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

September 12, 2018

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2018-Sept-12 (PDF)

L020 - Wed 12 Sep 2018 / Mer 12 sep 2018

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Wednesday 12 September 2018 Mercredi 12 septembre 2018

Royal assent / Sanction royale

Introduction of Visitors

Oral Questions

Municipal elections

Municipal elections

Municipal elections

Veterans

Municipal elections

Service fees

Municipal elections

Municipal elections

Freedom of expression

Municipal elections

Curriculum

Élections municipales / Municipal elections

Government spending

Municipal elections

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Municipal elections

Building Something Amazing

Municipal elections

Markham–Unionville community barbecue

Municipal elections

Municipal elections

Peterborough Lakers

Municipal elections

Terry Fox Run

Steel industry

Introduction of Bills

Efficient Local Government Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 pour des administrations locales efficaces

Petitions

Gasoline prices

Highway tolls

Indigenous affairs

Social assistance

Long-term care

Curriculum

School facilities

Social assistance

Affordable housing

Long-term care

Curriculum

Curriculum

Orders of the Day

Cap and Trade Cancellation Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 annulant le programme de plafonnement et d’échange

Adjournment Debate

Indigenous affairs

The House met at 1030.

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

Prayers.

Royal assent / Sanction royale

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that in the name of Her Majesty the Queen, the Administrator has been pleased to assent to a certain bill in his office.

The Deputy Clerk (Mr. Trevor Day): The following is the title of the bill to which Your Honour did assent:

An Act to amend the City of Toronto Act, 2006, the Municipal Act, 2001 and the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 / Loi modifiant la Loi de 2006 sur la cité de Toronto, la Loi de 2001 sur les municipalités et la Loi de 1996 sur les élections municipales.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We’re now going to do introduction of visitors, but I’d like to start it off. Would the members please join me in welcoming, in the Speaker’s gallery, Mr. Tim Hudak, who served as MPP during the 36th, 37th, 38th, 39th, 40th and 41st Parliaments, and his friend David Reid. Welcome to the Ontario Legislature.

I have been informed and would want to add that we welcome George Smitherman, who was the member for Toronto Centre–Rosedale in the 37th and 38th Parliaments and the member for Toronto Centre in the 39th Parliament. Welcome to the Ontario Legislature.

I’ve been informed that David Zimmer is also here, the member for Willowdale who served in the 38th, 39th, 40th and 41st Parliaments. Welcome to the Ontario Legislature.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I’m just wanting to welcome all of those folks who have come here to watch the proceedings today, and who are trying to protect the charter rights of Ontarians and Torontonians.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Again, I would ask the members, when they’re introducing guests, not to make a political statement to accompany the introduction.

Introduction of visitors.

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne: I would like to welcome to the Legislature a young and engaged constituent from Don Valley West, Jacob Landau. Welcome to the Legislature, Jacob.

Mr. Chris Glover: I would like to welcome constituents from Spadina–Fort York: Moira Clark and Eric Ladelpha.

Mr. Kevin Yarde: I would like to welcome my constituency assistants Melissa Edwards as well as Harleen Sandhu.

Ms. Sandy Shaw: I would like to welcome my niece Hana R. Clayton. She’s a student here at the Ontario College of Art and Design, and this is her first visit to the Ontario Legislature. Welcome, Hana.

Mr. Michael Coteau: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce Chris Moise, a TDSB trustee. Welcome to the Legislature.

Ms. Marit Stiles: I would like to introduce TDSB trustee Ausma Malik, as well as welcome some of our city council candidates in Toronto here today: Jennifer Hollett; Chris Moise, who has already been mentioned; and Ausma Malik.

I would also like to welcome my partner in life, Jordan Berger.

Ms. Jill Andrew: I would like to welcome Krista Mihevc here, a constituent of Toronto–St. Paul’s who is an amazing advocate for our rights.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Once again, I’m going to ask the members, please, do not make a political statement when you’re introducing one of your guests.

Mr. Michael Coteau: Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome Mary Hynes, who is a constituent in Don Valley East. Welcome to the Legislature.

Mr. Faisal Hassan: I would like to welcome a constituent, Brandon Machado, to the Legislature.

Oral Questions

Municipal elections

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, my first question is to the Premier. Does the Premier believe that Canada needs a Charter of Rights?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the Leader of the Opposition: What Canada needs and Ontario needs and Toronto needs is democracy. My friends, I want to remind the Leader of the Opposition that 2.3 million people voted for the PC Party. This is about preserving the will of the people. This is about preserving democracy.

Leader of the Opposition—through you, Mr. Speaker—the people will decide in four years. I’ll tell you who won’t decide: a politically appointed judge by one person. The people of Ontario will decide if they want to move forward with saving people taxes, reducing hydro rates—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. Stop the clock.

Start the clock. Supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, news flash for the Premier: Our democracy is upheld by our Charter of Rights and Freedoms in this country. However, earlier this week, while the Premier was trying to justify overriding the charter so that he could continue his vendetta against the voters of Toronto, the Premier stated that he and only he had the right to decide what was best for Ontario.

Does the Premier think that there should be any checks at all on his power?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: This bill we’re introducing was introduced to fix the gridlock down at city hall, the gridlock that took the factory worker, the construction worker, the person in the office over an hour to get to work down here.

My friends, we’re going to make sure that we take care of the housing crisis and make sure that we take care of the crumbling infrastructure underneath our feet and make sure that transit gets moving, unlike the leader of the NDP. The leader of the NDP is here to protect her crony buddies: Mike Layton, Joe Cressy, Gord Perks—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Premier will take his seat.

I need to remind the members that we are not to ascribe motive. That’s totally outside of the rules and traditions of the House. I would ask all members to cease doing that.

Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Here are the facts: The Premier rammed through undemocratic changes to Toronto’s elections, changes that he didn’t have the guts to mention at all during the election campaign. A judge ruled that that wasn’t just reckless and irresponsible but a violation of people’s basic rights guaranteed by our charter. Now the Premier is going to override the Charter of Rights for the first time in Ontario’s history just to get his way.

Our democratic rights, our democracy, include an independent judiciary and a free media to protect people from politicians who believe that an electoral majority gives them the mandate to trample on people’s rights. Why does this Premier believe that democracy means he can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: Here, again, the Leader of the Opposition is down here protecting downtown NDP politicians’ jobs. That’s what the Leader of the Opposition is—again, worrying about her buddies Joe Cressy, Mike Layton, Perks, Fletcher. That’s what the Leader of the Opposition is worried about.

I’ve yet to hear once the Leader of the Opposition worry about her own constituents in Hamilton. The people in Hamilton, when I visited, need jobs. They want lower taxes. They want lower hydro rates. That’s what the people of Hamilton want. They want to make sure they have a voice.

For the people—we will make sure that we deliver our promises, and the people will decide over the next four years.

Municipal elections

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is for the Premier, and I’d prefer to speak for myself, thank you very much, Premier. I really prefer to speak for myself.

What I’m here to do is actually to protect the interests of all Ontarians. That’s what I’m here to do today, Speaker. That’s what I’m here to do every day—Hamiltonians, Torontonians and all Ontarians.

Look, the Premier has stated that his personal vendetta against his enemies at Toronto city hall is so important that he is compelled to recall this Legislature to override the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in order to get that done. If it was so important to this Premier, why did he not mention it a single time during the election campaign that just ended?

Hon. Doug Ford: Leader of the Opposition, as I was criss-crossing Toronto talking to tens of thousands of people, they were frustrated. They know the city of Toronto is the most dysfunctional political system in all of Canada. They’re frustrated with travelling hours to work. They’re frustrated with the high taxes. They’re frustrated with transit not being built.

The people of Scarborough are frustrated that the Scarborough subway was voted eight times. David Miller couldn’t build transit; Rob Ford couldn’t build transit and neither—

Interruption.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: You’re making them puke. They’re all going to throw up up there. You’re making the whole gallery sick.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Member for Essex, please come to order.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The House will come to order so I can deal with this.

I’m now addressing the people in the gallery: We welcome you here today to observe the debate, but you cannot participate and you can’t demonstrate in any way.

Premier?

Hon. Doug Ford: Thank you.

Through you, Mr. Speaker: We’re here to serve the people—

Interruption.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We have to be able to debate without this disruption. If it continues, we will have to clear the gallery and you’ll have to leave.

The Premier can finish his answer.

Interruption.

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The official opposition will come to order. Order.

Interruption.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We’re going to have to clear the galleries. We have to clear the galleries.

We’re going to recess the House for 10 minutes.

The House recessed from 1049 to 1111.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We’re now going to seek to resume question period where we left off. Start the clock.

I recognize the Leader of the Opposition on her first supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, I don’t have a Premier to give my supplementary to. My first question was to the Premier. He’s not here to give a supplementary to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): You can’t make reference to the absence of any member, but you can put your question to the government.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Again I recognize the Leader of the Opposition on her supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Thank you, Speaker. The second part of my second question is to the Premier. The people of Ontario are looking for a government to provide good schools for their kids, decent health care for their loved ones and jobs that you can raise a family on. But when they look to this Premier for his priorities, all they see is someone obsessed with his enemies on Toronto city council—so obsessed that he’s going to toss aside the Charter of Rights to get what he wants; so obsessed that senior citizens are being taken out of our chamber in handcuffs so that he can get his way.

Why is this the Premier’s top priority?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, again I’ll remind the Leader of the Opposition that we were elected on making sure we fix this city. We were elected to make sure that we fix the infrastructure, that the hard-working people that took an hour, an hour and a half to get down to work today downtown have proper transit, proper subways to get them from point A to point B in a rapid fashion—unlike the NDP.

From the day the Leader of the Opposition came down here, she was worried about protecting her political, paid activists, making sure she protects the downtown NDP councillors that haven’t even registered to run. The NDP is worried about one thing: raising taxes, having the highest carbon tax in the entire country, $2-a-litre gasoline—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. Once again, I will ask members on both sides of the House to cease and desist imputing motive in the course of their questions.

Final supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, we all know who pays for their activists. We saw it during the election campaign.

Members of this Legislature could be tackling the real emergencies that Ontario families are facing currently, like lead in school water, for example; wait times in our hospitals; 80,000 Ontario jobs lost in one month under this Premier’s leadership. Instead, he called us here to cut the size of Toronto city council and override the charter to do it. The Premier is trampling on people’s basic rights to pass a law that he didn’t even have the guts to campaign on.

