Ontario Hansard — 2 December 2019 (42nd Parliament, 1st Session)
2019-12-02
Ontario — Debates (Hansard)
role="main" class="main-container container js-quickedit-main-content" id="main-content">
December 2, 2019
42nd Parliament, 1st Session
< Previous sitting day
Next sitting day >
Hansard Transcripts
Votes and Proceedings
Orders and Notices
Hansard Transcript 2019-Dec-02 (PDF)
L134 - Mon 2 Dec 2019 / Lun 2 déc 2019
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO
ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO
Monday 2 December 2019 Lundi 2 décembre 2019
Introduction of Visitors
Richard Alexander Allen
Report, Financial Accountability Officer
Oral Questions
Education funding
Government’s agenda
Religious freedom
Affaires francophones
Education funding
Anti-bullying initiatives
Public transit
Transportation infrastructure
Child care
International trade
Climate change
Recreational boating industry
Anti-racism activities
Forest industry
Highway maintenance
Rural transportation
Introduction of Visitors
Members’ Statements
Affordable housing
Table ronde économique
Dance Evolution
Richard and Pauline Kniaziew
Consideration of Bill 156
Ontario Volunteer Service Awards
City of Brampton
Richard Arthur Shangrow
Hospice palliative care
Reports by Committees
Standing Committee on Estimates
Introduction of Bills
Olympic Floor Cleaning Inc. Act, 2019
Rent Control Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur le contrôle des loyers
Security from Trespass and Protecting Food Safety Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur la protection contre l’entrée sans autorisation et sur la protection de la salubrité des aliments
Motions
Sign-language
interpretation
Petitions
Library services
Access to personal health records
Tenant protection
Endangered species
Water quality
Equal opportunity
Animal protection
Abuse awareness and prevention
Taxation
School facilities
Retail alcohol sales
Affordable housing
Orders of the Day
Legislative reform
The House met at 1030.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We will begin this morning with a moment of silence for inner thought and personal reflection.
Prayers.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I wish to acknowledge this territory as a traditional gathering place for many Indigenous nations, most recently the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation.
This being the first sitting Monday of the month, I’m going to ask the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry to lead us in O Canada.
Singing of O Canada.
Introduction of Visitors
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Today we are honoured to remember and pay tribute to a former member of the provincial Legislature, the late Dr. Richard Alexander Allen, who was the MPP for Hamilton West during the 32nd, 33rd, 34th and 35th Parliaments. Dr. Allen’s family is here with us in the Speaker’s gallery: son Phil Allen and his wife, Rebecca; granddaughters Gemma and Mika; sister-in-law Ruth; nephew Bill and his wife, Colleen; niece Karen and her daughter Crystal; niece Darlene and her partner, Todd; and friends Janet, Trish and Rebecca.
Also in the Speaker’s gallery are Bob Rae, Premier during the 35th Parliament, and David Warner, Speaker during the 35th Parliament and chair of the Ontario Association of Former Parliamentarians.
Please join me in welcoming our special guests who are here this morning.
Ms. Catherine Fife: I’m proud to introduce Steve Mann from Waterloo. Steve generously serves as the Sergeant-at-Arms at our local Legion, Branch 530. Welcome to Queen’s Park, Steve.
Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: I have the pleasure of welcoming to the Legislature today Hospice Palliative Care Ontario, who are here for their lobby day. I hope all members get a chance to stop by their reception and chat with them about the elephant in the room, hospice palliative care.
Miss Monique Taylor: I’m pleased to do my daily welcome to autism families and advocates. Today with us we have Amanda Mooyer, her husband, Evan Lynch, and their son Finn Lynch. Welcome back to Queen’s Park.
Hon. Monte McNaughton: I’m honoured to welcome a great friend of mine, the great mayor for Warwick township, Jackie Rombouts. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Ms. Suze Morrison: It’s an honour and a pleasure to welcome members of the OPSEU Indigenous Circle here to Queen’s Park today. We have Paige Malcolm, Fridmar Facunda, Liisa Kearney, Tammy Carson, Tina Stevens, Lise Dampier, Theresa O’Connor, Crystal Sinclair, Tim Vining and Linda Broer. Welcome to Queen’s Park. It’s certainly a pleasure to have you here.
They joined us in a Kairos Blanket Exercise this morning, which I hear went very well. They are asking members to pledge to adopt June 21 as a statutory holiday for Indigenous Peoples Day.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We appreciate our guests being here, for sure, but I’m going to ask the members to keep their introductions brief and to the point.
Mr. Mike Harris: It’s a rare occurrence that I get to do this, but I’d like to welcome my partner, Kim, to the House today. We got to leave the five kids at home with my mom, graciously, so she’s going to be at Queen’s Park for the next couple of days.
Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: I’d like to welcome two very special guests to the House today. Belinda Marchese is joining us today from Hospice Vaughan. I would also like to welcome Kim Woodland, CEO of Matthews House Hospice in Alliston. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Hon. Sylvia Jones: It is a pleasure for me to welcome and introduce the mayor of Caledon, Allan Thompson. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Mrs. Nina Tangri: It gives me great pleasure to welcome the president and CEO of the Mississauga Board of Trade, David Wojcik.
Also, a group from Life Sciences Ontario and Medtech Canada is coming here today. I’d like to invite everybody to the legislative dining room at 5 p.m. to join them at their reception.
Ms. Jessica Bell: I’d like to introduce the family of the page captain today, Sarah Roff. Aaron Roff, David Roff and Kirsten Doucette are here to recognize their daughter as the page captain today. Thank you for joining us.
Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: I’m pleased to rise in the House today to welcome my friends over in the east lobby. I know that the Minister of Agriculture will be introducing them this afternoon, but I want to give a special shout-out to Kelly Daynard. She is an amazing lady. She is with Farm and Food Care Ontario. She leads by example and she takes great care of my husband on occasion.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I also want to welcome very special guests who we have with us in the Speaker’s gallery today: His Excellency Zvi Vapni, the head of the North American bureau at the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He is accompanied by Ms. Galit Baram, the consul general of Israel at Toronto. Please join me in welcoming our guests to the Legislative Assembly today.
Hon. Ross Romano: I would be remiss, as I look up to the right, not to introduce a good friend of mine from my first by-election campaign, Mr. Jordan Falkenstein.
Richard Alexander Allen
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the government House leader on a point of order.
Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, I believe you will find we have unanimous consent to recognize a former member of provincial Parliament from the riding of Hamilton West, Mr. Richard Alexander Allen, with five minutes being allocated to the government, five minutes being allocated to the official opposition and five minutes being allotted to the independent members, with the independent members going first, followed by the government and finally by the NDP.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to recognize the former member of provincial Parliament from the riding of Hamilton West, Dr. Richard Alexander Allen. Agreed? Agreed.
I recognize the member for Don Valley West.
Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne: Richard Allen, MPP, was a friend and mentor to many Hamilton politicians. MPP Ted McMeekin called him “a local icon” who “modelled the life well lived.” He was described as full of love, insight and passion to his final days.
Allen was born in 1929 and raised in Vancouver, born into a family that loved music and the arts, playing violin and singing. Allen was guided by his deep faith, developing a deep love and compassion for fellow human beings. He was the son of a United Church minister. He moved frequently throughout BC during his childhood as his father was transferred from one pastoral charge to another. That’s when he fell in love with the great Canadian outdoors, spending hours as a boy trekking up the mountains and skiing back down.
He was committed to social justice and political engagement.
He was an avid academic, completing his PhD at Duke University, where he studied the intersection of religion and social reform in Canada. One former deputy minister that I spoke to called him a “scholar first.” He taught history at the University of Regina between 1964 and 1974, and at McMaster between 1974 and 1987.
Allen was married to Nettie, who was the typist for his PhD manuscript, for 52 years. They had two sons, Daniel and Philip.
He was very interested in the separatist factions in Quebec, which inspired a year-long sabbatical adventure for their family in Montreal in 1978-79.
He entered politics in 1982, winning a by-election in the former riding of Hamilton West, defeating Liberal Joe Barbera. He was subsequently re-elected three times: in 1985, 1987 and 1990. Constituents found him to be gentle, highly intelligent and non-judgmental. Allen served as Minister of Colleges and Universities from 1990 to 1993 and as Minister of Skills Development and Minister of Housing in 1994 to 1995 in NDP Premier Bob Rae’s cabinet.
After 13 years as an MPP, he returned to his work as a historical researcher and writer and published a number of books.
When I was looking up information on this—because I didn’t know Richard Allen—I came upon an
article in the Hamilton Spectator that was written in March of this year by my friend Aidan Johnson. He said, “My friend,” meaning Richard Allen, “did not confine his activism to his classroom or his church. For Richard, politics was a way of love, and to love. He entered public life in order to live ‘the social gospel’—the teachings of Jesus in relation to how communities ought to be, in terms of financial policy, health care, education, protection of nature, and concern for the most vulnerable.”
Ontario stands grateful to Richard Allen and to his family for his contributions to Ontario.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the member for Guelph.
Mr. Mike Schreiner: I am honoured to rise today to pay tribute to Dr. Richard Alexander Allen for his distinguished public service. I welcome his children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews and many friends here today.
Dr. Allen’s accomplishments were very impressive: a noteworthy career in academics, particularly his love for history, and his public service, especially his service in this Legislature, and 23 years as an academic, both at the University of Regina and McMaster University.
He was elected MPP for Hamilton West in 1982 and served in this Legislature until 1995. He held appointments as Minister of Colleges and Universities, Minister of Skills Development and Minister of Housing.
I was particularly struck by what a vocal advocate Dr. Allen was for the Meech Lake Accord, and I was especially inspired by the work he did on Indigenous rights. I think he would have been incredibly moved by the Indigenous blanket circle today, given what he talked about and stood for in this House.
Also, his support for the francophone community and francophone services was exceptional.
He was the author of many historical works. As a student of history myself, I was particularly impressed with the work he had done, both on the Prairies and also his advocacy around the social gospel and social justice.
Few people can claim such a meaningful and exceptional life as Dr. Allen, and we can take inspiration from his dedication in making our province and our country a better place. Thank you, Dr. Allen, for your contributions to academics, to politics, to public life, and thank you to Dr. Allen’s family for sharing his gifts with us.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the member for Flamborough–Glanbrook.
Ms. Donna Skelly: I’m honoured to rise today to speak about Dr. Richard Allen and his remarkable legacy.
Dr. Allen was a rare politician. He was the son of a United Church minister, and in part, because of his strong faith, he was deeply rooted in the traditions of social justice. He attained a PhD from Duke University, where he pioneered new ground in the field of Canadian social history. Richard was a professor of Canadian history at McMaster University for 14 years. His students say he was, among other things, a captivating storyteller. Richard Allen wanted more than simply to talk about social justice. He actually lived it, and that’s why he decided to enter the political arena, to live what his family called his “social gospel.”
Richard ran for the NDP in the 1982 Hamilton West by-election and won. When he went door-to-door campaigning, constituents would be surprised to see Richard standing there, a well-known professor from McMaster University, who would listen to them and actually cared about what they had to say. Richard regarded everyone as equal. His friends say this was Richard’s way of doing politics. He was warm and friendly, so interacting with people came naturally to him. Even when a person disagreed with his policies or views, they never walked away feeling animosity. He made them feel valued.
