively involved in his community, donating t