Why can’t the Premier just take a step back, take a deep breath—count to 10, for goodness’ sake—and accept that there is a more pressing priority there, and many more pressing priorities, than his petty vendetta against his old enemies at city hall?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the Leader of the Opposition: At least we can count to 10, unlike you folks. I know you get your budgets mixed up; I know that you were off by about $5 billion.

We’re there to save the taxpayers money. We’re there to put money back into the taxpayer’s pocket. We’re there to make sure we speak for the will of the people and uphold democracy. That’s why we are here.

We were elected to represent the people of this great province. We are here to make sure—again—we lower taxes, lower hydro rates, lower gas prices, and get rid of the worst tax ever, the carbon tax.

Municipal elections

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is for the Attorney General. The “notwithstanding” clause allows the government to override sections of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is meant to be used only in the most extreme circumstances, when a judicial decision is contrary to the public interest. But right now, staff within the Attorney General’s office are drafting a law that would invoke the “notwithstanding” clause for no better reason than to help her Premier settle personal scores with political rivals.

Does this Attorney General, charged with upholding the rule of law in our province, really believe that cutting Toronto’s city council from 47 to 25 seats is worth violating our charter rights for?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Attorney General.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The question was to the Attorney General.

Hon. Doug Ford: Oh, sorry.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order on the opposition benches.

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: We are using the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to uphold the Constitution.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Your old law firm must be so proud.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Essex will come to order.

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: We believe that the Better Local Government Act is constitutional. That is why our government is appealing the judge’s ruling and we are seeking a stay in the decision.

Section 92 of the Constitution makes it clear that the province has exclusive jurisdiction over municipalities, and

section 33 of the charter confirms the paramountcy of the Legislature.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Start the clock. Supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Taking away fundamental rights is an extremely serious measure. This is why Ontario has never, ever before invoked the “notwithstanding” clause. But after doing it once, it becomes easier to do it again. Indeed, after casually invoking the “notwithstanding” clause to indulge his personal Toronto obsession, the Premier said he “won’t be shy” about suspending charter rights again if the courts rule against him again.

Now, I think that the Attorney General understands the role of the courts in upholding democracy in our country and our province. If she doesn’t, she should go back to law school. Why is the Attorney General putting the Premier above the law and normalizing the suspension of fundamental charter rights?

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: We take our duties at the Ministry of the Attorney General very seriously. There is nothing casual about what is going on here. We take this seriously. We are using the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to uphold the Constitution and we are appealing the decision, which we believe was wrongly decided, to the Court of Appeal and asking for a stay in the judge’s decision.

Interjections.

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

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: Mr. Speaker, time is of the essence. On October 22, there is an election happening in Toronto. We need to give the voters of the city of Toronto certainty about the rules under which the election will be conducted.

Veterans

Mr. Doug Downey: My question is for the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport. Yesterday marked the 17th anniversary of the senseless attack against the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon and the hijacked plane that crashed close to Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

The world was a different place after that day, and the effects of the attack were certainly felt right here in Canada. Twenty-four Canadians lost their lives that fateful day; that included 11 Ontarians. The ensuing war in Afghanistan also saw 159 Canadian soldiers make the ultimate sacrifice, defending our freedoms and fighting against terror abroad.

Can the minister tell us how the government intends to honour the Canadian lives lost due to this tragic attack?

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

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Welcome back, Speaker.

Thank you for the question from my honourable colleague from Barrie–Springwater–Oro-Medonte. We must never forget that tragic event of 9/11. I was proud that our Premier met the family of one of the victims of that tragic event yesterday. Thank you.

Canada stepped up in the face of evil to assist our friend and ally the United States. We know the story of Gander, Newfoundland and how that small town protected thousands of displaced visitors when air traffic was stranded. Canada then aided our allies in fighting terror abroad in the war in Afghanistan, where 159 Canadians made the ultimate sacrifice.

We’re committing to support and honour the sacrifice of those soldiers, and I’d like to elaborate on that more in my supplementary.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Doug Downey: Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the minister: Thank you for your very thoughtful response. I, too, was glad to hear that the Premier had met with the family of one of the Canadian victims of 9/11. I also think it’s important to make sure we commemorate this event and the effects it had and the sacrifices made because of it. This includes honouring the fallen soldiers of those who bravely served in Afghanistan.

Can the minister please explain what our government is doing to honour the brave men and women who served Canada in the subsequent war in Afghanistan?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I’m pleased to share with you that our government for the people is committed to building Ontario’s first provincial memorial to honour Canadian heroes of the war in Afghanistan. The Memorial to the Canadian Heroes of the War in Afghanistan will be located here at Queen’s Park. This memorial will stand as a testament to the bravery of our veterans and the sacrifices made by our troops.

We have the utmost respect for our veterans, our soldiers and their families. We will ensure that their courage is honoured and express appreciation on behalf of all Ontarians for their service. We will have many more details in the months to come, but the sacrifices of these brave men and women will never be forgotten by the government of Ontario.

Municipal elections

Mr. Peter Tabuns: My question is to the Deputy Premier. Premier Ford has threatened to employ the “notwithstanding” clause to violate our fundamental rights whenever there is a court decision that stands in his way. Premier Ford’s intentions are chilling. The “notwithstanding” clause can be used to override fundamental rights like freedom of religion or even our right to life, liberty and security of the person.

As the right hand to Mr. Ford, does the Deputy Premier support overriding our Charter of Rights and Freedoms to satisfy the whims of a would-be dictator, or will the Deputy Premier—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): First of all, we refer to each other by our riding or our official name. You can’t refer to the Premier in that way.

Secondly, you have to withdraw.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Response?

Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, the will of the people—

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Now we know why you wear a yellow tie, Vic.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member from Essex will come to order.

I would ask the member for Essex to withdraw.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Premier?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: The will of the people will decide on this Legislature in four years, not a judge appointed by one person, a politically appointed judge.

My friends, do you know what people are worried about? People are worried about being gouged by the government. They are worried about getting a good-paying job. When I was in Hamilton, I talked to dozens of people who felt they weren’t being represented in the Leader of the Opposition’s area. They were unemployed. Do you know why they were unemployed? Because the Leader of the Opposition is too worried about protecting her political friends—

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

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Take your seat. Please take your seat. Please take your seat.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Premier will please take his seat.

Supplementary question?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Back to the Deputy Premier: It’s clear by now that the Premier is willing to take the nuclear option when a less damaging option is available. But in a democracy, the government is more than just one person.

The Conservative Party sold the people of Ontario on the belief that Mr. Ford’s cabinet would keep his worst impulses in check. As the highest-ranking member of the cabinet after the Premier, will the Deputy Premier do the right thing, keep the Premier in check and step up to stop his vendetta against the Toronto city council?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Once again, I’m going to ask members to stop imputing motive in their questions or in their statements in this House.

Premier, respond?

Hon. Doug Ford: My friends, do you know who is going to keep us all in check? The people are going to keep us in check. They’re going to decide if the government is in better shape than we were before. The people will decide—

Interjections.

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

Hon. Doug Ford: Mr. Speaker, I think—

Interjections.

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

Hon. Doug Ford: They’re out of control, Mr. Speaker, like usual.

My friends, what is going to keep us in check are the people—

Interjections.

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

Premier, respond.

Hon. Doug Ford: This is about preserving the will of the people. It’s about preserving the rights of the people. It’s about letting them decide who they’re going to vote for. I can assure you there are going to be a few people missing on the other side in the next election. My friends—

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Next question.

Service fees

Mr. Will Bouma: My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Under the previous Liberal government, fees for driver’s licences and other services were set to increase. This burden would have been placed directly on the people of Ontario.

Ontarians work harder than ever before and pay more than ever before. I was pleased to see that the government for the people froze these fee increases. Ontario has elected a government that works for the people. We have lowered day-to-day costs for the taxpayer.

I have two questions for the Minister of Transportation: Can he outline for the House which fees were frozen and how the fee freeze will benefit Ontarians?

Hon. John Yakabuski: I want to thank the member for the question today. When we travelled across the province during the campaign, and previous to that, we heard every day how life was getting more and more unaffordable in the province of Ontario under the previous government, and we listened to what the people said.

Effective September 1, there was supposed to be a fee increase. We made the decision that that fee increase would not proceed. I’ll give more details in the supplementary, but what we recognized is that it was important for us to send a message to the people that we’re going to do what we can in the Ford government to make life more affordable and not be putting our hands into the people’s pockets each and every day that they wake up and go to work, but to try to make life easier for the people. Because this is a government for the people.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Will Bouma: Thank you, Minister, for these common sense changes. Under the previous government, life in Ontario had grown unaffordable, not only for my constituents but for people across our province. The Liberal government wasted hard-earned money and spent tax dollars that only benefited Liberal insiders and political elites. But you know what? Ontarians know better.

I’m proud to serve in the government for the people that is committed to making life easier and more affordable. Minister, can you update the House on how much money this initiative will save the people of Ontario?

Hon. John Yakabuski: Thank you very much for the supplementary. What we have done with the decision that was made prior—the September 1 increase that would have been implemented under the previous government—is to freeze the cost of a driver’s licence here in the province of Ontario, to freeze the cost of knowledge tests and to freeze the cost of road tests. This will result in millions of dollars of savings to the people of the province of Ontario.

It’s not the largest amount of money, but it is a clear message to the people that this government is listening. We recognize what the previous government had done. Every time people got up in the morning, they looked at the news and the previous government was taking more money out of their pockets, more of their hard-earned money. We were elected on a platform to get rid of the unjust carbon tax and to make life more affordable for the people of Ontario. With the freezing of those fees, that’s exactly—

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

Municipal elections

Hon. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: Thanks for the question. I refer the question to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: I want to thank the member for the question. Speaker, I think what’s being forgotten here is that virtually every constitutional expert, even those who don’t support our party, felt we were well within our rights to table the Better Local Government Act. In fact, last weekend, candidates were actually campaigning in their new wards, and candidates were waiting at city hall for the decision, ready to register for the new wards. I think there was a general acceptance that this government was well within our rights to have an effective and efficient government at Toronto city hall.

That’s why, today, we will be tabling a new bill. As the Attorney General said earlier, we’ll be appealing the—

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Members will please take their seats.

Start the clock again. Supplementary.

Interjections.

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

Once again, I’ll remind the House that we refer to the Premier by the name “Premier,” ministers by their ministerial responsibilities, and members by their riding names.

Response, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: Our government is doing the right thing. Given the decision, we’re tabling a new bill. We are doing the right thing.