It was that warmth and friendliness and empathy for people that won the hearts and minds of the constituents of Hamilton West. He had compassion, but also integrity. Given his academic achievements, Richard certainly had the right to boast, but he never did. He was a humble man. He served his constituents in this down-to-earth manner for 13 years, including five years as a cabinet minister in the Bob Rae government.
Richard won the admiration and loyalty of many people who worked in the public service at Queen’s Park with over the years. He did his homework and he listened to Ontarians. Staff said he was interested in their opinions. He would ask them intelligent, respectful and probing questions. He had a strong belief in the connection between faith and social action. Richard was always a thoughtful and deeply committed advocate for social justice.
As Minister of Housing, Richard oversaw the building of much-needed social housing throughout the province. He wanted to make a difference in people’s lives and cared deeply about the most vulnerable, such as those who were homeless and living in poverty. As chair of the board of Wesley Urban Ministries, he became a voice for those he wanted to help most. To this day, Wesley Urban Ministries is one of the leading providers of support to low-income and marginalized people in Hamilton.
Richard was also a renowned and celebrated author. In his later years, his body was failing, but his mind was sharp. His final book was published just two months before he died at the age of 90. In his private life, he adored his wife, Nettie, as well as his two sons, Philip and Daniel, and he loved animals, especially his three dogs.
Former NDP MPP Evelyn Gigantes remembers Richard for his decency and intelligence. Jean Poirier, a former Liberal MPP, said this when Richard passed away, “Ontario has lost a most honourable person, who never stopped caring for his fellow human beings.” There was a common refrain when those who knew Richard were describing him: “Richard Allen made our lives so much better for having known him.”
To his family and friends sitting in the gallery: Thank you for sharing your father, your grandfather and your friend Richard Allen with all of us.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Next I’ll recognize the member for Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas.
Ms. Sandy Shaw: Many of us in this House had the distinct honour and privilege to have known Dr. Richard Allen. I was one of these lucky people.
Richard was first elected as MPP for Hamilton West in 1982. He went on to serve in the 32nd, the 33rd, the 34th and the 35th Parliaments. Under Premier Rae, Richard served as a cabinet minister.
We are here to honour Richard Allen. He was a remarkable historian, a fearless politician and universally described as a wise, kind, caring, compassionate person. But more than all, he was a loving and dedicated husband and father.
Richard and Nettie, his loving wife of 52 years, were an iconic duo in Hamilton. Together, they built a life dedicated to a steadfast love for one another and compassion for their fellow humans.
Richard was the son of a United Church minister, and undoubtedly this influenced his life’s work. His first book, The Social Passion: Religion and Social Reform in Canada, explored what Richard believed to be an essential connection between faith and social action. This is a tradition that goes back to important CCF figures like J.S. Woodsworth and Tommy Douglas.
As an MPP, Richard himself wasn’t above a little fire and brimstone. From Hansard, in 1990, Mr. Allen said, “Yesterday in the assembly the Treasurer attacked my activities and questions on behalf of the hungry, homeless and poor in this province as a mindless crusade....
“Much in politics may be a careful balancing of competing interests, but for me and my party, both religious and humanistic convictions tell us that the condition of the poor is non-negotiable.... There is no trade-off between infants on watered formula and the paying down of the provincial debt.
“The Treasurer in his budget has put the rich and the poor on the scales together. God help him.”
Richard was many things, but he was the feistiest campaigner that you would ever meet. The first indication in Hamilton that it was election season was the appearance of an orange sign on the lawn of his Dundas cottage, the beautiful home that he shared with his wife, Nettie. Whether Richard was on the ballot or not, Richard was there, knocking on doors, making calls.
During my provincial campaign, Richard was more than happy to make the scene. He would show up at my campaign office in a cab, ready to throw down for us again. On election night, he showed up proudly sporting a vintage T-shirt that he had from one of his campaigns in the 1990s.
Richard’s last visit to Queen’s Park was to watch my inaugural speech. Afterwards, he gave me some advice, and we sat together in my office and he described the pride that he felt in what he was able to achieve as an MPP and as a cabinet minister under Premier Rae. As word got out that Richard was here, my office slowly filled up, and Richard held court. He was at his best. He was a spellbinding storyteller, and there was a sense of awe in the room as he described his experience and his conviction about a life dedicated to others.
I had the pleasure to meet with Richard’s family at his funeral at Westdale United Church in Hamilton. The love and admiration they have for Richard is remarkable.
To Richard’s family, to his sons, Daniel and Philip, to Philip’s partner, Rebecca Richardson, and to his two granddaughters, Gemma and Mika, whom he adored: We share in your great loss.
Richard was always busy, as has been described. His most recent book was published in his 90th year, just before his death, so I think it’s only fitting to end this tribute by quoting from this book, Beyond the Noise of Solemn Assemblies: The Protestant Ethic and the Quest for Social Justice in Canada:
“For my graduate students from whom I have learned so much—then and since
“I hate, I despise your feasts,
“And I take no delight in your solemn assemblies
“Take away from me the noise of your songs
“To the melody of your harps I will not listen
“But let justice roll down like waters
“And righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.”
Dr. Richard Allen.
Applause.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I want to thank the members for their eloquent tributes in memory of Dr. Richard Allen and his life of public service and faith.
Report, Financial Accountability Officer
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that the following document has been tabled: a report entitled Expenditure Monitor 2019-20, from the Financial Accountability Office of Ontario.
Oral Questions
Education funding
Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is to the Premier. Parents and students are bracing themselves for a day of job action that will close hundreds of schools across the province on Wednesday. The Ford government is plowing ahead with classroom cuts that mean larger classes, and forcing students into mandatory online learning courses.
The Ford government insists that they’re on the side of parents. They point to the millions of parents they heard from in consultations. Can they tell us how many parents approved of their plans for larger classes in those consultations?
Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Minister of Education.
Hon. Stephen Lecce: The government is absolutely focused on getting a voluntary agreement with our educator unions, because we want to keep kids in class.
What we have done is listened to those we have served, and by doing so—we announced just weeks ago that we will move the classroom-size provincial average for secondary students from 28 to 25. We have listened to parents when we made a move to move the number of online courses from four to two. We made a move when we more than doubled the mental health funding envelope, to ensure the support for those in need. We have demonstrated that we’re listening to those that we serve.
What we also have seen, notwithstanding the moves the government has made, is a continuation by teacher unions to escalate, irrespective of the good-faith bargaining and the moves we have made. That is regrettable.
We believe strikes hurt kids. The question for the member opposite is, do you stand with parents against escalation by teacher unions?
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: According to a report from Global News yesterday, the government’s consultation with parents had some pretty conclusive results. Approximately 70% of parents felt an increase in class sizes would negatively impact students’ learning. That means that an increase from 22 to 28, not to 25, like the minister said in his response.
A majority of parents opposed the mandatory e-learning for students—again, not four classes down to two, but zero up to two. They still oppose it, Speaker.
Why is the Ford government picking a fight with teachers to implement cuts that parents clearly, clearly told them that they don’t want?
Hon. Stephen Lecce: Mr. Speaker, 100% of parents want kids to be in class on Wednesday, and our government agrees with them.
The parents of this province want all parties to be reasonable. That is why we tabled a move of the provincial average from 28 to 25. It’s why, in online courses, we moved from four to two. It’s why we increased support for STEM and mathematics in the class, and doubled the mental health portfolio.
For 203 consecutive days, the teachers unions have not made a single substantive change. They have been absolutely dogmatic. The continuation here is with respect to their emphasis on getting a $1.5-billion increase in salary. That seems to be the fundamental issue at the table.
We will continue to work in good faith to get deals, because parents in this province deserve predictability, and children should be in class on Wednesday and every day thereafter.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The final supplementary.
Ms. Andrea Horwath: The fundamental issue is that parents and educators and educational workers in this province are fighting to save our public education system and the quality of that education system.
Let’s be clear: The government held a formal consultation with thousands of parents. Parents clearly and unequivocally rejected larger class sizes, fewer courses and mandatory online learning. The Ford government not only plowed ahead with those cuts, but they hid the results from that very consultation and claimed that parents actually supported the cuts that they had clearly already rejected. Now the Ford government is ready to close every school in the province to keep those cuts in place.
Will the government release the full results of this consultation today, or, better yet, reverse the classroom cuts?
Hon. Stephen Lecce: The government’s aim is to be reasonable to get deals, as we did with CUPE just a month ago. But Mr. Speaker, for 203 consecutive days the teachers’ unions have not made any substantive change. The onus is on all parties to be reasonable. The government has listened to those we serve. We have listened to parents and students. We made significant changes to our bargaining position. What has not transpired is any change at all by the teachers’ unions, and that is regrettable.
We are in this position because they are escalating, irrespective of the Premier, who is in the chair. You could be a New Democrat, a Liberal or a Progressive Conservative. What unites them is escalation by teachers. We oppose, and I ask the members opposite to stand with parents and oppose, this escalation.
Government’s agenda
Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also to the Premier. But let’s be clear: We’re in this position because this government picked a fight with education workers in this province.
This question, Speaker, is about the government’s priorities as Canada’s Premiers meet in Mississauga today. While families in Ontario are worried about hallway medicine and the high cost of drugs, Ontario’s Premier says that he’s opposed to efforts to create a national pharmacare plan. Instead, he wants flexibility on how health care dollars from Ottawa can be spent. Presumably, that means the freedom to not spend them on health care.
Will the Ontario Premier be recruiting other provincial leaders to oppose the plan that would make prescription drugs more affordable for the people of this great province?
Hon. Christine Elliott: I can assure the leader of the official opposition that the health and safety of Ontario patients and making sure that prescriptions are affordable are of utmost priority to us.
We have heard various things from the federal government. We’re not exactly sure what they’re going to come forward with since the election, since the report that was written by Dr. Hoskins, which is very broad and all-encompassing, or whether it’s something more narrow than that.
I have had one conversation with the new federal Minister of Health. I’ve indicated to her that the priorities for us right now are making sure that we can afford and deal with the orphan and rare-disease drugs that are increasing our health costs by dramatic levels each and every year.
I think there’s a lot that we can focus on. I look forward to first meeting with the provincial-territorial leaders in health care, and with the new federal minister, to discuss this.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question?
Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, the best way to make drugs universally affordable to all Ontarians is through a universal pharmacare plan. I would ask the minister to take that into consideration.
The Premier has also made a name for himself across the country by leading the war on the environment and fighting any effort to put a price on pollution or address the climate crisis. So will Ontario’s Premier be recruiting other provincial leaders to join his lawsuit against the federal government’s climate plan?
Hon. Christine Elliott: Minister of the Environment.
Hon. Jeff Yurek: Thanks very much to the member opposite.
We just celebrated our one-year anniversary of our Made-in-Ontario Environment Plan, Mr. Speaker. We’ve taken drastic steps over the last year to lay the groundwork to reach our emissions target of 30% below 2005 levels by 2030.