Speaker, we believe in better local government. We believe in an efficient and effective Toronto council of 25 people that mirrors the same electoral boundaries of the 25 MPs and the 25 MPPs. I think everyone acknowledges those 25 MPs have no problem representing those electoral districts and Legislative Assembly members have no problem representing their districts. We believe in better local government, we believe in 25 electoral districts in the city of Toronto, and we’re—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Windsor–Tecumseh, come to order.

Hon. Steve Clark: —for the people on that pledge.

Municipal elections

Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Premier. In response to the Ontario Superior Court ruling striking down a flawed Bill 5, the Premier made a hasty decision to invoke the “notwithstanding” clause, something that has never been done before in Ontario. It is seldom used because it overrides our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is a measure of last resort. It suspends people’s civil liberties. The Constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms are there to guide us as lawmakers and, most importantly, protect all of us.

Speaker, the Premier knows there are other remedies available to him. Reasonable people are asking, if he’s willing to use it in this circumstance, where else will he use it?

To the Premier: Did the Premier ask the advice of the Deputy Premier, the Attorney General, the Secretary of the Cabinet or the Deputy Attorney General before making his decision?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the representative from Ottawa South in the minivan party: I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, they didn’t have to worry about that because they had more political scandals, billions of dollars of waste. There was no party in the history of this government that was more politically corrupt than their party—there has been no party at all.

We are down here thanks to the Liberals, because they wasted billions and billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money. They had scandal after scandal after scandal. No matter if it was eHealth, no matter what it was, there were billions of dollars wasted. And my friends, you’ll be hearing about the billions of dollars that were wasted. The Auditor General came out and said they were cooking the books. I can tell you, they were more than cooking the books; they were frying—

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

Hon. Doug Ford: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. John Fraser: I’ll take that as a no. And somebody should check your material; it’s a bit stale.

The Premier’s impulsive decision to invoke the “notwithstanding” clause has not been fully thought through and is wrong. Did the Premier consult with the former Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney? Did he seek the advice of the former Progressive Conservative Attorney General, Roy McMurtry? Did he pick up the phone and call Mike Harris, who, if you remember, when he amalgamated cities across Ontario, did a public consultation?

We’ll be filing a reasoned amendment. Impatience is not a good reason to take such an extreme measure.

Speaker, through you to the Premier: Will the Premier let the cooler heads in his caucus prevail, not suspend people’s rights, and refrain from invoking the “notwithstanding” clause?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the member for Ottawa South: You’re going to be the last person I take advice from about running a government down here. You have destroyed this province for years to come. Every single taxpayer in Ontario is going to be paying for years for their mistakes. For years and years and years—billions of dollars—it was tax, tax, tax, spend, spend, spend.

And who lifted the Liberals up but the leader of the NDP. They stood side by side with the Liberals, wasting billions of dollars, hand in hand with every single scandal the Liberals brought to this province.

My friends, we’re going to turn this province around. We’re going to make sure there’s accountability, transparency and integrity back at Queen’s Park.

Freedom of expression

Ms. Jane McKenna: My question is to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. The free and open exchange of ideas is the fundamental element of post-secondary education. That is why I was so concerned to hear from young people during the campaign about examples of groups using violence and intimidation tactics to shut down free speech on campus.

Speaker, can the minister please tell us about the government’s plan to uphold free speech on campus?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Once again, I ask the opposition to come to order. I have to be able to hear the question and the answer. The member for Burlington has the right to ask a question too.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

The Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the hard-working member for that question and the work that she does every day on behalf of the constituents of Burlington.

Our government made a commitment to the people of Ontario to uphold free speech on campus. On August 30, we announced measures which will do just that. Promise made, promise kept.

Speaker, any action that interferes with free speech on campus is absolutely unacceptable and is taken very seriously by this government. Our plan will put in place a minimum standard for free speech policy for all publicly assisted—

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

Ms. Jane McKenna: Thank you to the minister for your thoughtful response. It is great news to hear that our government is moving forward with delivering this promise to the people to uphold free speech on campuses.

Speaker, I believe that most Ontarians would be shocked to learn that students and groups are being shut down and intimidated simply for having a different opinion. In order to learn—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I apologize for interrupting the member for Burlington. I cannot hear the member for Burlington. The opposition has to come to order. If I have to, I’ll start warning and naming.

The member for Burlington can continue.

Ms. Jane McKenna: In order to learn about an idea you agree with, you also have to learn about and listen to ideas you fundamentally disagree with.

Can the minister tell us more about how the government’s policy upholds free speech?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: As the member alluded to, colleges and universities should not shield their students from ideas or discourse they disagree with. Colleges and universities also need to ensure that students are not stopped from sharing their opinions. By January 1, 2019, all universities and colleges must implement a free speech policy that includes a definition of free speech, that is based on best practices from around the globe and ensures existing student disciplinary measures apply to students who violate the policy.

To ensure that all students can expect the same standard, the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario will monitor whether institutions are in compliance. If necessary, the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities may reduce operating grants for institutions not taking appropriate action to uphold free speech.

Municipal elections

Mr. Jeff Burch: To the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing: The Premier’s decision to invoke the “notwithstanding” clause is an unprecedented abuse of power and displays nothing but pure contempt for the people of Toronto.

To add insult to injury, the Premier has also made it clear that he will not be shy about invoking the clause in the future.

Does the minister support trampling the rights and freedoms of Ontarians any time this Premier wants to interfere in municipal councils, or will the minister stand up, have a backbone and vote against this undemocratic move?

Hon. Steve Clark: Speaker, I want to thank the member for the question, but let me be clear: It’s our government’s intention to put forward new legislation to deal with this issue. We believe very strongly that a council that is streamlined and ready to work on October 22 is the best way to move forward.

Yes, we’re disappointed with the judge’s decision. The Attorney General made clear our intention to appeal, but time is of the essence. We have an election for October 22. We want to make sure that that council is a streamlined council that’s ready to work to make those important decisions. Our government wants to make sure that the city of Toronto can build transit, can fix infrastructure and build new housing. We believe the best way to do that is with an efficient council of 25.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Jeff Burch: Speaker, it is shocking that the minister is standing here in this House, happily propping up this Premier’s dictatorial move to invoke this clause—

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

Mr. Jeff Burch: Withdrawn.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): You have to stand up and say “withdraw.”

Mr. Jeff Burch: Withdrawn.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Continue.

Mr. Jeff Burch: —a clause that we all know has nothing to do with efficiency and everything to do with this Premier settling a score with the city that rejected him as mayor and Premier. This is a hideous display of vengeance on one of our province’s great cities—a shameful day for Ontario.

Why does the minister think it is appropriate for this government to use unprecedented nuclear measures to bulldoze the democratic rights of Torontonians at the whims of a Premier who is acting like a dictator?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Once again, I’d ask the member to withdraw.

Mr. Jeff Burch: Withdrawn.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Response?

Hon. Steve Clark: This member time and time again uses unparliamentary language.

Let me be clear: Our government is committed to having an efficient and effective council. We made it very clear—crystal clear, as my colleague beside me said—during the election that we were going to reduce the size and cost of government. We want government to be accountable to the people. We want to ensure that new Toronto council is not dysfunctional, cannot just grind through week-long council meetings and get nothing done. We want to give that council the effective tools to make those tough decisions.

As I said before, we’re going to be introducing new legislation, and I ask the member to consider the reason we want effective local government. That’s why we’re doing it, Speaker.

Curriculum

Ms. Christine Hogarth: My question is for the Minister of Education. Ontario students just went back to school and, once again, they are faced with learning Kathleen Wynne’s ideologically driven discovery math curriculum. Everyone on this side of the House and—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to have to interrupt and once again remind the members that you have to refer to other members by their riding name, not by their personal name.

The member can continue.

Ms. Christine Hogarth: Thank you.

Everyone on this side of the House knows, and my colleagues on the other side of the House, and my residents—I spent the weekend at the Taste of the Kingsway, where hundreds of parents came to see me. Last night, I was knocking on doors in Alderwood, and parents again said this to me: Our discovery math program is not working.

In fact, EQAO scores have been dropping for years and this past year reached a new low. Half of Ontario’s grade 6 students have failed to meet the provincial standards on math. By the time our students get to grade 9, more than half of them will be taking the applied math courses and failing to make the grade.

I think we can all agree that these statistics are unacceptable. EQAO assessment results show that we must do better when it comes to math performances in Ontario. We must ensure that all students have the knowledge and skills they need—

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

Response? Minister of Education.

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to welcome you and the member from Etobicoke–Lakeshore back to the House, as well as every other member, because this is what democracy is all about: It’s about debating ideas and concepts.

You know what? Since the first day we took office our team has been focused on ensuring our education system accomplishes two goals: respecting parents—we know how to respect people on this side of the House—and also, prepare people for their future. We promised to deliver a system that puts the rights of parents first while getting back to the basics, Speaker. That’s a promise we made, and we are delivering on that promise.

Mr. Speaker, it’s with pride that I can say that we have already begun following through on our commitment to get back to the basics and focus on the fundamentals. We’re taking the necessary steps to make sure Ontario students are once again leaders in mathematics. To date, we have introduced a number of initiatives to get—

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

Interjections.

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

Supplementary.

Ms. Christine Hogarth: Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the minister: Thank you very much for your response. This is truly great news, and important news to the parents in my riding. I know my constituents will be pleased to finally have a government that will focus on giving their children the skills and the tools they need to be successful both inside and out of the classroom.

Minister, once again, I have heard from constituents as early as last night that it’s not only fundamental math our students need to learn; they believe students need to know more about what it takes to be part of the growing technology sector in our province. They are looking forward to expressing these concerns in upcoming province-wide consultations.

Mr. Speaker, we finally have a government for the people that is putting the rights of parents first, and we’ll be consulting them on their child’s education, such as the new math curriculum.

Minister, what options are available to parents in my riding who wish to participate in our government’s province-wide consultation process? And what can my constituents expect from these—

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

Response.

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: Before I answer the member from Etobicoke–Lakeshore, I want to ensure the people watching today that we have taken great steps in ensuring our students are going to get back to the basics in math. We’ve introduced a teachers’ guide. We’re introducing a fact sheet for parents and guardians to make sure they understand the importance of teaching the proper math in classrooms.

Furthermore, we’re redirecting $55 million to ensure that our teachers are prepared to teach math to prepare our students for the realities of today.