Later on today, I will be meeting with the federal Minister of Environment. We’re going to have the discussion about our performance standards that we’ve put forward toward the ministry. That will allow us to ensure that the heavy polluters of this province are paying their fair share with regard to their pollution, but also working with them to lower their emissions so that we can start tackling the emissions in our province.
The leader opposite has no plan on the environment, Mr. Speaker. All they talk about is taxes. They have zero plans for the environment. I’m looking forward for them to join in the conversation and give us some ideas other than a carbon tax that is going to do nothing but cripple low- and medium-income people throughout this province.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Final supplementary?
Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, I dare say that was probably a pretty sad celebration.
As Ontario parents are wondering whether schools will stay open all week, the Premier has been making a play for the national stage. But instead of putting forward a vision that would actually help Ontario families who are struggling with the cost of drugs or would put Ontario at the front of the clean energy economy, the Ford government’s vision for Canada is a country with no pharmacare and no plan for climate change. Does this Ontario Premier really think that this is the leadership that Ontario families deserve?
Hon. Jeff Yurek: I can take further our announcement of just last week of creating our climate change advisory panel, for which we’ve taken experts from across this field.
Mr. Speaker, not only are we dealing on the environment with regard to reducing our emissions; we’re also taking care of our land, air and water. We’re ensuring that we start dealing with plastics. Right now we just started consultations with municipalities, Indigenous communities and the people of this province in order to change our recycling programs and remove plastics out of our landfills, move plastics out of our environment and create a new circular economy that is going to recycle those plastics and create a better economy for the province.
We announced our impact assessment analysis throughout the province, so we know what key areas we can plan for down the road, so municipalities and Indigenous communities can actually focus on what climate change is going to be doing to the region, so they can make smart investments. That does include new technology, but it also includes innovative ways that individual people in this province can move forward to clean up our environment. I am proud of our plan going forward, as is the government of this province.
Religious freedom
Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also to the Premier. Last week, this Legislature unanimously passed a motion opposing Quebec’s Bill 21 and calling on the government of Ontario to formally request that Quebec repeal the law. The support for that motion was welcomed by groups like the World Sikh Organization, the Toronto Board of Rabbis and the National Council of Canadian Muslims.
However, immediately after confirming their support for the motion, the Ford government made it clear they would not be raising these serious concerns about human rights with the government of Quebec. Can the Ford government confirm that they have not formally communicated the views of this Legislature to the government of Quebec?
Hon. Christine Elliott: To the government House leader.
Hon. Paul Calandra: As I’ve said last week and on a number of occasions, the Premier was very clear on this: A law like this would never have a place in the province of Ontario. As the Leader of the Opposition knows full well, this Legislature was unanimous not once but twice on Bill 21.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question?
Ms. Andrea Horwath: Unfortunately, I have not had any light shed on the question that I asked, Speaker. For people who had dared to hope that they’d see some action when this Legislature unanimously passed this motion, the Ford government’s refusal to stand up for basic rights and freedoms is a betrayal.
Last week we had the embarrassing sight of Ontario’s Premier insisting he would not discuss human rights at a meeting with Quebec’s Premier, only to learn that Quebec’s Premier planned to raise the issue himself. This Legislature asked the Premier to stand up for human rights. Why didn’t he?
Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, this party has always stood up for human rights, and so has this Premier. This Premier was very quick to suggest that a bill like this would have no place in the province of Ontario. This caucus and this Legislature did that on two occasions, but the member opposite continues to play politics on something that is very important to all members of this Legislature.
We talked about the members of this Legislature—the first turban-wearing Sikh to become a cabinet minister. These are things that are important. But I say to the member opposite that if the member opposite is so wanting to play politics on this, may I suggest that she call her former deputy leader, the current leader of the New Democratic Party in Ottawa, and see what his position is and ask him to help on this.
On this side of the House, we will continue to stand up for those people who need our help, and going forward, of course, we’re going to continue to work on building a strong economy for all Ontarians.
Affaires francophones
M me Natalia Kusendova: Dans mon comté de Mississauga-Centre, comme partout ailleurs en Ontario, les gens travaillent durement pour gagner leur pain, et ils ont élu un gouvernement qui a à coeur d’appuyer leur travail et les différents secteurs d’industrie dans cette province. C’est pourquoi j’étais très contente de constater l’orientation que le ministère des Affaires francophones a empruntée depuis plus d’un an : celle d’exploiter le potentiel bilingue et francophone de la province à des fins d’enrichissement collectif.
Cela s’ajoute aussi au grand projet d’appui à la fondation d’une université par et pour les francophones dans la grande région de Toronto. Vraiment, c’est un bon moment pour être francophone et francophile, comme moi, en Ontario.
Est-ce que la ministre des Affaires francophones peut nous parler de la table ronde économique qu’elle a présidée la semaine dernière à Toronto?
La semaine dernière, avec mon adjointe parlementaire, Gila Martow, et mon conseiller économique, M. Glenn O’Farrell, nous avons eu une table ronde très positive, très constructive et prometteuse au Centre ontarien des investissements et du commerce à Toronto.
Ce fut l’occasion d’une prise de contact et d’échanges sur les thèmes du réseautage entre les chefs de file économiques de la francophonie de Toronto, du potentiel économique francophone et des voies d’avenir pour bien exploiter ce potentiel au profit de tous les Ontariens à travers des mesures de développement économique harmonisant les efforts du gouvernement provincial et des acteurs économiques de la société civile.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question?
M me Natalia Kusendova: Je remercie la ministre des Affaires francophones pour sa réponse et pour son travail dur avec la communauté francophone en Ontario.
Est-ce que la ministre peut nous parler davantage de la rencontre qu’elle a eue avec les leaders d’affaires francophones la semaine dernière et le sens des échanges qui ont eu lieu dans notre province?
L’hon. Caroline Mulroney: En tant que ministre des Affaires francophones, je veux aussi que la communauté franco-ontarienne se développe au maximum et atteigne tout l’espace de force et de rayonnement économique dont elle est capable—avec sa fougue et son audace—pour le bien de l’Ontario.
Ce que nous avons pu palper lors de cette table ronde, c’est, je dirais, une sorte de patriotisme économique chez des francophones emblématiques de divers milieux d’affaires, une volonté de tabler sur des secteurs économiques où les francophones sont déjà présents, ou où ils pourraient y aller, pour exporter des produits et des services vers des marchés francophones, comme le Québec et à l’étranger.
Nous sommes là pour leur faciliter la tâche, que ce soit en les réunissant ensemble, en les libérant du fardeau de la paperasserie quand c’est possible et en cherchant à utiliser des leviers existants de l’État judicieusement, pour aller plus loin, pour créer des emplois et faire prospérer davantage la province et la francophonie ontarienne.
Education funding
Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is for the Minister of Education. After many, many months of trying to bury the truth about their plan to fire teachers and cut classes—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member to withdraw and rephrase the question.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Withdraw.
It turns out that the government’s own consultation documents confirm what Ontarians have been saying all along. No one thinks that this government’s plan to jack up class sizes is a good idea. They never asked for it, they don’t want it, period. It’s clear from the consultation that this government doesn’t care what Ontario families think.
Mr. Speaker, why does this government think they know better than the thousands of teachers, students and families who just want the best for their kids?
Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you to the member opposite. Mr. Speaker, all parties at the table must be reasonable, and this government has demonstrated a reasonable posture and a focus on keeping students in class. It is the impetus for why we made a move to go from a 28 provincialized average to 25. It’s why we went from four online learning courses to two. It’s why we’re preserving the lowest classroom size in the nation for early years.
Mr. Speaker, we are doing this by investing in public education. What we expect is for all parties to be reasonable. For 203 consecutive days, the unions have made no change at all to their position, not a single substantive move, and I think that is unacceptable. I think strikes hurt kids. The question for the member opposite is: Do you agree?
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question?
Ms. Marit Stiles: Mr. Speaker, when you cut your cuts in half, that doesn’t make an improvement. Class sizes aren’t up for negotiation. Parents don’t want it, students don’t want it. You’re using students as pawns in your negotiations.
While this government continues to—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. Stop the clock. The member for Davenport has the floor. She’s close to me. I should be able to hear her; I need to be able to hear her. I would ask the House to come to order.
Start the clock. Member for Davenport.
Ms. Marit Stiles: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess I’m getting under their skin.
While this government continues to escalate their attacks on teachers and the education system, the minister has tried to tell us that his terrible plan for class size hikes was just part of some negotiation strategy. Look at where we find ourselves. Everyone knows that when your starting point is firing 10,000 teachers and cancelling tens of thousands of classes, it’s not a negotiation, it’s a hostage situation.
Speaker, no amount of spin is going to get them out of this. Why won’t this minister come clean with Ontarians, admit that their plan to force teachers out of their jobs and force students into crammed—
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you.
Minister to reply.
Hon. Stephen Lecce: Our government is absolutely laser-focused on getting deals with all tables because we want to keep the children of this province in class. That is why, Mr. Speaker, our government made a decision to move the provincial average from 28 to 25. It’s why we cut the online course number from four to two; we brought that down. It’s why we doubled our investment in mental health. It’s why we increased expenditure to the highest levels ever recorded under public education.
What every member of this Legislature should agree with is the premise that all the parties have to be reasonable; only one has been, and it’s this government. The unions have opted for 203 consecutive days to not make any significant or substantive change to their position. That is unacceptable for families. They want all the parties to be reasonable because we need to work together to keep the children of this province in class. Count on our government to continue to be student-centric and to fight to ensure that kids stay in class every day.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The next question: The member for Don Valley West.
Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne: My question is for the Minister of Education. Mr. Speaker, across Ontario today—
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Don Valley West, I apologize. I’m not able to recognize you at this time.
The next question. The member for Scarborough Centre.
Anti-bullying initiatives
Miss Christina Maria Mitas: I’m going to keep the Minister of Education question train going.
Mr. Speaker, as a mother and as an educator, I know how devastating bullying can be on a child. We know that the longer a child is bullied, the more likely they are to develop physical, emotional and psychological scars that can last a lifetime. In several tragic cases, constant harassment and bullying has prompted students to take their own lives. This is unacceptable. We urgently need to learn from these incidents and to take action to protect the children of Ontario. Could the Minister of Education please tell the House about some of the steps our government is taking to combat bullying in our schools?
Hon. Stephen Lecce: Speaker, allow me to thank the member from Scarborough Centre for her leadership in combatting bullying, on behalf of all parents and students in this province. I was excited to stand with her and with the member from Thornhill, as well as with the Associate Minister of Children, as we work together to combat the scourge of bullying that is so clearly growing within our schools in every region of Ontario.
We announced a five-point plan. It is the first step in our commitment to combat the growing escalation of bullying in our schools. In the health and physical education curriculum, Mr. Speaker, we put a major focus on removing the visible and invisible differences that can manifest in class. That starts with respect to help young people, be it in the context of body shaming, LGBT community children, as well as so many others who face a significant level of bullying, to know with confidence they should see themselves in their curriculum. Mr.
Speaker, we put a nearly $250,000 investment to help combat bullying in the context of de-escalation training, and we’ll continue to support the safety of every child in this province.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.
Miss Christina Maria Mitas: As a former teacher with the Toronto District School Board, I was honoured when the minister recently asked me to advise him and the government on educational matters, with a special emphasis on bullying prevention. As a former educator, I have seen the negative effects that bullying can have first-hand. Bullying is an age-old and global problem that requires a multi-faceted approach involving the collective work of children, parents and educators—really that requires the work of anyone who cares about our children here in Ontario.
First and foremost, though, Mr. Speaker, we need information—information so that we know what is happening, and can act decisively and accordingly. So, I ask the minister: What is the government doing to reach out to our students in order to learn more about the scourge of bullying?
Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you to the member opposite. Mr. Speaker, indeed we want to ensure students have a voice. That’s why we announced a province-wide survey to empower them to share their voice, their narrative, and to help the government better understand the pervasive nature of this issue. It’s why, Mr. Speaker, when we held a round table with the member from Scarborough Centre and with students to hear from the front line what they want more of from our government, we had an eye-opening discussion where they wanted more online. They wanted a survey.
They wanted a better review of our reporting set practices and our enforcement. They wanted more support for educators in de-escalation training. Mr. Speaker, all of these initiatives are all part of our plan to support our kids, to make sure every single child in this province, irrespective of heritage, faith, orientation, age, place of birth or colour of skin can see themselves, with confidence, reflected in our schools.
Public transit
Mr. Joel Harden: As nauseating as it was to hear that exchange on bullying from a government currently bullying education workers—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member to rephrase his introduction to his question.
Mr. Joel Harden: This is to the Deputy Premier. On Saturday, our office in Ottawa Centre hosted a town hall to discuss public transit. Over 100 people turned out to share their ideas and frustration with the state of Ottawa’s transit system, and our light rail transit system in particular. Since its launch in September, the LRT has repeatedly ground to a halt due to mechanical failures, leaving thousands of people stranded. To make matters worse, Speaker, we’ve heard from riders living downtown whose commutes have lengthened because of route changes and reductions in buses that have accompanied the LRT’s launch.
Speaker, as the MPP for Ottawa Centre, I was excited by the launch of the LRT, but its first two and a half months have been nothing short of a debacle. More than two weeks ago, this government pledged that help was on the way, but since then we’ve heard nothing. Premier, what can we count on for actual support from your government, beyond words?
Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Minister of Transportation.
Hon. Caroline Mulroney: We have been following very closely the situation in Ottawa with respect to the LRT and we’ve been speaking closely with our colleagues in our caucus who represent the Ottawa area. Obviously, there are a lot of difficulties in operating the LRT. The Ministry of Transportation reached out to Ottawa to see how we can support their efforts.
It’s a municipally run project. We want to be respectful of their jurisdiction with respect to this project, and at the same time offer the support and technical aid that is necessary. We’re still discussing this with the city of Ottawa, and we will have more to say once a resolution has been reached.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question?
Mr. Joel Harden: At our town hall in Ottawa Centre, we heard story after story about unreliable schedules, overcrowding and delays. Riders are at their wits’ end, and many are giving up, sadly, on public transit altogether. We heard one participant who told us how she has to walk extraordinary distances everywhere now. Others are forced into winter cycling, without a sense of what that requires. Another simply said they were stranded from picking up their kids at the end of the day. These are real, meaningful hardships, not even counting people with disabilities who face even harsher impacts.
Speaker, public confidence in this LRT cannot get much lower, but the public-private partnership model supported by the previous Liberal government and this government right over here is leading to secrecy and problems for people in our profession of politics getting to the bottom of this problem.
The province has invested $1.2 billion for the second phase of the LRT. We want to know in Ottawa: How are you working to make sure bad mistakes aren’t repeated? How are you—
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you.
The Minister of Transportation to reply.
Hon. Caroline Mulroney: As the member knows, this is a municipally run project. The province has committed funding to phases 1 and 2 of the Ottawa LRT project, and we are very pleased to be able to support the transit needs in the city of Ottawa in this way. But the province, while it has committed funding, respects the jurisdiction of the municipality to operate the LRT.
That said, we have reached out and officials are working closely with the city of Ottawa to see how we can help them resolve the issues, because we don’t want to see transit riders in the city of Ottawa stranded. We’re continuing to work with them and when we have been able to come to some agreement with the city of Ottawa on this, we will have more to say. In the meantime, we are supporting their efforts. It is a municipally run project.
Transportation infrastructure
Mr. Mike Harris: My question is to the Minister of Infrastructure. Minister, this summer it was my pleasure to have you join my colleagues and me in Waterloo region to announce Ontario’s investments in transit infrastructure. I want to also acknowledge that Premier Ford visited to further support our government’s investment in transit for the region.
Our government is investing more than $61 million to support transit and road projects that will see improved service for the people living in Waterloo region. All three levels of government must work together to ensure these important infrastructure investments are made across the province, and I believe the federal government has already indicated support for these important projects.
Can the minister advise if there are any other transit projects that the Waterloo region can look forward to in the near future?
Hon. Laurie Scott: I would like to thank the member from Kitchener–Conestoga for his question and for his representation of his riding and his region.
Ontario is investing more than $61 million for transit infrastructure that will improve services to the residents of the Kitchener and Waterloo area. In addition to the transit operations facility, Ontario is investing more than $9 million, which will be used to add or replace conventional and specialized vehicles in the fleet. Our investments also include funding for the building of cycling and pedestrian bridges and trails that will lead to better integration of transit services.
Our government is working and will continue to work with our municipal partners, families and businesses to make smart investments in our infrastructure and keep it reliable for the people of Ontario. These projects were brought forward as priority projects by our municipal partners and are supported by the region of Waterloo, Mr. Speaker. And there will be more to come.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.
Mr. Mike Harris: Thank you to the minister for your continued support for these infrastructure projects, which are so important to the people of Kitchener–Conestoga and Waterloo region.
Minister, in addition to these transit projects, our government is providing funding for road and bridge infrastructure. I know that some of those investments include more than $469,000 in rehabilitation of the Glasgow Street North bridge in Woolwich, and more than $1.1 million for the replacement of a bridge over the Nith River in Wilmot township. These road and bridge projects, together with the transit infrastructure projects, will benefit families, students and businesses throughout the area.
Minister, I know that some of the region’s projects have received final federal approval, while others are still waiting. Is the minister able to provide an update on these remaining projects?
Hon. Laurie Scott: The member is quite right again. Eight of the 17 projects that the province nominated through the ICIP funding agreement have in fact received final approval and can now proceed. While there are nine pending approval, I remain optimistic that the new federal government in Ottawa will move quickly to approve these projects, thus allowing the municipality to move forward.
It’s worth noting that a number of these projects brought forward by municipal officials will directly benefit university and college students in Kitchener-Waterloo. Over $1.2 million of provincial money will be put toward the building of a shelter canopy in the University of Waterloo and over $2.8 million for the expansion of transit service at Conestoga College. Mr. Speaker, once completed, these projects will reduce congestion, improve commutes, and connect neighbourhoods, businesses and people to their jobs.
Child care
Ms. Doly Begum: My question is to the Premier. Jean Hamlyn Day Care Centre in Dufferin county is facing closure, with 65 daycare spots at risk. A report to Dufferin county council states that the child care centre is already running at a deficit, and recommends shutting the centre down entirely as a result of further funding cuts by this government.
Speaker, Jean Hamlyn Day Care Centre already has a wait-list for new kids, so my question is: With a shortage of quality, affordable child care spaces in Ontario, why is this government cutting funding for child care and forcing centres to close?
Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Minister of Education.
Hon. Stephen Lecce: On the contrary, the government is investing over $2 billion to build tens of thousands of child care spaces in every region of Ontario, in addition to a $2-billion allocation to build 30,000 new child care spaces, 10,000 in new schools and 20,000 in existing schools.
Also, we’re the only political party in this Legislature that believes in parental choice for child care. The member opposite does not support it, and her leader does not support it—as do the Liberals. They support a one-child-fits-all approach; we do not. We believe parents are the best decision-makers about their children’s child care.
That’s why we introduced the child care tax credit to provide over $1,000, on average, per child under 18 for a middle-income family in this province. We’re providing investment. We’re expanding choice. We’re building new spaces, and we’re making child care affordable after the highest child care costs after 15 years of Liberal government, Mr. Speaker.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.
Ms. Doly Begum: Mr. Speaker, it sounds to me like this government is irresponsibly spending people’s hard-earned dollars, and yet the people of this province are struggling. These parents have been told to look for day care options elsewhere in Dufferin county. For families in Orangeville, that means finding new private day care spots some 25 kilometres away, in Shelburne or Grand Valley.
High-quality, affordable child care should be available for parents in every community in Ontario. Will this government stop their reckless cuts and clearly irresponsible spending so that parents in Orangeville and across the province don’t lose any more daycare spaces in their communities?
Hon. Stephen Lecce: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite will know that our government is investing over $2 billion to build over 30,000 new child care spaces to provide more choice for families in this province.
The specific example cited is a decision exclusively made by the municipality. However, the Solicitor General of this province was proud just weeks ago to announce, in the French board in her riding, new child care spaces for families in her community.
We’re doing that because we believe in choice. We believe in both institutional day care and providing a child care benefit for every middle-class family who’s eligible for up to 75% of expenses, putting over $1,000 per child in the pockets of working families. Mr. Speaker, this is the approach of our government: more choice, more options and more monies in their pockets.
International trade
Mrs. Daisy Wai: My question is to the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade. Minister, you rose in the House last Monday to speak about the great success our government found last week—thank you for your success in India. The businesses in my riding of Richmond Hill are very excited.
You have already secured an investment deal with VVDN Technologies for the people of Kitchener-Waterloo, a deal that will bring over 200 new skilled, high-paying jobs for workers and families.
Can the minister tell this House what further agreements were signed while you were leading your business mission in India?
Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you to the member from Richmond Hill for the question.
During the mission, Seneca College was also able to sign three MOUs that will promote the exchange of information and expertise. Ontario’s academic institutions offer cutting-edge training, skills development and services that are in global demand. Some 52,000 students from India are in Ontario.
Ontario’s business delegation had 150 business-to-business meetings with Indian businesses to explore opportunities for future partnerships, including India’s infrastructure needs. This will give Ontario businesses a competitive advantage in accessing contracts for the $1.5 trillion in infrastructure projects that India is building over the next five years.
India stands to benefit from Ontario’s internationally recognized construction technology and design, and our mission was key in building and strengthening those relationships.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?
Mrs. Daisy Wai: Thank you, Minister. It is great to know our government is doing its part to help Ontario workers and businesses get access to some of the world’s fastest-growing and most lucrative markets.
Minister, we know, as part of your business mission, you met with international leaders in the infrastructure sector and managed to secure deals which will benefit the people of Ontario who work in that space.
India also has one of the largest information technology sectors in the world. Can the minister explain what progress was made on giving the people of Ontario increased access to this exciting market in India?
Hon. Victor Fedeli: Speaker, during the mission we met with representatives from the state of Karnataka, home to Bangalore, India’s leader in IT, to advance a formal partnership. This partnership will provide Ontario with a competitive advantage to access this market and develop opportunities for increased trade, investments and partnerships.