Over and above that, Speaker, I am so pleased to say that we are absolutely on track with our consultation. We look forward to it being comprehensive and soliciting information back from our teachers, our parents and our students. Anyone who wants to contribute to this consultation will have a manner to do so. We’ll be utilizing technology. We’ll be utilizing telephone town halls. We’ll be doing online consultations. Also, we’ll be receiving written submissions as well. I look—

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

Next question.

Élections municipales / Municipal elections

Mr. Joel Harden: My question is to the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services. I’m going to pose it in French first.

Est-ce que la ministre pense que les gens d’Ottawa ont le droit de s’exprimer au sujet de la taille du conseil municipal? Oui ou non?

Does the minister believe that the people of Ottawa deserve to have a say in the size of their city council? Yes or no?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I answered that question yesterday, so I’ll refer it to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Interjections.

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The standing orders allow a minister to refer a question.

Mr. Percy Hatfield: How can they muzzle Lisa MacLeod?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Windsor–Tecumseh will come to order.

I have to remind the member that it has to be a straight referral without further explanation. The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing can respond.

Hon. Steve Clark: Merci beaucoup pour la question. I’m not sure if the member was at the Association of Municipalities of Ontario conference. He’s nodding his head, so he was. If you heard the Premier’s speech, there was a clear statement by the Premier that the Better Local Government Act only deals with the city of Toronto.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Steve Clark: Again, if the members would stop heckling and start listening, they would realize that the speech was clear. Bill 5 only deals with that. He said the same thing to many delegates who asked the question of him. I said the same thing to delegates who asked me. This bill only deals with the city of Toronto.

We feel, Speaker, that it’s very appropriate, given the fact that there are 25 existing federal and provincial boundaries, that the city councillors in this city have those same boundaries. There is no plan, as the Premier said at AMO, to include any other municipality.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Joel Harden: I’m going to ask my friend the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services, as a fellow Ottawa MPP, to answer the question, again, I hope.

I’ll just remind my friend that the Premier recently stated, “I’ve had numerous calls from Ottawa, I’ll tell you. I don’t know what’s going on out in Ottawa, but I’m getting endless calls from the Ottawa region.” This was followed by a tweet from the minister referring to the Premier’s address at AMO and saying that this government actually had no intention of targeting Ottawa the way it did Toronto. So which is it? Which is it?

Speaker, the people of Ottawa, whom the member and I both represent, deserve clarity. Will the minister confirm once and for all if the Premier will or will not apply the same drastic measures used to slash Toronto city council to Ottawa?

Hon. Steve Clark: Again, Speaker, through you to the member: I’m not sure if the member was at the mayor’s breakfast yesterday in Ottawa to hear my colleague the minister. The minister, in her speech, said no.

Government spending

Mr. Mike Harris: My question is for the President of the Treasury Board. Under the past Liberal government, spending was out of control. Since 2004, the Liberals mismanaged the public finances and shamefully doubled the size of the debt. This is debt that future generations of Ontarians, including my own children, will be on the hook for.

Mr. Speaker, the people of Ontario threw out the last government because of irresponsible management. The people of Ontario wanted a government that would listen. Can the President of the Treasury Board please tell this House what the government is doing to listen to the people and get government spending under control?

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: Thank you to the member from Kitchener–Conestoga for that very thoughtful question. Mr. Speaker, the government has a responsibility to ensure programs and services meet the needs of the people we serve and to keep those programs sustainable now and into the future. Make no mistake: Our expenditure review is about much more than tightening our purse strings. It’s about planning for prosperity.

Our government, launching the Planning for Prosperity consultation, asked the people about public spending and services. Our government recognizes that Ontario’s hard-working front-line workers and citizens have valuable input about service improvements. I’m pleased to say that the people of Ontario have so far flooded our office with submissions: over 6,000 survey responses and over 9,000 individual ideas. The people demanded a fiscally responsible government that listens, and that’s exactly what they got.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Mike Harris: Mr. Speaker, through you: Thank you to the President of the Treasury Board for the response. It is clear that our government has committed to an unparalleled level of transparency and openness when it comes to reviewing the state of the province’s finances.

Can the President of the Treasury Board inform this House on how the Planning for Prosperity public consultations will help the government get spending under control?

Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy: Mr. Speaker, the province doesn’t have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem—one which the previous government recklessly enabled. That spending ends here.

Efficiencies exist all over government, whether it’s how different agencies and ministries purchase goods or how they deliver services. We will use what we hear during our Planning for Prosperity, which I hope the members opposite will participate in online—and yes, you can do it anonymously—to ensure that our vital public services are sustainable both now and in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, despite all the fearmongering from the opposition, the actions that we have taken are not about cuts. They’re about rebuilding Ontario’s finances so that we have a legacy of sustainable public services for future generations. It’s about planning for prosperity.

Municipal elections

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is to the Minister of Education. This government’s use of the “notwithstanding” clause to push through their unconstitutional changes to Toronto city council is not only unprecedented but just plain wrong. But to make matters worse, the Premier who thinks he’s king said that he will be using the clause to override our charter rights whenever he pleases.

Does the Minister of Education support using the “notwithstanding” clause to override our fundamental rights and freedoms, or will she show some backbone and vote against it in the upcoming free vote?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: To the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Interjections.

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

Hon. Steve Clark: Thank you, Speaker. Through you to the member for Davenport: There’s only one reason why we’re introducing new legislation, and that’s to end the dysfunction and deadlock at Toronto city council.

During the campaign, we talked very clearly about reducing the size and cost of government. We believe that an accountable and efficient 25-person council at the city of Toronto is the only way to go and that’s why we’ve made the decision. As I said earlier, the Attorney General very eloquently this morning talked about our appeal and our use of

section 33. It’s very important for us. This is very, very important.

Interjections.

Hon. Steve Clark: I want the members to stop heckling and start listening a bit.

October 22 is fast approaching. We need to have a council in place. We need to introduce new legislation. This is very important and we’re moving forward.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: Through you, Mr. Speaker, back to the Minister of Education—because the battle over Bill 5 isn’t the only court case that this government is embroiled in. There are also legal challenges over the government’s repeal of a modern sex education curriculum, including a human rights complaint. That is why my question was directed to the Minister of Education.

This is not the kind of leadership that Ontarians are looking for in this very important role, Minister of Education. Will you show the students of Ontario what it means to stand up to a bully? Does the Minister of Education believe there are—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I would ask the member to withdraw.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Withdrawn.

Does the Minister of Education believe there are such things as fundamental human rights and, if so, does the minister believe the government has a responsibility for upholding those rights?

Hon. Steve Clark: Again, the only party that is talking about wanting more politicians in the province of Ontario is the NDP. Come on, Speaker.

During the campaign people wanted a more efficient, more nimble, more effective government. They told us very clearly they wanted to stop the dysfunction and deadlock. I’m sure my seatmate, the Minister of Transportation, would love to work with a streamlined council to build more transit. My colleague behind me is Minister of Infrastructure. He wants to work with a nimble Toronto council and build more infrastructure. I want to build more housing. I want to work with that new council and get things done for the people of Toronto.

That party is the only party that’s standing up for more politicians, more waste, more mismanagement and more spending.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The time for question period has expired. This House stands in recess until 3 p.m. this afternoon.

The House recessed from 1205 to 1500.

Introduction of Visitors

Ms. Sandy Shaw: It’s my pleasure to introduce a good friend of mine who has joined us this afternoon to watch the proceedings: Kevin Hearn from the Barenaked Ladies. Welcome, Kevin, to the Legislature.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: It’s my pleasure to introduce my friend and constituent Steve Dyck, who is visiting Queen’s Park today representing Fair Vote Canada, meeting with members and talking about democracy. Welcome to Queen’s Park, Steve.

Mr. Joel Harden: It’s a pleasure to introduce Declan Ingham, who’s here today. Declan was part of our team in Ottawa Centre and did a lot of our riding and policy work. Declan is now lost to Toronto, unfortunately, but we hope to get him back soon. Declan, it’s good to see you here in the people’s House.

Members’ Statements

Municipal elections

Ms. Doly Begum: In the last few weeks, we have witnessed the Premier’s dislike of proper process, his dislike of appropriate public consultation, and his dislike of careful cost-benefit analysis. But his utter disrespect for our judicial system is not only appalling; it sets a dangerous precedent. The Premier’s Wild West attitude to push this bill through by invoking the “notwithstanding” clause, a clause that is intended to be used only in exceptional circumstances such as a national security threat, directs us back to this question: Is this really about cost saving or is this personal? Is this the Premier using every tool in his tool box just to get his petty revenge on Torontonians?

Mr. Speaker, it appears that he does not have any problem with the number or cost of politicians as long as they’re from his family or close group of friends.

Like many of my colleagues in this room, I’m a member of provincial Parliament, but unlike many of my colleagues in this room who are voting for this bill, I’m actually a proud resident of the city of Toronto, and we the people of this great city not only denounce the Premier’s callous attitude towards the people’s wishes and his plan to misuse government powers for personal vendetta, but also tell him, “Enough. You need to stop now.”

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Once again, I’m going to remind members of the House that it is inappropriate to impute motive.

Members’ statements.

Building Something Amazing

Mr. Lorne Coe: I’m pleased to highlight the great work under way at Durham College in support of students and youth involved with the development of business ideas and plans. If Durham region’s reputation for quality and innovation is to flourish, then we must work to create an environment where businesses can not only start locally but develop as well.

In that regard, I’m pleased to announce the new partnership between Durham College and 360insights, one of Ontario’s fastest-growing, innovative companies located in Whitby. 360insights is making a significant donation to Durham College’s Building Something Amazing capital campaign to support construction of the college’s new centre for collaborative education. The goal of the centre is to support students and youth in developing their business ideas and plans and getting them to market quickly.

Speaker, I applaud the creativity and foresight of both Durham College and 360insights in supporting students and youth in developing their business ideas and plans—a win-win for all involved and a boost for our local economy

Municipal elections

Ms. Rima Berns-McGown: For the past 48 hours, the phone in my constituency office has been ringing off the hook. Constituents have stopped me on the street and on the boardwalk, they’ve emailed and texted. They have had one message: Please stop Doug Ford and the Conservatives from trampling our fundamental freedoms and our charter rights.