India’s information and technology sector is set to reach US$350 billion by 2025, making it the largest sourcing destination for IT. Ontario is an ideal jurisdiction for partnership with India. We are North America’s second-largest IT cluster.
So we will continue to take a proactive lead when it comes to international trade and bring our message everywhere: Speaker, we are cutting red tape and, instead, rolling out the red carpet. This tells people that we’re open for business and open for trade.
Climate change
Mr. Peter Tabuns: My question to the Premier: The Auditor General is preparing her first report on this government’s so-called climate policy. The forthcoming report is expected to call into question Ontario’s ability to meet its Paris accord targets.
Dianne Saxe, the former Environmental Commissioner, the one this government gave a pink slip to, has said that there is “no credible evidence” behind the Conservative government’s emission reduction forecasts.
In advance of the report coming Wednesday, is the government willing to state in the Legislature today that they are on track to meet their forecasts for reducing greenhouse gas emissions?
Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Minister of the Environment.
Hon. Jeff Yurek: I look forward to the Auditor General’s report on Wednesday. I guess there’s plenty of information being spread out there, but we’ll know Wednesday what the report is entailing in its whole.
The one thing we’ve come to see over the last year is that not one single plan or idea is one-size-fits-all for any province, region or community. Our living document, the environmental plan, will continue to evolve over the years and change over time as new technologies come on board. We’re going to maintain our work towards reducing our emissions to our 30% target. Hopefully, we’re going to go beyond that target by 2030.
We’re going to continue to partner with private business to look at their innovation, because we know we’re going to have to partner with them. We’re going to partner with other levels of government, municipal and federal, to ensure we’re working together on the common goal of reducing our emissions. We’ve done a lot of things this year that are going to pay benefits down the road, for instance, the Watay Power corporation, which we’ve made amendments towards so that they can start building their transmission lines to remove seven diesel—
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much.
The supplementary question.
Mr. Peter Tabuns: Thanks, Speaker. So I guess they’re not on track to meet their commitments.
Again to the Premier. To quote the former Environmental Commissioner, “The government’s climate plan doesn’t add up.” So far, this Conservative government spent at least $231 million to cancel green energy projects that were already under way. It tore electric vehicle charging stations out of the ground. It cancelled the successful GreenON home energy program, throwing homeowners and businesses into chaos. It wasted millions of taxpayer dollars to take the federal government to court, and it quoted climate-denial blogs in this House. That’s not a plan, Speaker. Ontarians deserve better.
Will the government today commit to changing course, accepting the science and coming up with a real climate change plan?
Hon. Jeff Yurek: Minister of Energy.
Hon. Greg Rickford: Speaker, as you listen to that, it becomes abundantly clear what NDP really stands for: This is the new denial party. This was the party that would deny the people of Hamilton and the workers at Dofasco an affordable supply of electricity that would not come from erratic wind turbines. This is the kind of party that would deny Timmins and the Borden mine, a fully electric line that was actually affordable. This is the kind of party that would deny Toronto and the GTA one of the largest green infrastructure projects in the history of this province and vote against it.
This is the party that would deny Durham nuclear technology—a green form of energy that not only supplies this province and employs 6,000 people, but also has a dynamic profile of world-class isotopes—and deny the fact that they voted for a 65% increase in the price of electricity between—
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much.
The next question.
Recreational boating industry
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: My question is for the Minister of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries. Minister, I know you recently attended the Boating Ontario Conference in Niagara Falls, where there were over 300 recreational boating industry leaders and decision-makers.
In my riding of Perth–Wellington, we are blessed with some beautiful waterways which are perfect for recreational boaters. It’s also a popular summer activity in my riding, although I know its impact province-wide is much larger.
Minister, can you tell us what kind of impact the recreational boating industry has on Ontario?
Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I want to say thank you to the enthusiastic and good member from Perth–Wellington for bringing this to the floor of the assembly today.
As with most things in the Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries, boating also plays an integral role in the spectacular double bottom line of this ministry. In fact, over six million Ontarians enjoy boating each and every summer and that contributes to amazing memories in the cultural fabric of this province. In addition to that, the recreational boating industry accounts for over 30,000 Ontario jobs, contributing to over $4 billion in revenues, resulting in an impact of approximately $2.3 billion in revenues for our province to continue to build roads, bridges and other valuable infrastructure.
Speaker, I look forward to the supplemental, but I want to assure the member that we’re taking this very seriously and we want to continue to support the Ontario boating association.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question.
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: Mr. Speaker, it’s certainly encouraging to hear how well our recreational boating industry is doing in Ontario and to hear what a great impact they have on the province, both financially and in terms of job creation.
In my riding, recreational boaters flock to places like Conestogo Lake. It attracts tourists from the region and across the province and also from out of province. Local businesses that support these boaters are valuable job creators and respected members of their communities who have a measurable local impact.
Can the minister tell the Legislature what she and her ministry are doing to support this important industry?
Hon. Lisa MacLeod: Thank you very much to the member.
We want to ensure that the Ontario boating association and those six million Ontarians have smooth sailing on some clear waters across Ontario. We want to make sure that they continue to be supported and that they know they have a business-friendly, job-friendly and boating-friendly government here in the province of Ontario. That’s why, last week, at the Ontario boating conference in Niagara Falls, I was able to announce funding of up to $14,000 from the Tourism Development Fund for their 2020 waterfront tourism summit at the Toronto International Boat Show this coming January.
Speaker, this is an important part of our spectacular double bottom line. This ministry is committed to ensuring that we are open for business, open for jobs and open for boaters.
Anti-racism activities
Ms. Jill Andrew: My question is to the Minister of Education. Last week, the government announced the next steps in their review of anti-Black racism at the Peel District School Board. Many in our Black communities were frustrated to hear that neither of the reviewers are Black.
Black community members are once again forced to commit to the emotional and intellectual labour of educating non-Black reviewers on what anti-Black racism looks like, rather than having the opportunity the minister promised them to disclose their experiences and have solutions presented to them by experts with lived experience—the lived experience, for example, of being disproportionately streamed, as Black children, out of academic classes.
Previous reviews, like the Review of the Roots of Youth Violence, Dr. Carl James’s We Rise Together, Stephen Lewis’s Report on Race Relations and many more have centred Black reviewers.
Minister, why did the government fail to appoint a Black reviewer to a review that is supposed to look at anti-Black racism within the Peel District School Board?
Hon. Stephen Lecce: It is the government’s commitment to ensure that every child in Ontario, particularly in Peel, feels safe, welcome and respected. That’s why, upon the issues being raised by the community, by members of the Black community in Peel as well as the chair and vice-chair of the board, among others, we took immediate action to call in a review.
The two individuals we’ve called in, Ena Chadha, who is an experienced human rights lawyer, an educator, an investigator and a mediator—she actually worked as vice-chair of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. We trust her judgment to lead this process, relying on the lived experiences of families and children and educators impacted. Suzanne Herbert is a former deputy minister, but as well is someone who helped lead the review of York Region District School Board on a similar although different issue about anti-Black racism in schools. We denounce it. We stand with families and parents.
As well, I’ll be leaning on one of my associate deputy ministers, Patrick Case, the ADM for the Education Equity Secretariat, to lead the way in ensuring that these boards end these practices and every child feels respected in Peel.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.
Ms. Jill Andrew: Mr. Speaker, what I’ve just heard is that the government could not find two qualified Black professionals with lived experience to review the Peel District School Board. That is shameful.
Parents, students and educators have been contacting our offices, concerned that this government is not taking anti-Black racism and discrimination in our schools seriously. The exclusion of Black reviewers, Minister, from the PDSB review is shocking.
Michaëlle Jean, former Governor General, stated that the lack of a Black reviewer is “not only an offence but totally counterproductive.”
Dave D’Oyen says that in the absence of the inclusion of a qualified member from the Black community, this review will not enjoy credibility.
Will the minister correct his decision, please, and appoint a Black reviewer to the Peel District School Board review as a lived and professional expert on anti-Black racism: yes or no?
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I ask the members to please take their seats.
The Minister of Education to reply.
Hon. Stephen Lecce: We are absolutely committed to combatting these very serious allegations of systemic racism within our schools in Peel region and in all boards across the province. The allegations are serious. It’s why, upon hearing about them directly from parents and students and educators and administrators, we took immediate action to call in reviewers. One of the reviewers is the same reviewer that helped us and the former government—helped the York region board deal with systemic issues of discrimination.
My associate deputy minister in the Education Equity Secretariat, Patrick Case, is a leader within the Black community, is a human rights lawyer, is a person of impeccable integrity who is committed to working with both reviewers to ensure accountability and to ensure those young people’s voices are heard.
In fact, I met with both trustees and students of the Peel region board and members of the Peel caucus in our government just last week to listen first-hand about the allegations. They are disturbing. It is why, Mr. Speaker, we are acting swiftly to ensure there is transformation and change in Peel.
Forest industry
Mr. Toby Barrett: My question is for the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry. Last week, he was in North Bay to announce the redesigned Forest Sector Investment and Innovation Program. Ontario’s forestry sector generates over $16 billion in annual revenues and supports 155,000 direct and indirect jobs, primarily in rural and northern Ontario. It’s easy to see how much passion the minister has for the sector, and I’m confident that with his hard work, the industry will finally be back on the right track.
Can the minister inform this House on how this announcement will benefit the sector and the hard-working men and women who are employed by it right across the province of Ontario?
Hon. John Yakabuski: I want to thank the great member from Haldimand–Norfolk for that question.
Speaker, as you know, Ontario wood products are globally recognized as coming from forests that are responsibly and sustainably managed. We have a plan to create the right conditions to help the forest industry innovate, attract investment and create jobs for communities all across the province.
The Forest Sector Investment and Innovation Program will emphasize the impact a project can have on a region and Ontario’s forest sector as a whole while considering key outcomes such as jobs, innovation and productivity or product enhancements. This program helps address the economic development challenges of doing business in the province’s rural and northern regions and is part of our government’s plan for building Ontario together.
I’ll have more to say in the supplementary.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question?
Mr. Toby Barrett: Thank you to the minister for that answer. I’m heartened to see that our government recognizes the benefits of having a strong forestry industry in Ontario, and I’m glad to see how committed the minister is to creating an environment that will help the forestry sector succeed within the province of Ontario. By growing our forestry sector, we can help communities across the province thrive, building a future with a better quality of life and a higher standard of living.
Through you, Speaker: Would the minister please explain how this redesigned program will make it easier for those who work in the forest industry to do business in Ontario?
Hon. John Yakabuski: Thank you to the member for that question. I was pleased to meet with the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade last week to make that announcement, along with its new name. FSIIP will make it easier for forestry businesses to gain access and apply for funding. The new program is focused on streamlining the process and will put greater emphasis on the impact a project will have on its given region.
I’m looking forward soon to launching a draft forest sector strategy that will help industry innovate, attract new investment, and protect and create jobs, securing a future for the communities and families who depend on the industry.
These initiatives will offer better support for the industry, help us promote a stronger and more dynamic forest sector, and enable us to make Ontario the most attractive place in North America to invest, grow a business and create jobs. We’re open for jobs. We’re open for business.
Highway maintenance
Mr. Michael Mantha: My question is to the Minister of Transportation. Last week, the government finally disclosed the performance records of Ontario’s private highway maintenance contractors. They show that last year the government issued over $291,000 in penalties against highway maintenance contractors who violated their agreements. Why? Due to not taking care of the highways, not properly sanding and not meeting certain time limits.
Why does this minister think that the people in Sault Ste. Marie, where the service providers violated the most, who service not only Sault Ste. Marie but the entire region of Algoma–Manitoulin—why does she think that the performance of companies to keep our roads safe is not there?
Hon. Caroline Mulroney: Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, it is the position of this minister and the Ministry of Transportation that the goal is to keep our roads safe and to plow our highways as quickly as possible so that motorists can travel along our roads safely and quickly. We take this responsibility very seriously, and our private contractors that work for the Ministry of Transportation are doing a good job of clearing our roads and getting to bare pavement as quickly as possible, and doing so meeting standards of the top-class highways across the province.
We are doing everything that we can to find ways to enhance our service levels in the north and across the province, and we will continue to do so.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question?
Mr. Michael Mantha: Minister, I was on those highways last night and I have to tell you, you missed the goal. The standards were not even met. I would invite you at one point or another to come to northern Ontario and visit our roads. Earlier this winter, or just a couple of weeks ago, my colleague introduced a private member’s bill that would end second-class treatment of Highways 17 and 11 and ensure that they’re plowed as quickly as possible at the same level as the 400 series. Instead, the government showed that they are perfectly happy to let northern Ontarians roll the dice and get on the winter roads.
Now we have learned that highway maintenance contractors are violating service agreements to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars. Why does the minister think Algoma and Sault families deserve a private snowplow contractor with the worst compliance record in Ontario?
Hon. Caroline Mulroney: As the member knows, we take the safety of our roads and clearance very seriously, and we are working closely with our contractors to ensure they are meeting the service levels we expect in the south and in the north. As our winter conditions will continue to worsen over the next coming months, it’s something that we are going to be monitoring closely.
If the member opposite wants to talk about people in this House voting against things that are going to support the people of northern Ontario, I’d like to ask him and the members of the opposition why they decided to vote against the four-laning of sections of Highway 69 and Highways 11 and 17 in the north, including stretches between Kenora and the Manitoba border.
Mr. Speaker, why are they voting against measures to make life more affordable for people in the north by voting against the fall economic statement, which will see a reduction in the aviation fuel tax rate in northern Ontario? Mr. Speaker, that will go a long way to making the cost of groceries go down in the north and making life more affordable.
Rural transportation
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Speaker, we’ve heard a lot of great news about getting subways built for the city of Toronto in recent months. But I understand the minister is focused on improving transportation options across the province, not only here in the GTA. Rural municipalities need our help to get their communities moving and I know the Community Transportation Grant Program is a means to that end.
Could the minister please tell us about this important program?
Hon. Caroline Mulroney: I’d like to thank the member for the question. We campaigned on making life more affordable for Ontarians and making life easier for Ontarians. That’s why the Community Transportation Grant Program is so important. The Community Transportation Grant Program will provide up to $30 million over five years to assist municipalities to support local and intercommunity transportation projects in areas that are currently underserved or unserved.
The municipalities will use this provincial funding to partner with community organizations to coordinate local transportation services for their communities. This is just another example of our government working together with our municipal partners to ensure that they have what they need to best serve their communities. Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to getting Ontario moving because we recognize just how important it is that every Ontarian have access to reliable transit.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question?
Mr. Randy Pettapiece: Thank you to the minister for that answer. It’s indisputable that access to reliable transit has the ability to improve the quality of life for every Ontarian. Going to work, attending appointments and visiting families and friends all become significantly more challenging when the transportation options are poor. I can tell the minister, from my riding of Perth–Wellington, that these projects are working very well. Thank you so much for paying attention to rural Ontario.
Can the minister tell us more about how the Community Transportation Grant Program works?
Hon. Caroline Mulroney: I would like to thank the member for all of his advocacy work on behalf of the residents of his riding.
The Community Transportation Grant Program provides support to municipalities to serve more riders, to provide more trips and to reach more destinations. There are a variety of projects that are being funded through this program. Owen Sound received more than $1.2 million in funding for a project to reinstate a fixed route from Owen Sound to the Guelph Central GO station. Perth county received funding of over $1.4 million for the creation of a Perth county transit system which operates from Monday to Friday. The city of Stratford received funding of over $1.4 million as well to support interregional bus access from Stratford, St. Marys and Listowel to intermodal hubs in Kitchener and London.
Mr. Speaker, these are only just a few examples of the great projects that are being supported by the Community Transportation Grant Program.
The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): This House stands in recess until 1 p.m.
The House recessed from 1156 to 1300.
Introduction of Visitors
Hon. Ernie Hardeman: I apologize in advance for the lengthy list.
Today I’m pleased to welcome the following individuals to Queen’s Park, who are here in the galleries to support our government taking action to protect farmers: Keith Currie, Cathy Lennon and Peggy Brekveld from the Ontario Federation of Agriculture; Allan Thompson from the Rural Ontario Municipal Association; Ed Benjamins, Rob Dougans and Cory Preston from the Chicken Farmers of Ontario; Ken Ovington and Eric Schwindt from Ontario Pork; Norm Beal from Food and Beverage Ontario; Jennifer MacTavish and Mark Carere from Ontario Sheep; Joe Hill and Richard Horne from Ontario Beef Farmers; Tom Kroesbergen and Jennifer Haley from the Veal Farmers of Ontario; Bonnie den Haan from the Dairy Farmers of Ontario; Clarence Nywening and Brenda Dyack from the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario; Kelly Daynard from Farm and Food Care Ontario; Franco Naccarato and Carol Goriup from Meat and Poultry Ontario; Kerry Towle from Sofina Foods; Mayor Jackie Rombouts from the township of Warwick; Brian Ricker and Ryan Brown from the Turkey Farmers of Ontario; and my staff and my parliamentary assistant’s staff as well as the amazing OMAFRA staff who have all worked so hard on this effort.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to make this introduction.
Mr. Jeremy Roberts: She’s just on her way upstairs now, but I’d like to issue a very warm welcome to my cousin, visiting all the way from Vancouver. Please join me in welcoming Erica Roberts.
Members’ Statements
Affordable housing
Miss Monique Taylor: Today I want to talk about the housing crisis in Hamilton. All along the housing continuum, we’re seeing a crisis of affordability. It’s impacting the safety, health and dignity of Hamiltonians. Over the past decade, the average price of a house in Hamilton has doubled; so has the average rent.
According to the Social Planning and Research Council of Hamilton, 45% of renters are living in unaffordable housing. Right now there are more than 15,000 people on a wait-list for subsidized housing in Hamilton. As a result of unaffordable housing, people are living in substandard conditions and Hamilton shelters are at capacity. Food bank visits are up, especially among children, as families are spending more and more of their income on housing.
It didn’t have to be this way. In the 1990s we saw the federal Liberals cut their subsidized housing and download it onto the provinces. Then, the Conservative Ontario government, led then by Mike Harris, downloaded it onto the municipalities. Now the Ford government has sided with developers and landlords by scrapping rent controls and making evictions easier.
Successive Liberal and Conservative governments have let this housing crisis go on for years, and things are only getting worse. Ontario needs a government that will prioritize and invest in affordable housing, a government that will make sure that everyone’s right to housing is protected and realized so that people in Hamilton and across the province can have the safety and security of a roof over their head.
Table ronde économique
La semaine dernière, avec la ministre Caroline Mulroney et son conseiller économique, Glenn O’Farrell, nous avons eu une table ronde très positive, très constructive et prometteuse au Centre ontarien des investissements et du commerce à Toronto.
Ce fut l’occasion d’une prise de contact et d’échanges sur les thèmes du réseautage entre les chefs de file économiques francophones de Toronto, du potentiel économique francophone et des voies d’avenir pour bien exploiter ce potentiel au profit de tous les Ontariens à travers des mesures de développement économique harmonisant les efforts du gouvernement provincial et des acteurs économiques de la société civile.
C’était un très, très, très bon après-midi. Je veux dire merci à tous les francophones, les employés et les employeurs qui ont participé à cette table ronde.
Dance Evolution
Mr. Jamie West: Today I’d like to recognize the work of Dance Evolution. Dance Evolution is a small business in my riding that is giving back to our community. They’re committed to helping their students become confident and empowered young people. As part of this commitment, the school is certified as a YPAD school; that’s the Youth Protection Advocates in Dance. This means the school follows age-appropriate artistic choices, healthy teaching techniques and behaviours that nurture the wellness of their students, including positive body image and anti-bullying education.
These students not only learn how to dance; they also learn the significance of teamwork, leadership and building positive relationships with their peers in the world around them.
Beyond the studio, the school is actively engaged in the Greater Sudbury community. Students regularly perform at charity events and volunteer at the Northern Ontario Families of Children with Cancer father-daughter ball every year.
Started 11 years ago under the direction of Miss Ali Loney, this summer she passed the reins on to Miss Taylor Austin, a long-time student who is now an extraordinary teacher. I’d like to congratulate the school, Dance Evolution, on their positive impact and wish them many more years of developing dancers and our community leaders of tomorrow.
Richard and Pauline Kniaziew
Mr. Rick Nicholls: I don’t often make triathlon announcements, but when I do, I’m so pleased to announce that Dr. Richard Kniaziew and his wife, Pauline Kniaziew, from my riding of Chatham-Kent–Leamington were recently honoured on Saturday, November 23, in Inglewood, Ontario, with Triathlon Canada’s 2019 Impact Award.
This was to recognize their contributions to the sport of triathlon for over 30 years in Canada. To top it off, Olympic triathlon champion Simon Whitfield presented their prestigious award to them. In addition to their triathlon accomplishments, Dr. Kniaziew also runs a successful optometry business in Leamington, Chatham and Blenheim, and will soon be opening yet another branch in North Chatham, providing excellent eye care to thousands of people in my community.
Now, in case you’re wondering, Triathlon Canada is a national organization dedicated to promoting excellence in their sport. Their team of dedicated professionals is committed to the same expectation they have of their athletes and coaches who represent Triathlon Canada. They want to be the best in their field, whether it’s on the racecourse, in the training environment, or in the offices and boardrooms.
Congratulations, Dr. Richard and Pauline Kniaziew, on receiving this very prestigious Impact Award from Triathlon Canada for 2019.
Consideration of Bill 156
Mr. John Vanthof: As agriculture critic for the official opposition and the deputy leader, I would like to welcome just about every Ontario farm leader I’ve ever worked with to the House. I would suggest that they’re probably here for the introduction of Minister Hardeman’s bill regarding security from trespass.
I would like to thank the minister. I haven’t seen the bill, but we’ve had extensive discussions. I appreciate that. I would like to thank the government for actually allowing this bill to be stand-alone. One of the worst things about politics is when you mix something good with something not so good. I hope and I trust that there will not be a poison pill in this bill, that this bill is actually coming from the right place.