Our charter rights matter. They are the very core and the very foundation of our democracy and of values that we as Canadians hold dear. As elected officials, we have a duty to protect those rights above all else. These are the rights for which people have struggled and protested and fought to leave with us. They’re the rights for which generations of new Canadians have left their homes behind and travelled here, at great cost and great sacrifice, to enjoy and give to their children. They are the standard against which we must always strive to measure ourselves as elected officials, as citizens and as people.

They are a sacred trust. To toss them so carelessly aside is to toss aside the very best of our society. This decision sets a terrifying precedent and we should all be vigilant.

We in the official opposition will do everything we can to defend what every elected official ought to defend: those rights and freedoms that are the most precious to us as Ontarians and as Canadians.

Markham–Unionville community barbecue

Mr. Billy Pang: I am happy to speak about the event I co-hosted with MP Bob Saroya this past month. On August 11, a beautiful and sunny day, MP Bob Saroya and myself had the opportunity to co-host the annual Markham–Unionville community barbecue at Wismer Park in Markham.

We were exceptionally pleased that close to 2,500 constituents joined us, making the barbecue one of the largest annual events hosted by parliamentarians in Canada. Along with many of our constituents, friends and volunteers, fellow MPPs Aris Babikian, Logan Kanapathi for Markham–Thornhill and Michael Parsa for Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill, as well as other local city councillors, were able to join us. We also hosted Andrew Scheer, the federal leader of the official opposition. As you can see, this event for the people included elected representatives from three levels of government working together to make it a great success.

Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I wanted to add that not only did this event include food, family and fun, this was an event that promoted and featured more than 15 different musical or dance performing groups.

Also joining us were the world traditional culture research institute, Canada branch, and STEM Kids Rock, which is a club that inspires the young generation of—

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

Municipal elections

Mr. Faisal Hassan: I rise to speak about the unprecedented use of the “notwithstanding” clause. I’ll be voting against this outrageous and needless attack on the rule of law.

The “notwithstanding” clause has never been used in Ontario, and for a good reason: It is a tool that is undemocratic and opens the door to unprecedented power that can be brought to bear against citizens. Most concerning is that the member from Etobicoke North has explicitly promised to use it again if his agenda violates the Charter of Rights. If this passes, it will send a message that the member from Etobicoke North can violate the charter whenever he so desires.

To maintain the integrity of the rule of law and our democratic institutions, it is high time that we all defend democracy, the rule of law and defend the rights and freedoms of the people of this city, Toronto, and of this great province of ours. Therefore, I will be voting against the use of the “notwithstanding” clause—and for freedom and democracy.

Municipal elections

Mr. Mike Schreiner: My constituency office is being inundated with people expressing their outrage that the Premier is trampling on their charter rights.

Guelph lawyer Cherolyn Knapp wrote:

“To justify using the notwithstanding clause to make a law that is unconstitutional because ‘judges aren’t elected’ is arbitrary and nonsensical. Especially when the law reduces elected representation. You can’t use democracy as a justification to interfere with democracy.”

My constituent Lori wrote:

“Doug Ford may be Premier, but really, nobody is above the law. If he can ignore the courts for Toronto, will he do that to the rest of Ontario?

“As a voter who cares about respect for the law, I am asking you, my MPP, please vote against invoking the notwithstanding clause.”

Mr. Speaker, I want to be very clear to my constituents that I share their outrage. Nobody is above the law. Winning a majority government should not entitle anyone to railroad the Constitution and suspend people’s fundamental rights. The rule of law and the protection of people’s rights are essential to democracy. I want to be clear with my constituents that I know that I will fight for their charter rights and our democracy.

Peterborough Lakers

Mr. Dave Smith: The Mann Cup, since 1932, has been awarded as the box lacrosse championship for Canada. Last night, the Peterborough Lakers won their 16th Mann Cup. I’d like to point out that that is the most of any community in Canada since it has been awarded, since 1932.

We finish this season with a 12-3-1 record. Our playoff record was an outstanding 12-5. In fact, we swept the team from Maple Ridge to win the Mann Cup. If there was any doubt as to whether or not Peterborough is the universe for lacrosse, it was erased last night. Maple Ridge had a single player born in Maple Ridge playing for their team. I’m proud to say that the Peterborough Lakers have 14 of 26 players born and raised in Peterborough, as well as an additional five players from my riding.

I’m very proud to say that the Peterborough Lakers repeated this year—it was their second championship in two years and actually their sixth since 2010.

Municipal elections

Ms. Suze Morrison: Last night, I had the pleasure of attending a public meeting organized by the Corktown Residents and Business Association, a local group of active residents in my riding of Toronto Centre. During the meeting, a Corktown resident named Trisha spoke at length about the government’s move to introduce legislation to enact

section 33. She asked me why this government is choosing to demonstrate a total lack of respect for our judiciary system and ram through legislation that is contrary to the wishes of people in her community.

Mr. Speaker, I have received hundreds of similar emails from constituents across Toronto Centre since Monday afternoon. To quote one of the emails from a constituent named Gina: “Premier, this is outrageous behaviour. Shame on you.”

The reply from the government: crickets.

The ruling of the Superior Court is clear: The Premier and his government have violated the rights of Torontonians. Instead of accepting that it has crossed a line, this government has chosen to push through legislation that suspends sections of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This is not how a healthy democracy operates.

Toronto belongs to Torontonians; make no mistake about that.

Terry Fox Run

Mr. Doug Downey: This weekend, I look forward to joining thousands of fellow Canadians and Ontarians in carrying on the legacy of Terry Fox and his Marathon of Hope. Now in its 38th year, the annual Terry Fox Run takes place in over 9,000 schools and communities across Canada, including Terry Fox Elementary School on Livingstone Street in Barrie.

Since 1992, the support has expanded internationally, with runs taking place from Lima, Peru to Dakar, Senegal to Hong Kong.

Thank you to all the run organizers and participants for your continuing support of Terry’s elusive dream, a cure for cancer.

I would like to thank Michael McDougall, who is chair of the Barrie Terry Fox Run. We know this event and legacy rely on volunteers like him.

I would also like to recognize my friends Alison Stoneman and Jim Butticci, who have organized the Terry Fox Run for several years.

I want to tell you about the incredible efforts of Will Dwyer, a World War II veteran who lives in Barrie. Will was so inspired after watching the Marathon of Hope on television in 1980 that he set a goal to raise $1 million for the Terry Fox Foundation. He is now 93 years old. He is knocking on doors and he is raising money. He is only $200,000 short of his goal. Let’s help him get there.

Please join us on Sunday in Barrie at 9 a.m. It starts at Centennial Park. You can bike, walk, run, stroller or rollerblade and do the 5K or 10K. I hope to see you there.

Steel industry

Ms. Donna Skelly: It’s my pleasure to rise today to recognize the industry representatives and stakeholders who participated in the steel summit in Hamilton on Friday morning.

The summit, which I also attended, took place at a time when US steel tariffs and NAFTA are clearly top of mind. In fact, to underscore that point, the county executive from Erie county, New York, was also there to talk about impacts on both sides of the border.

Having said that, it was most important that steel producers be heard. None spoke more directly than Walter Koppelaar, the CEO and chairman of Walters Group, a family-owned and world-class steel construction company based out of Hamilton. He spoke from the heart about the significant impacts his business is facing, but also about the need for Ontario to be a competitive jurisdiction for his company to invest.

That’s why I am happy that the Premier was proactive in coming to Hamilton just weeks after being elected. He met with the CEO and vice-president of Dofasco. He walked the steel production line. He saw how steel is made. He spoke with workers, and he spoke with business leaders, including Walter. In our discussions that day and with stakeholders since, Ontario’s competitiveness has been a consistent theme.

I want to thank the Premier for his commitment and his tireless work day after day in ensuring that Ontario can and will be the economic engine of Canada once again.

Introduction of Bills

Efficient Local Government Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 pour des administrations locales efficaces

Mr. Clark moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 31,

An Act to amend the City of Toronto Act, 2006, the Municipal Act, 2001, the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 and the Education Act and to revoke two regulations / Projet de loi 31, Loi modifiant la Loi de 2006 sur la cité de Toronto, la Loi de 2001 sur les municipalités, la Loi de 1996 sur les élections municipales et la

Loi sur l’éducation et abrogeant deux règlements.

Interjections.

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): If the official opposition members refuse to come to order, I will start warning.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m warning the member for Waterloo. Come to order. I am warning the member for Waterloo to come to order.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Fife, you are named, and you will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Ms. Fife was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The members will come to order or I will name them one by one.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’d ask the Leader of the Opposition to come to order. I am warning the Leader of the Opposition, if she doesn’t come to order, she will be named.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Horwath, you are named. You will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Ms. Horwath was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I would ask the member for Toronto–Danforth to come to order. The member for Toronto–Danforth will come to order. I am warning the member for Toronto–Danforth that if he doesn’t come to order he will be named.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Tabuns, you have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day. You are named. Mr. Tabuns has been named.

Mr. Tabuns was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I will ask the member for Brampton Centre to please come to order. I am warning the member for Brampton Centre that if she doesn’t come to order she will be named.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Singh, you are named. You will have to leave the chamber now for the duration of the day.

Ms. Sara Singh was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member for Davenport to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Davenport that if she doesn’t come to order she will be named.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Stiles, you are named. You will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Ms. Stiles was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I would ask the member for Essex to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Essex that if he doesn’t come to order he will be named.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Natyshak, you are named, and you will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Mr. Natyshak was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member for Algoma–Manitoulin to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Algoma–Manitoulin that if he doesn’t come to order he will be named.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Mantha, you are named. You now have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Mr. Mantha was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member for Parkdale–High Park to come to order. I will warn the member for Parkdale–High Park that if she continues she’ll be named.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Karpoche, you are named. You will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Ms. Karpoche was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I will ask the member for Hamilton Mountain to come to order. I’m warning the member for Hamilton Mountain that she will be named if she doesn’t come to order.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Miss Taylor, you are named. You will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Miss Taylor was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member from London North Centre to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for London North Centre that you’re about to be named if you don’t come to order.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Kernaghan, you are named. You’ll have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Mr. Kernaghan was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I will ask the member for Brampton East to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Brampton East.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Singh, you are named, and you will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Mr. Gurratan Singh was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m warning the member from Niagara Falls. I’m warning the member from Niagara Falls. Come to order.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Gates, you are named, and you will have to leave the chamber as well for the day.