We cannot predict whether a bill will pass, but we all, I believe, in this House, share the same goal: that farm animals should be protected from disease, and one of the ways to do that is to protect the biosecurity of the farm and also of farm families. With that goal in mind, we are looking forward to debating this bill, looking forward to continuing to work with farm groups, and continuing to work with the minister and the ministry to try and get the best solution possible.
Ontario Volunteer Service Awards
Mr. Aris Babikian: Last month, along with a number of our colleagues, I had the pleasure of attending Ontario Volunteer Service Awards, two in Scarborough and one in Markham. Given out by the Ontario government, the awards are a great way to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of volunteers in our communities throughout the province.
Volunteers are the heart and soul of our society. Their dedication and service help us grow and prosper. Personally, as the former recipient of a 25-year service award, it was very fulfilling to help other people and community organizations. As such, I know the contributions of volunteers to our province and communities are immeasurable.
At the award ceremonies, I was able to meet a number of individuals who are making a great contribution to Scarborough–Agincourt with their dedicated service and volunteering. For example, I was able to meet a number of young recipients who are growing into the leaders of tomorrow in Scarborough. I was also happy to meet with a number of seniors who have been volunteering and contributing to the community for many years.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the award recipients for their hard work and continued service to our community.
City of Brampton
Ms. Sara Singh: It’s an honour to rise here today on behalf of the good people of Brampton Centre. This past weekend, I attended a town hall organized by the Brampton First Foundation and a number of other concerned community groups. There were a number of speakers, Mr. Speaker, who shared a lot of different concerns with us.
It’s no surprise to anyone here in this House that Brampton is ground zero for hallway medicine, and the participants at this town hall made it very, very clear that in Brampton, we need another hospital. People in our community are tired of waiting in hallways. They’re tired of waiting on lists in order to get the health care services they need. Our young people are tired of waiting for mental health supports, and our senior citizens are tired of waiting for long-term-care beds.
Many also made it clear that education in our community needs to be a priority. Earlier this year, we saw the government cancel Ryerson University’s $90-million project. People in Brampton want to make sure the next generation has the same educational opportunities as other communities across this province do. Not only are they concerned about the cut of this post-secondary institution in our community; they are concerned that this government is deciding to cut more and more out of our public education system, leaving children in Brampton without the education that they need to move this province forward, Mr. Speaker.
They’re also concerned about this government’s lack of priorities. A buck-a-beer over making sure that children with autism get services? This is not okay, and the people of Brampton are saying enough is enough.
Richard Arthur Shangrow
Ms. Christine Hogarth: Today, I rise to pay respects to the recent passing of Richard Arthur Shangrow, a long-time resident of Etobicoke and a former district chief of the New Toronto and Etobicoke fire department. Former chief Shangrow passed away at age 88 on November 23 of this year.
Chief Shangrow was known as a no-nonsense type of fire chief, who served the people of Etobicoke for 35 years in the fire department. One of the big fires he fought, and became known for was the Pittsburgh Paint fire of July 15, 1976, in Long Branch. It is a fire that many residents still remember.
Chief Shangrow is survived by his wife of 65 years, Betty, and children Joan, Valerie, Lois, Brian and Barbara, as well as numerous grandchildren.
Chief Shangrow was active in the community through the Long Branch Neighbourhood Association and the Faustina Hockey Club, just to name a few organizations that he supported.
I would like to offer my condolences to the Shangrow family on behalf of myself and the residents of Etobicoke–Lakeshore, and I thank him for the service to our community.
Hospice palliative care
Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: The elephant is back in the room. Hospice Palliative Care Ontario is back at Queen’s Park today, along with their mascot, Ellie the Elephant, to talk about dying, death and bereavement. We’re all going to die, and we’re all going to lose loved ones. But generally we don’t want to talk about it.
Today, members of Hospice Palliative Care Ontario are talking to MPPs about how a holistic approach to care helps people live well until their last breaths, and their loved ones to stay well through bereavement. Hospice palliative care is consistent, quality health and social care, when and where they need it. It’s highly valued and supported by grassroots and governments together.
Today’s event has had all-party sponsorship, and I know I can count on that same support for my private member’s bill, Bill 3, the Compassionate Care Act, which provides for a framework and reporting timelines to help us meet the rapidly growing demand for hospice palliative care due to an aging population. Community-based hospice palliative care is already working to end hallway medicine and help people stay at home or in a home-like hospice setting, at a fraction of the cost of hospitals—and it’s where people would rather be. It has been great to see this organization team up with our government to provide quality, effective care.
It is true teamwork, improving the quality of life for the people of Ontario, because we know that death is death, but dying is still living, and living well is what we all want and deserve. On behalf of Hospice Palliative Care Ontario, thank you for coming to the reception, and I look forward to all of your support for Bill 3 when it comes forward for third reading in this House.
Reports by Committees
Standing Committee on Estimates
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Standing order 63(
a) provides that “The Standing Committee on Estimates shall present one report with respect to all of the estimates and supplementary estimates considered pursuant to standing orders 60 and 62 no later than the third Thursday in November of each calendar year.”
The House not having received a report from the Standing Committee on Estimates for certain ministries on Thursday, November 28, 2019, as required by the standing orders of the House and as required by the order of the House dated May 28, 2019, pursuant to standing order 63(b), the estimates 2019-20 before the committee of the Ministry of Infrastructure, the Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services, the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, and the Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs are deemed to be passed by the committee and are deemed to be reported to and received by the House.
Report deemed received.
Introduction of Bills
Olympic Floor Cleaning Inc. Act, 2019
Mr. Thanigasalam moved first reading of the following bill:
Bill Pr22,
An Act to revive Olympic Floor Cleaning Inc.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
First reading agreed to.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Pursuant to standing order 86, this bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Regulations and Private Bills.
Rent Control Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur le contrôle des loyers
Ms. Morrison moved first reading of the following bill:
Bill 155,
An Act to amend the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 with respect to rules relating to rent / Projet de loi 155, Loi modifiant la Loi de 2006 sur la location à usage d’habitation en ce qui concerne les règles relatives au loyer.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
First reading agreed to.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Would the member care to give a brief explanation of her bill?
Ms. Suze Morrison: I would—thank you, Speaker. I’m happy to be able to introduce this important piece of legislation in the House today. Just a few weeks ago, in November, we heard from tenants affected by the first wave of leases that are coming up in buildings that are no longer protected by rent control. Some of the proposed increases were close to 25%, which represents an annual increase of nearly $5,000 per year.
This bill seeks to undo the erosion of rent control and reverse the cuts made to it in November 2018.
Security from Trespass and Protecting Food Safety Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur la protection contre l’entrée sans autorisation et sur la protection de la salubrité des aliments
Mr. Hardeman moved first reading of the following bill:
Bill 156,
An Act to protect Ontario’s farms and farm animals from trespassers and other forms of interference and to prevent contamination of Ontario’s food supply / Projet de loi 156, Loi visant à protéger les fermes et les animaux d’élevage en Ontario contre les entrées sans autorisation et d’autres actes susceptibles de les déranger et à prévenir la contamination de l’approvisionnement alimentaire en Ontario.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
First reading agreed to.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Minister, would you care to give a brief explanation of the bill?
Hon. Ernie Hardeman: It is my pleasure and honour today to introduce an important piece of legislation called the Security from Trespass and Protecting Food Safety Act.
The bill is intended to protect farm animals, the food supply, farmers and others from risks that are created when trespassers enter places where farm animals are kept or when persons engage in unauthorized interactions with farm animals. The risks include the risk of exposing farm animals to disease and stress, as well as the risk of introducing contaminants into the food supply.
Animal protection zones are defined in the bill as areas on farms, animal processing facilities and other prescribed premises on which farm animals may be kept or located. The bill prohibits persons from entering in or on animal protection zones without the prior consent of the owner or occupier of the farm, facility or premises. The bill prohibits persons from interfering with a motor vehicle that is transporting farm animals and from interfering or interacting with farm animals in the motor vehicle without the prior consent of the driver of the motor vehicle.
The bill provides that a consent is invalid if it is obtained using duress or under false pretenses.
Section 14 sets the maximum fine at $15,000 for a first offence under the act and $25,000 for subsequent offences. That fine may be increased by a court in certain prescribed circumstances that increase the gravity of the offence.
Section 15 provides that, if a person is found guilty of an offence under the act, the court may, in addition to imposing a fine under the act, require the person found guilty to pay restitution to the owner or occupier of a farm, animal processing facility or prescribed premises, or to the driver of a motor vehicle for any injury, loss or damages suffered.
Mr. Speaker, we feel that this proposed bill is fair and balances the safety and security of farmers and their families and our food supply, while protecting the right of people to participate in legal protests.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to make those two comments.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Thank you very much, Minister, for that brief explanation.
Motions
Sign-language
interpretation
Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to move a motion without notice regarding ASL services during statements by the ministry on December 3, 2019.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Minister Calandra seeks unanimous consent to move a motion without notice regarding ASL services during statements by the ministry on December 3, 2019. Agreed? Agreed.
Back to the minister.
Hon. Paul Calandra: I move that sign-language interpreters may be present on the floor of the chamber on Tuesday, December 3, 2019, to interpret statements by the ministry and responses.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Minister Calandra has moved that sign-language interpreters may be present on the floor of the chamber on Tuesday, December 3, 2019, to interpret statements by the ministry and responses.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
Motion agreed to.
Petitions
Library services
Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: This petition is called “No Cuts to Libraries.
“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas libraries perform a vital function storing and sharing information in our communities and are integral to healthy, strong communities;
“Whereas the Ontario Library Service—North and the Southern Ontario Library Service programs ensure that smaller libraries in rural communities have equal access to all of Ontario’s library collections; and
“Whereas libraries are particularly important spaces for people who face geographic and socio-economic barriers to accessing information and technology;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to: reverse the budget cuts to our libraries and reinstate the necessary funding to keep our libraries strong.”
I sign this petition gladly and send it with Ally to bring to the Clerks’ table.
Access to personal health records
Mrs. Gila Martow: I have a petition for the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas the Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004, currently allows health information custodians to charge a fee that does not exceed the prescribed amount or the amount of reasonable cost recovery, where no amount is prescribed; and
“Whereas given no amount has been prescribed, the amount of ‘reasonable cost recovery’ has been left to the discretion of health information custodians; and
“Whereas in 2006 the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care proposed a regulation for fee enforcement under subsection 54(11) of the act; and
“Whereas in 2008 the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario ... submitted a recommendation for amendment of the act to include enactment of a fee regulation that is substantially similar to the regulation drafted by the ministry in 2006; and
“Whereas the IPCO’s recommendation is based on the numerous complaints from members of the public about fees charged by health information custodians for access to personal health records; and
“Whereas health information custodians continue to charge exorbitant fees for access to personal health records, against the recommendation of the IPCO; and
“Whereas the Center for Patient Protection recently cited this as one of the most common public complaints; and
“Whereas inaccessible fees continue to (1) be a widespread barrier to access of personal health records; (2) cause undue hardship and stress to the public; and (3), inundate a tribunal that could otherwise allocate its resources to other matters.
“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“That the government of Ontario enact the ministry’s 2006 fee regulation so as to enable hassle-free access to personal health records, as well as transparency and accountability of health care institutions.”