Mr. Gates was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I would now ask the member for Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas to come to order. I’m going to have to warn the member for Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Shaw, you are named. You will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Ms. Shaw was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’ll ask the member for Niagara Centre to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Niagara Centre to come to order, or he will be named.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Burch, you are named, and you will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Mr. Burch was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member for St. Catharines to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for St. Catharines.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mrs. Stevens, you are named as well, and you’ll have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Mrs. Stevens was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Brampton North will come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Brampton North that he must come to order or he’ll be named.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Yarde, you are named. You’ll have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Mr. Yarde was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Scarborough Southwest: I will ask you to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Scarborough Southwest.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Begum, you are named, and you will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Ms. Begum was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for York South–Weston will come to order. I’m going to warn the member for York South–Weston.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Hassan, you are named. You’ll have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Mr. Hassan was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’ll ask the member for Beaches–East York to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Beaches–East York.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Berns-McGown, you too are named, and you’ll have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Ms. Berns-McGown was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member for Kingston and the Islands to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Kingston and the Islands.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Arthur, you too are named, and you will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Mr. Arthur was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I will ask the member for Mushkegowuk–James Bay to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Mushkegowuk–James Bay.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Bourgouin, you are named, and you will have to leave the chamber as well for the duration of the day.

Mr. Bourgouin was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I am going to ask the member for University–Rosedale to come to order. I ask the member for University–Rosedale to come to order. I’m warning the member.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Bell, you are named, and you will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Ms. Bell was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m asking the member for Spadina–Fort York to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Spadina–Fort York.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Glover, you are named, and you will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Mr. Glover was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member for Toronto Centre to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Toronto Centre.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Morrison, you are named and you will have to leave the chamber as well.

Ms. Morrison was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member for Humber River–Black Creek to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Humber River–Black Creek.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Rakocevic, you have to leave the chamber as well. You are named. You’ll be out for the day.

Mr. Rakocevic was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member for Ottawa Centre to come to order. I’m going to warn the member for Ottawa Centre that you’ll be named if you persist.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Harden, you are named. You’ll have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Mr. Harden was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’d ask the member for Thunder Bay–Atikokan to come to order. I’m going to have to warn the member for Thunder Bay–Atikokan.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Monteith-Farrell, you are named. You will have to leave the chamber for the duration of the day.

Ms. Monteith-Farrell was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’ll ask the member for Sudbury to come to order. I warn the member for Sudbury.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. West, you are named as well. You’ll have to leave the chamber for the rest of the day.

Mr. West was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Mr. Clark has moved that leave be given to introduce a bill entitled

An Act to amend the City of Toronto Act, 2006, the Municipal Act, 2001, the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 and the Education Act and to revoke two regulations, and that it now be read for the first time. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

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

All those opposed will please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1533 to 1538.

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

Mr. Clark has moved that leave be given to introduce a bill entitled

An Act to amend the City of Toronto Act, 2006, the Municipal Act, 2001, the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 and the Education Act and to revoke two regulations, and that it now be read for the first time.

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

Ayes

Anand, Deepak

Baber, Roman

Babikian, Aris

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

Jones, Sylvia

Kanapathi, Logan

Karahalios, Belinda

Ke, Vincent

Khanjin, Andrea

Kramp, Daryl

Kusendova, Natalia

Lecce, Stephen

MacLeod, Lisa

Martin, Robin

Martow, Gila

McDonell, Jim

McKenna, Jane

Miller, Norman

Mulroney, Caroline

Oosterhoff, Sam

Pang, Billy

Pettapiece, Randy

Phillips, Rod

Rasheed, Kaleed

Rickford, Greg

Roberts, Jeremy

Romano, Ross

Sabawy, Sheref

Sandhu, Amarjot

Sarkaria, Prabmeet Singh

Scott, Laurie

Simard, Amanda

Skelly, Donna

Smith, Dave

Smith, Todd

Thanigasalam, Vijay

Thompson, Lisa M.

Tibollo, Michael A.

Triantafilopoulos, Effie J.

Wai, Daisy

Walker, Bill

Wilson, Jim

Yakabuski, John

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

Nays

Armstrong, Teresa J.

Bisson, Gilles

Coteau, Michael

Des Rosiers, Nathalie

Fraser, John

French, Jennifer K.

Gélinas, France

Gravelle, Michael

Hatfield, Percy

Hunter, Mitzie

Lindo, Laura Mae

Mamakwa, Sol

Miller, Paul

Sattler, Peggy

Schreiner, Mike

Vanthof, John

Wynne, Kathleen O.

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 63; the nays are 17.

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

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for a short statement. The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: I rise to introduce, on behalf of the government, the Efficient Local Government Act, 2018. The act introduces new, significant changes to the Municipal Act, 2001, the City of Toronto Act, 2006, and the Municipal Elections Act, 1996.

Provisions in this act declare that the amendments in the act operate notwithstanding sections 2 and 7 to 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and changes the nomination day for the 2018 Toronto municipal election.

Petitions

Gasoline prices

M me France Gélinas: J’aimerais remercier M. Dave Narozanski de Raft Lake, dans mon comté, pour la pétition.

It reads as follows:

“Whereas northern Ontario motorists continue to be subject to wild fluctuations in the price of gasoline; and

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

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

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

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

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

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

Highway tolls

Ms. Jennifer K. French: I have a petition called “Stop the Unfair Tolling of Highways in Durham Region.”

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Highway 412 and the planned Highway 418 are community highways that are primarily used for local traffic travelling to and from Durham region; and

“Whereas Highway 412 and the planned Highway 418 are the only north-south 400-series highways in the entire greater Toronto and Hamilton area that are tolled; and

“Whereas tolls on the 412 have left the highway underutilized, resulting in additional congestion across residential roadways in the region; and

“Whereas residents across Durham region have been advocating for the removal of these unfair tolls since their introduction;

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

“Immediately remove the tolls from the 412 highway and protect the planned 418 highway from any future tolls.”

I wholeheartedly support this, Madam Speaker, affix my name to it and send it to the table with page Corey.

Indigenous affairs

Ms. Laura Mae Lindo: I have a petition entitled “Stop the Cuts to Indigenous Reconciliation.”

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Ontario is situated on the traditional territory of Indigenous peoples, many of whom have been on this land for at least 12,000 years;

“Whereas reconciliation must be at the centre of all government decision-making;

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

“—continue reconciliation work in Ontario by implementing the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission;

“—reinstate the Ministry of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation;

“—work with First Nations leaders to sign co-operative government-to-government accords;

“—support TRC education and community development (e.g. TRC summer writing sessions);

“—support Indigenous communities across the province (e.g. cleaning up Grassy Narrows).”

I fully support this petition, affix my name to it and give it to page Jenny.

Social assistance

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: I’m putting forward a petition, “Scrapping the Basic Income Pilot Project is Not Being ‘Compassionate’ nor ‘for the People.’”

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the priorities of the Conservative government are dragging Ontario backwards leaving people with no basic income to those living on low income;

“Whereas the Conservative government is breaking their promises by scrapping a program they said they would keep;

“Whereas cancelling the Basic Income Pilot project will leave 4,000 people living in Thunder Bay, Lindsay, Hamilton, Brantford and Brant county with no basic income, further deteriorating their health, well-being and living conditions;

“Whereas reducing poverty in the province of Ontario does not work by decreasing the rates for Ontario’s most disadvantaged and marginalized people on Ontario Works and the Ontario Disability Support Program;

“Whereas Ontarians have a right to know about—and have a say in—the government decisions that affect them;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services to continue the Basic Income Pilot project, and to reinstate the regulatory changes that would allow people to keep more of their part-time earnings. If this government is truly for the people, then it should be for all people, including the poor.”

I will sign this petition and give it to page Lawrence.

Long-term care

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Further petitions? The member for Windsor–Tecumseh.

Mr. Percy Hatfield: Thank you, Speaker. It’s a pleasure to see you in the chair this afternoon.

I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

“Whereas quality care for the 78,000 residents of (LTC) homes is a priority for many Ontario families; and

“Whereas the provincial government does not provide adequate funding to ensure care and staffing levels in LTC homes to keep pace with residents’ increasing acuity and the growing number of residents with complex behaviours; and

“Whereas several Ontario coroner’s inquests into LTC homes deaths have recommended an increase in direct hands-on care for residents and staffing levels and the most reputable studies on this topic recommends 4.1 hours of direct care per day;

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

“Amend the LTC Homes Act (2007) for a legislated minimum care standard of four hours per resident per day, adjusted for acuity level and case mix.”

I fully agree. I’ll affix my name and give it to my friend the page to bring up to the desk.

Curriculum

Mr. Mike Schreiner: My constituents have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

“Whereas young children and adolescents across Ontario are being lured into the sex trade and being sexually exploited every day;

“Whereas many youth have no idea what exploitation entails or that they may fall victim to it;

“Whereas prevention is the best strategy in eradicating human trafficking, education and awareness is key to prevention;

“Whereas incorporating mandatory human trafficking education will ensure our province is doing everything legally possible to protect our precious youth;

“Whereas our younger generations must be properly informed about true consent, the reality of sexual exploitation and the danger of online predators...;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to include informed consent, sexual exploitation, the warning signs of human trafficking and the dangers of online predators into the Ontario sexual education curriculum.”

I support this petition. I will affix my name to it and submit it to page David to send to the Clerk.

School facilities

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I’m pleased to present this petition on behalf of my constituents in London West. It calls on the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to fund our schools. It reads:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas too many children are going to school in buildings without proper heating or cooling, with leaky roofs or stairways overdue for repair;

“Whereas after years of Conservative and Liberal governments neglecting schools, the backlog of needed repairs has reached $16 billion;

“Whereas during the 2018 election, numerous members of the Conservative Party, including the current Minister of Education, pledged to provide adequate, stable funding for Ontario’s schools;

“Whereas less than three weeks into the legislative session, Doug Ford and the Conservative government have already cut $100 million in much-needed school repairs, leaving our children and educators to suffer in classrooms that are unsafe and unhealthy;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the Minister of Education to immediately reverse the decision to cut $100 million in school repair funding, and invest the $16 billion needed to tackle the repair backlog in Ontario’s schools.”

I fully support this petition. I affix my name and will give it to page Jen to take to the table.

Social assistance

M me Nathalie Des Rosiers: This petition is entitled “Scrapping the Basic Income Pilot Project is Not Being ‘Compassionate’ nor ‘for the People.’”

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the priorities of the Conservative government are dragging Ontario backwards leaving people with no basic income...;

“Whereas the Conservative government is breaking their promises by scrapping a program they said they would keep;

“Whereas cancelling the Basic Income Pilot project will leave 4,000 people living in Thunder Bay, Lindsay, Hamilton, Brantford and Brant county with no basic income, further deteriorating their health, well-being and living conditions;

“Whereas reducing poverty in the province of Ontario does not work by decreasing the rates for Ontario’s most disadvantaged and marginalized people on Ontario Works and the Ontario Disability Support Program;

“Whereas Ontarians have a right to know about—and have a say in—the government decisions that affect them;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services to continue the Basic Income Pilot project, and to reinstate the regulatory changes that would allow people to keep more of their part-time earnings. If this government is truly for the people, then it should be for all people, including the poor.”

I agree with this petition. I’m affixing my name to it and I’m giving it to page David.

Affordable housing

Ms. Jennifer K. French: I have a petition here from Darlene Olaya and others across my riding for affordable housing.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas for families throughout much of Ontario, owning a home they can afford remains a dream, while renting is painfully expensive;

“Whereas consecutive Conservative and Liberal governments have sat idle, while housing costs spiralled out of control, speculators made fortunes, and too many families had to put their hopes on hold;

“Whereas every Ontarian should have access to safe, affordable housing. Whether a family wants to rent or own, live in a house, an apartment, a condominium or a co-op, they should have affordable options;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately prioritize the repair of Ontario’s social housing stock, commit to building new affordable homes, crack down on housing speculators, and make rentals more affordable through rental controls and updated legislation.”

Madam Speaker, I wholeheartedly agree with this. I support this petition, I affix my name and will send it with page Jonathan to the table.

Long-term care

M me France Gélinas: I would like to thank Mrs. Donna Dool from Paris, Ontario, for sending me this petition. It reads as follows:

“Whereas quality care for the 78,000 residents of (LTC) homes is a priority for many Ontario families; and

“Whereas the provincial government does not provide adequate funding to ensure care and staffing levels in LTC homes to keep pace with residents’ increasing acuity and the growing number of residents with complex behaviours; and

“Whereas several Ontario coroner’s inquests into LTC homes deaths have recommended an increase in direct hands-on care for residents and staffing levels and the most reputable studies on this topic recommend 4.1 hours of direct care per day;”

They petition the Legislative Assembly as follows:

“Amend the LTC Homes Act (2007) for a legislated minimum care standard of four hours per resident per day, adjusted for acuity level and case mix.”

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

Curriculum

Mr. Percy Hatfield: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the health and physical education curriculum empowers young people to make informed decisions about relationships and their bodies;

“Whereas gender-based violence, gender inequality, unintended pregnancies, ‘sexting,’ and HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) pose serious risks to the safety and well-being of young people;

“Whereas one in three women and one in six men experience sexual violence in Canada, and a lack of age-appropriate education about sexual health and healthy relationships leaves children and youth vulnerable to exploitation;

“Whereas one in five parents reported their own child being a victim of cyberbullying; and

“Whereas Doug Ford and the Conservative government is dragging Ontario backward, requiring students to learn an outdated sex ed curriculum that excludes information about consent, sexual orientation, gender identity, sexting, cyberbullying and safe and healthy relationships;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the Ministry of Education to continue the use of the 2015 health and physical education curriculum in schools and move Ontario forward, not backward.”

I agree. I’ll sign and give it to Jonathan to bring up to the desk.

Curriculum

M me France Gélinas: I would like to bring this petition forward from a group from the United Church of Toronto and my good friend Cheri DiNovo.

“In light of the Ministry of Education’s cancellation of two writing weeks with Indigenous educators and elders for the revision of Ontario’s kindergarten through grade 12 curriculum to address residential schools, treaties and Indigenous peoples’ historical and contemporary contributions to Canada, we are compelled to urge the completion of the work according to the original plan and timetable....

“Whereas for six years the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada ... listened to thousands of former students of residential schools and their families testify to the devastating legacy of this national policy of assimilation;

“Whereas the TRC called upon ‘the federal, provincial and territorial governments, in consultation and collaboration with survivors, Aboriginal peoples and educators, to make age-appropriate curriculum on residential schools, treaties and Aboriginal peoples’ historical and contemporary contributions to Canada a mandatory education requirement for kindergarten to grade 12 students’ ... ;

“Whereas on July 15, 2015, Canada’s Premiers indicated their support for all 94 Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action and said they would act on them in their own provinces and territories;

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

“That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario urge the government of Ontario to fully implement such a curriculum for kindergarten through grade 12; and

“Whereas, in 2017, the government of Ontario had taken first steps to fulfill this action with a planned completion date of fall 2018;”

They ask “that the Ontario Ministry of Education immediately complete and implement the comprehensive revision of history, social studies, civics and other curriculum for kindergarten through grade 12 to fulfill the goals cited in call to action 62.i from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report.”

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

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): The time for petitions is over.

Orders of the Day

Cap and Trade Cancellation Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 annulant le programme de plafonnement et d’échange

Resuming the debate adjourned on August 8, 2018, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 4,

An Act respecting the preparation of a climate change plan, providing for the wind down of the cap and trade program and repealing the Climate Change Mitigation and Low-carbon Economy Act, 2016 / Projet de loi 4, Loi concernant l’élaboration d’un plan sur le changement climatique, prévoyant la liquidation du programme de plafonnement et d’échange et abrogeant la Loi de 2016 sur l’atténuation du changement climatique et une économie sobre en carbone.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): The member for Timmins.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: As I had the floor the last time we were debating this, I was making the point of what the government was doing in regard to this whole cap-and-trade thing.

First of all, this government is trying to say that cap-and-trade is a carbon tax. Let’s be really clear here: A carbon tax is a very different thing than cap-and-trade in itself. The first

part is that cap-and-trade is about making sure that the polluter pays. Those who pollute are the ones who pay; those who don’t pollute are the ones who don’t pay. The money raised through cap-and-trade is then used to pay for offsets for those who want to do things that make our environment greener and reduce carbon emissions to our atmosphere and to our water.

For the government to argue that cap-and-trade is the same as a carbon tax, I think, is a big misnomer. A carbon tax is, everybody pays. So when you buy anything, you pay a carbon tax on anything you buy. The money from that goes to mitigation. That is a very different approach, and it’s one that we didn’t support. That’s why New Democrats thought that supporting cap-and-trade, even though there were problems with the bill that the Liberals put forward, was a step in the right direction because it’s about the polluter paying.

Here is the other thing—and I’ve only got about three minutes left in this debate that I want to make. I think it’s very much in keeping with what’s going on in the House today. We know that there are people who are bringing the government to court, yet again, because of the cancelled cap-and-trade. This legislation cancels cap-and-trade, and Greenpeace and others are bringing the government to court in order to uphold the rights of those people who are concerned about the environment when it comes to what the government is doing.

There are a lot of people who are going to be hurt by the cancellation of the cap-and-trade system: a number of businesses and individuals, least of all the environment.

Where is the “notwithstanding” clause going to be used next? The government has said, in its comments through the Premier, that he’s prepared to use the “notwithstanding” clause on more than one occasion. He’s prepared to deny the citizens in Toronto their rights to a free and democratic election, as per the rules that were set out when the election started, by invoking the “notwithstanding” clause.

Is the government going to utilize the “notwithstanding” clause in order to try to override the rights of people who may be found to be just in the courts when the courts rule in favour of those people who are bringing forward the court case against the government for the cancellation of cap-and-trade? Will the government use the “notwithstanding” clause against those people who have been affected by the cancellation of the programs thus far—because we know that there are a number of people who have already brought the government to court for the decisions on the cancellation of other programs.

Will the government use the “notwithstanding” clause in order to deny people’s rights when it comes to that as well?

Will it be equity seekers who will be the next target of the “notwithstanding” clause? Will it be an equity group that is trying to get justice in our society over the issue that is important to them, where all of a sudden the government decides that those equity issues are not right because they don’t fit within the Conservative, right-wing ideology, and that, somehow or other, we’ve got to use the “notwithstanding” clause in order to give people some pause when it comes to their rights under our constitution?

I think this government is going down a slope, Madam Speaker, that is a very dangerous slope. To utilize the whole issue of the “notwithstanding” clause, in the context of the debate around Bill 5 or anything else, is dangerous. You only have to look to people like Bill Davis, Brian Mulroney and other Conservatives who preceded this particular government, to listen to what they have to say about the idea of invoking the “notwithstanding” clause on any legislation at a provincial level.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Questions and comments?

Mr. Doug Downey: I listened to the member from Timmins’ response and comments in trying to parse the difference between cap-and-trade and carbon pricing and different schemes. It makes me think of the Shakespeare line—if I can paraphrase—that a tax by any other name is a tax, and it increases the cost of living in Ontario. The fact that the NDP supported it on a certain principle and not on another principle is kind of hard to parse. I don’t remember there being a big debate about whether they should tax; it was just how they were going to tax.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Do you remember what Shakespeare said about lawyers?

Mr. Doug Downey: I remember what Shakespeare said about lawyers. He actually liked lawyers, and so did Stephen Leacock and other great writers.

Madam Speaker, the important thing here is that we’re talking about people in their homes trying to get by and businesses who are on the edge because the cost of living is so high. This tax inflates everything all the way down the line.

Madam Speaker, I hear from these people. These are people who aren’t necessarily going to come in here and pound the drums. They’re not going to come in here and sit up there and be disruptive, because they are busy working and they’re trying to get by and they are hurting. They are trying to find their way through this very expensive add-on tax that produces absolutely nothing except a slush fund for the previous government.

I guess I would be interested in knowing what the difference is and if there is some way to curb behaviour without adding a tax. But the member from Timmins isn’t offering any of that. This is not a constructive solution. It’s simply beating up our government because we’re trying to find a way to let families get by and solve the problem. There is a smarter way.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Questions and comments?

M me France Gélinas: It was quite interesting to listen to my colleague from Timmins now—it used to be Timmins–James Bay; it’s shortened to Timmins—talk about the cancellation of cap-and-trade. We both represent people in northern Ontario. In many areas in my riding, the only way to heat your house is with electricity or you chop wood. Chopping wood when you’re 85 years old gets to be really tough. So what you do when there is no natural gas—actually, the natural gas goes straight through Nickel Belt but doesn’t connect to us. There is no oil delivery or propane delivery because you’re just too far out in the bush and the roads are not good enough, so you heat with electricity.

What did cap-and-trade do? It helped those people change the windows on their house so that their hydro bill could go down. It helped them insulate their attic so that the cost of heating their house would go down. It helped them in meaningful ways, in ways that were never available before.