Of course, I affix my signature and give it to page Clara.
Tenant protection
Ms. Catherine Fife: It’s my pleasure to present this petition for the first time in Ontario’s Legislature. It’s entitled “Protect our Student Tenants.
“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas student tenants from post-secondary institutions are inexperienced with housing issues and can be vulnerable to unethical and illegal business practices of landlords and housing companies;
“Whereas cities across Ontario face challenges to provide safe and affordable housing for its post-secondary students;
“Whereas all Ontarians deserve safe and accessible housing;
“Whereas students from post-secondary institutions contribute to the social and economic growth of a city;
“Whereas the Landlord and Tenant Board is not meeting the needs of transient students;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to: develop a provincial strategy and stronger regulations for students to enforce their rights as tenants.”
I want to thank the students from the University of Waterloo and Wilfrid Laurier for this petition. I present this to Emily and will affix my signature.
Endangered species
Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne: I want to acknowledge Sarah Filippi, who is a constituent of mine. She’s a driving force behind this petition, and she’s here today.
“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas Ontario’s Endangered Species Act was seen as the best one in Canada. On June 6, 2019, the provincial government passed Bill 108, called More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019, which includes amendments to the Endangered Species Act under
schedule 5. Under these changes, developers and industry are now allowed to pay a fee for the right to expand activities which would destroy critical wildlife habitat and kill endangered species;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:”
That the changes be reversed “to the Endangered Species Act, made through Bill 108, called More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019, under
schedule 5 in order that endangered species and their habitat be protected.” And that “more protection measures for species at risk, not fewer,” are in place.
I agree with this petition. I affix my signature, and I will give it to Suhani.
Water quality
Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I’d like to table the following petition:
“We, the undersigned, want Lake Simcoe’s water quality to improve, the Lake Simcoe watershed’s forests, wetlands and the shorelines to be protected from development, climate change adaptation and mitigation be addressed, and the province of Ontario address these issues in the Lake Simcoe Protection Act, to be reviewed and implemented.”
I affix my signature and give it to page Daniel.
Equal opportunity
Ms. Suze Morrison: I have a petition here entitled “Don’t Take Away Social and Economic Rights for Women and Marginalized People.” It reads:
“Whereas Bill 47 erased many of the legislative gains achieved through Bill 148, the fairer labour laws and working conditions that had a particularly positive impact on women and marginalized people;
“Whereas statistics show that women, particularly women of colour, are most likely to be employed in precarious work, and the Bill 47 amendments to the Employment Standards Act, 2000 and Labour Relations Act, 1995 create conditions that lead to a growth in precarious employment while also eliminating protections for millions of Ontario workers;
“Whereas Bill 66 further erodes women’s and marginalized people’s social and economic rights; and
“Whereas the” Conservative “government continues to remove, cancel or freeze funding for other supports, programs and regulations that would increase women’s equality in the workforce and beyond;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to, at the very least:
“—reinstate paid sick days...;
“—reverse changes to daycare regulations that allow more children per caregiver;
“—reverse the retroactive cuts to funding for the Ontario College of Midwives;
“—reinstate funding increases to sexual assault centres;
“—restore the” provincial “round table on violence against women; and
“—restore the child and youth advocate commissioner’s office.”
I fully endorse this petition. I will be signing it and providing it to page Laura to deliver to the Clerks.
Animal protection
Ms. Christine Hogarth: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas on June 28, 2019, the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (OSPCA) stopped enforcing Ontario’s animal welfare laws; and
“Whereas on June 6, 2019, royal assent was given to Bill 117, Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment Act (Interim Period), 2019, which provides an interim solution to ensure animals remain protected while the government developed a new permanent animal welfare enforcement model; and
“Whereas the continued protection of animals across this province is an urgent priority to the people of Ontario;
“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“To unanimously support the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act (PAWS Act) so that Ontario’s pets and animals can be protected without delay under a system that establishes the strongest penalties for animal abusers in Canada.”
I’ve already signed my name to it, and I’m going to give it to page Sarah.
Abuse awareness and prevention
Mr. Michael Mantha: I want to thank Charmaine Loverin for her tenacity and her advocacy for this petition. It’s entitled “Loverin’s Law.
“Whereas the government of Ontario does not provide direct use of education and real life skills language, nor prevention tools about abuse in elementary (specific to first reader ages Grade 1+), middle schools and high schools; and
“Whereas the government of Ontario does not provide direct use of education and real life skills language, nor prevention tools for five top abuse situations facing many Canadian and diverse families today: physical, neglect, emotional, verbal and sexual, grooming; and
“Whereas abuse affects ages younger than 5 and 93% of abuse happens in the hands of those that young people or youth are supposed to trust; and
“Whereas statistically two in five girls and one in six boys are currently abused in Canada today, not including unreported; and
“Whereas abuse has no culture, status nor religious divide and is a long-term injury that causes stigma, shame, guilt, anxiety, even isolation that can result in bullying, self-harming behaviours, depression, youth addiction and even suicide; and
“Whereas early education, including evidence-based and new community prevention programs, will greatly benefit intervention, awareness and empowerment for prevention of bullying, addiction and suicide for victims and early offenders;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“Request
an act to designate an ‘annual awareness of abuse prevention week’ in all Ontario primary, middle and high schools, and to provide for abuse curricula for healthy families and safe community policies, administration and accountability.”
I agree with this petition, affix my name, and present it to page Ally to bring down to the Clerks’ table.
Taxation
Mrs. Gila Martow: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.
“Whereas the government for the people was elected on a mandate to make life more affordable for Ontarians; and
“Whereas the Made-in-Ontario Environment Plan is currently working to reduce targets by the previously agreed upon Paris accord targets without a carbon tax; and
“Whereas Ontario is the only province that is meeting the goals of the 30% reduction rates agreed to in the Paris accord; and
“Whereas the seniors, workers, families and small businesses of Ontario cannot afford another tax burden on every purchase they make;
“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“Fight the federally imposed Justin Trudeau carbon tax with every tool at the government’s disposal.”
I’m happy to affix my signature and give it to page Augustine.
School facilities
Ms. Sara Singh: I’m proud to present this petition on behalf of the students in my riding of Brampton Centre who have been busy collecting signatures. The petition is entitled “Fund Our Schools.
“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” over “$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 ... 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 am very proud to sign my name and support this petition and send it off with page Alexandra.
Retail alcohol sales
Mrs. Gila Martow: I have yet again a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.
“Whereas Ontario is behind the times and out of step with the rest of Canada when it comes to the retail sale of alcohol; and
“Whereas Ontario’s current system is unfair and largely benefits three global brewers, restricting consumer choice, and limiting opportunity for small businesses; and
“Whereas insider claims have stoked unnecessary fears regarding the cost associated with expanding alcohol sales, using a false billion-dollar figure to detract from the true economic potential before Ontario’s consumers, retailers and brewers; and
“Whereas an expanded retail market could create over 9,000 new jobs and add $3.5 billion to Ontario’s GDP; and
“Whereas Ontario consumers have long called for a market that is fair, and offers more choice and convenience;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:
“Expand the sale of beer, wine and cider to convenience stores, big box stores and more grocery stores in Ontario.”
Of course, I affix my signature and give it to page Emily H.
Affordable housing
Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: I have a really important petition, and I want to thank Anton Brink and Art Tiesma for collecting the signatures so I could bring this petition to the Legislature.
“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:
“Whereas a report from the city of London estimated that over 400 Londoners currently use emergency shelters, and other estimations put the statistic as closer to 800;
“Whereas at least 59% of homeless individuals reported experiencing mental health issues, and 57% said they struggle with addiction. Indigenous people are far more likely to experience homelessness in London, making up 2.6% of the population but 30% of the homeless population;
“Whereas London and area shelters are running over 100% capacity on a regular basis and vacancy rates in London are consistently hovering around 1%;
“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to invest in a provincial housing strategy, affordable housing and supportive housing for those experiencing mental health issues, and we ask that the government immediately release emergency funds to London’s homelessness prevention system, including shelters, so that they are able to provide assistance to people in crisis.”
I fully support this petition, sign it and give it to page Peter to deliver to the table.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Unfortunately, the time for petitions has now expired.
Orders of the Day
Legislative reform
Resuming the debate adjourned on November 28, 2019, on the amendment to the motion, as amended, regarding amendments to the standing orders.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Mr. Bisson has the floor.
Mr. Gilles Bisson: I’ll be sharing my time with the member from Brampton Centre and the member from Algoma–Manitoulin.
I just want to say a few things as we start today’s debate. The government is trying to create the narrative that they need these changes to the standing orders because somehow it’s going to make this House more efficient. The reality is that’s not the case. The government currently has standing orders that are quite friendly to the government. It allows the government to pass legislation in this House without difficulty, in a period of a week or two at the most.
In many cases, and almost all the cases that legislation has worked its way through the House, the government has actually time-allocated those bills through the House. In some cases, when they time-allocated it, they didn’t even allow time for committee. So the government has had situations where they’ve been able to, in all cases, always get their bills through the House, get them done in a pretty expedited manner and get whatever business they were trying to get done in a time frame that suited them, and not necessarily that of the public.
When you see governments like this one who are further dialling back the ability for the opposition or government members to hold the government accountable to an issue, I think that’s a disservice to the public, and I think it’s a disservice to our democracy. This Legislature is the Legislature for the people, and that means to say that we do the people’s business here. Yes, I’m the first to say the government always has to have its way in a parliamentary system. At the end of the day, if they have a majority, they have to have the ability, with the rules, to pass their legislation in the end.
The government has all kinds of tools inside the standing orders to allow them to get their business through the House. They can call the question when it comes to debate. If they think that there has been too much debate and it’s repetitive after so many hours, in a very short time frame, they’re able to call the question, which ends the debate and forces a vote.
They’re able to time-allocate a debate, and they can write a time allocation motion in such a way that allows them to speed the process not only of getting it through second reading, but to completely bypass the entire committee process and send it to the House for a short-shrift debate of five or 10 minutes when it comes to third reading.
So why does the government need these particular rule changes? I think it’s a question of, as in the cases of a lot of governments, sometimes they feel that they have a God-inherited right to be able to pass stuff as quickly as they can, without allowing the public or the opposition to have its say, and I just think that is a very bad recipe. We all know that in the end the government will get its way. For example, we were here two summers ago when the government decided that they wanted to change the Toronto municipal election system in the middle of an election.
They were so intent on doing that, they recalled the House so that we could sit throughout the night—that we could continue going past midnight and into the next day—so that they could get the required amount of time to do time allocation.
My Lord, they even used the “notwithstanding” clause. The Minister of Transportation, whose father, Prime Minister Mulroney, had fought the good fight to try to get rid of the whole idea of a “notwithstanding” clause in our Constitution—here was his daughter, supporting such a particular move as the Minister of Transportation here in Ontario. I’m sure that that must have created a certain amount of interesting discussions at the dinner table, when her dad was the person who was trying to get rid of the “notwithstanding” clause and the Attorney General of Ontario at the time, the now Minister of Transportation, was actually invoking the “notwithstanding” clause.
My point is th