When I hear the members say, “Oh, cap-and-trade makes everything more expensive,” well, let me tell you the truth. Once you remove cap-and-trade, the prices of goods are not going to go down. The prices of goods are not based on how much it costs to produce; it’s based on what the market can bear. Now that they know that the market can bear this higher cost, they will continue to sell it to us at that cost. So all of those savings that are supposed to come back into our pockets are dreams in Technicolor from the Progressive Conservatives. It’s not going to happen.

What will happen, though, is that for all of the good people of Nickel Belt who were supposed to finally have enough help to be able to insulate their house, to put the heat pump in, to get alternative sources of heat into their house, those programs are not available to them anymore. Once you are 85 years old and your only alternative is chopping wood, it is too hard, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Questions and comments?

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: I appreciated the comments from the member from Timmins. But during the previous provincial election, there was one theme that kept coming up time and time again at the doors, and that was the cost of living in Ontario and the cost of doing business in Ontario. Between rising hydro rates, the carbon tax and other taxes and costs, people in Ontario were feeling that they were getting pinched and squeezed at both ends. This was something that I heard at every single door.

One of the problems behind that was the failed cap-and-trade system that was introduced by the previous government. When you look at a policy, Speaker, it’s important to look at what is the impact that we’re hoping to have with this policy. The impact from the cap-and-trade program was to seek to reduce emissions in order to stem some of the harmful warming effects of climate change. Unfortunately, the cap-and-trade program was not accomplishing this. It was not going to reduce emissions anywhere near enough to have the kind of impact that would be needed.

To point to one statistic, in BC, a similar jurisdiction, they have a carbon tax of around $30 per metric tonne. Studies say that that would have to be raised by 450%, to $160 per metric tonne. Ontarians and Canadians, by and large, cannot afford that kind of cost.

So we have a policy that is not achieving its objective, but meanwhile, it’s making life more and more expensive.

That’s why I’m incredibly proud to be here today supporting this bill, which is going to help reduce costs for Ontario businesses and families.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Questions and comments?

Mr. John Vanthof: I listened intently to my colleague from Timmins. Where I come from, people are having a hard time making it too. But the issue is, we need to also look at the long-term impact of climate change.

I listened to the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. He did a TV interview, and he was specifically asked, “Are you going to meet the targets?”—the Kyoto targets, which are actually Stephen Harper’s targets. He evaded the question. “Are you going to come up with a climate change plan?” He evaded the question.

Climate change is a real thing. As an example, last week in Englehart, my hometown—we get storms. We actually get kind of boring weather in northern Ontario most of the time. We get really cold winters, and we get a few weeks of hot summer, and the rest is kind of just spring and fall. Last week, we had a rainstorm and a tornado in Kenabeek, but a rainstorm in Englehart that we have never experienced before. We had dry weather all summer, and all of a sudden—and I got calls, because some of our local lakes turned brown and they were wondering why. I said, “Well, one of the reasons is because the laneway from my house washed into the local lake.” It’s happening.

Do you know what? The costs are going to be much greater to the folks like me who have to fix their laneway. They’re going to be much greater.

You guys can be like ostriches with your heads in the sand. Until you come up with a plan, it’s pretty disingenuous to criticize other people’s plans and how they don’t work. That’s pretty disingenuous. Come up with a plan, and then you can criticize the lack of work for other people’s plans. So far, I haven’t seen anything but crickets from that side.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Member, I would ask you to withdraw.

Mr. John Vanthof: Withdraw.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Thank you.

Back to the member for Timmins.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: We did hear about crickets in a certain judgment, but we won’t go there.

I want to pick up on what a few of the members have said. First of all, there is a thing called climate change. We’re seeing it every day. Talk to my good friend the member from Kiiwetinoong, where normally the water levels are not as low as they are now in our rivers in northern Ontario. You can’t even navigate some of the rivers in northern Ontario as a result of the lack of water.

We can’t run winter roads in the way that we used to before. These are land-locked communities with no highways, no dirt roads, nothing to get in but an airplane or a winter road. Our winter road season now is about half of what it used to be 25 years ago.

You talk to the elders. The elders have never seen this before. You talk to a man like Mr. Vanthof, from Timiskaming–Cochrane, who talks about a microcosm of weather in a place called Earlton, where you see a deluge of water to the point that the water is running over the highway through the ditches, and then you’ve got a tornado touching ground inside his riding—something that we never used to hear of before.

We had the most extreme dry summer that we have seen in a long time in northerm Ontario.

Listen, I’ve got to say we like good weather, us in northern Ontario. We certainly deserve some. But I’ll tell you, it has been a hellish summer when it comes to forest fires in northern Ontario, to the chagrin of many.

To deny there’s any climate change, and to say nobody has got a plan because cap-and-trade was wrong, in the absence of their own plan—I have to agree with the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane. I think it’s pretty short.

The other

part is, cap-and-trade is about making the polluter pay. This is the point that the government is trying to gloss over. You can have a carbon tax such as what Mr. Trudeau wants to do—which I don’t support—or you can have a program that says that those who pollute are the ones who are going to pay. That’s what cap-and-trade was all about.

This government at this point has no plan, and they’re getting rid of the only plan that was in place, which I think is pretty darn disingenuous.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): I’m going to ask the member to withdraw.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Disingenuous?

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Yes.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Okay. I withdraw disingenuous.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): I need the member just to withdraw, without explanation.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Okay. I withdraw.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Further debate?

Mr. Doug Downey: I rise today to address Bill 4, the same bill: the Cap and Trade Cancellation Act. This cap-and-trade scheme achieved certain outcomes. It did achieve certain outcomes, but it had nothing to do with the environment. The outcomes had absolutely nothing to do with the environment. It felt good. It felt like we were doing something. It felt like we were achieving something because we said we were going to say the word “environment.” But I think this cap-and-trade scheme is really the fidget spinner of legislation: a lot of motion, no action. It felt like you were doing something, but nothing was happening.

Except it wasn’t benign. It wasn’t benign; it was a tax. So actually something was happening. It was hurting businesses, it was hurting families, it was hurting individuals and it was hurting non-profits. It was hurting all of the pieces of our society that consume anything. It pushed up the cost of absolutely everything: everything that you had to move, everything that you had to grow and everything you had to consume. It pushed up the costs of absolutely everything.

Madam Speaker, this act will retire and cancel the cap-and-trade instruments. It will do several things. It will also protect the people of Ontario from the harm’s way that the previous government threw us into, with the support of the NDP. They threw us into harm’s way because they signed contracts and they did things and they set up a scheme that put the government on the hook.

We will protect our people from that, the people of Ontario. Our government was elected on a mandate to put the people first and make life more affordable for families, make life more affordable for businesses. Madam Speaker, we made the commitment; we were clear. We won the election on June 7, and people said, “Oh, my goodness, they’re going to do what they said. I can’t believe it. Can you imagine?” We actually followed through. We didn’t just say we were going to do it when we got elected; we got back here in this House, Madam Speaker, and we got to work. It’s bill number 4.

We took decisive action and we took it early. We followed through on what we promised we would do. So there shouldn’t be shock and awe and angst about, “Oh, my goodness, it’s happening.” We’ve been talking about this for months. This has been in previous platforms of this government. It was in the election platform of this government, and we made it clear that it was a priority.

We also made clear our promise to oppose the federal government’s plan. They want to impose a carbon tax. They want to impose it on all the people of Ontario and all the people of Canada. Regardless of size, we are going to oppose any movement from the federal government. We are committed to using all available resources to challenge the federal government on this. Their plan to impose a carbon tax on hard-working Ontario families must not go forward. We can’t afford it, we don’t want it, and it does not accomplish anything.

This isn’t about whether climate change exists or not, as the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane suggested. We know climate change is happening. That’s a fact; we accept that. But taxing things and fidget-spinning about them does nothing. The climbdown from the federal government is a bit of an acknowledgement about the serious economic impact that their job-killing carbon tax is having. It took a lot for them to even acknowledge that they had gone too far, so I welcome that and I don’t want to beat them up too much for moving in the right direction.

I would encourage the federal government to move even further in that direction, because we all have the same taxpayer at the end of the day, and surely they’re hearing what we’re hearing.

When I knocked on doors, I heard it loud and clear. I knocked on the door of one lady, and she was on social assistance. She said, “My single biggest issue isn’t the amount I’m getting on social assistance. My single biggest issue is the cost of my hydro. It’s the cost of my consumption, the things that I have and the things that I have to buy, the food that I eat. Those are the concerns.” This carbon tax cap-and-trade program pushed up the costs of all those things.

If the federal government continues to press ahead with its job-killing carbon tax, we will proceed with our plan to cut taxes. We will cut taxes and we will create jobs. We will encourage growth and demonstrate to Ontario that we are in fact open for business.

The orderly wind-down of the cap-and-trade carbon tax will benefit all Ontarians regardless of partisan stripe or job or background or ethnicity or anything. It’s an equality piece. It applies to everybody equally because we all consume all of these things.

The orderly wind-down of cap-and-trade is important. It will provide support for eligible registered participants in the previous program. It wasn’t an immediate “everybody’s out;” we are respecting those who had entered, knowing they will have to deal with certain costs. So that’s built into the bill. It’s a very responsible wind-down, and I just don’t understand why the NDP wouldn’t support that part of it.

Most importantly, we are ensuring no additional cap-and-trade tax costs will be passed on to consumers, because we’re making sure the suppliers aren’t bearing the brunt. I’m going to say that again: The suppliers are part of the wind-down because we don’t want those costs being passed on to consumers anymore. That’s an important piece of what we’re doing.

The average family is going to save $260 per year. Gas prices will go down. Energy costs will be cheaper. People will have more money in their pocket at the end of the day. A carbon tax of any kind makes life more unaffordable for the people of Ontario and is a competitive disadvantage for businesses in Ontario. In this time of trade discussions, a carbon tax is an input cost that serves nobody but our competition. Of course, under the previous government, it served their purposes—but we don’t need to get into that. I think the people have spoken.

In a simplistic way—the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane, I know that he’ll relate to this. For the farm worker who wakes up in the morning and his alarm clock goes off, the cost of running that alarm clock was jacked up. The cost of driving to work was jacked up. The cost of producing the food was jacked up. The cost of moving that food was jacked up. All that happened was the money went into a fund for pet projects for the last government. It didn’t actually save the environment and it ran up the costs for farmers, whether it be dairy o