Ontario Hansard — 27 May 2020 (42nd Parliament, 1st Session)

2020-05-27

Ontario — Debates (Hansard)

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

May 27, 2020

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2020-May-27 (PDF)

L164 - Wed 27 May 2020 / Mer 27 mai 2020

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Wednesday 27 May 2020 Mercredi 27 mai 2020

Orders of the Day

Order of business

Members’ Statements

Homelessness

COVID-19 response

Long-term care

COVID-19 response

Northern municipalities

Family caregivers

COVID-19 response

Church-Wellesley Village

COVID-19 response

Question Period

Long-term care

Students

Long-term care

Broadband infrastructure

Long-term care

Deferred Votes

Rebuilding Consumer Confidence Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 visant à rétablir la confiance chez les consommateurs

Protecting Tenants and Strengthening Community Housing Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 visant la protection des locataires et le renforcement du logement communautaire

Petitions

Public sector compensation

Orders of the Day

Order of business

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers/Prières.

Orders of the Day

Order of business

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the member for Barrie–Innisfil.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I move that, notwithstanding standing order 7(a)(

i) or any special order of the House, when the House adjourns on June 3, 2020, it shall stand adjourned until Tuesday, June 16, 2020, and the House shall then continue to meet during an extension of the spring meeting period in accordance with the following schedule:

Tuesdays and Wednesdays during the weeks of June 15, 2020, and June 22, 2020; and

Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays during the weeks of July 6, 2020, July 13, 2020, and July 20, 2020; and

That, during these meetings, members be permitted to speak and vote from any member’s desk in the chamber in order to observe recommended physical distancing; the proceeding “Introduction of Visitors” shall be suspended and the afternoon routine shall commence at 1 p.m.; and

That, in order to practise appropriate physical distancing during recorded divisions, standing orders 30(c), 32(

b) and 37 shall be suspended until Monday, September 14, 2020, and the following substituted:

“30(

c) When a recorded division is required, members shall proceed to the members’ lobbies to register their vote with the Clerks. The ayes shall be recorded in the east members’ lobby and the nays shall be recorded in the west members’ lobby. Subject to standing order 13, every member shall have their vote recorded in this manner.

“(c.1) Thirty minutes shall be allotted to the conduct of each vote, during which time the division bell shall ring, and after which time no further votes shall be recorded.

“(c.2) The whips of the recognized parties, or their designates, may attend the members’ lobbies to observe the taking of the vote.

“(c.3) For each vote held under this proceeding during the afternoon routine, 30 minutes shall be added to the end of the sitting day, and the House may continue to meet after 6 p.m. accordingly, if requested by the government House leader.

“32(

b) Excluding the time taken to conduct recorded votes as determined by standing order 30(c.3), the time allotted for the afternoon routine each day shall not exceed 90 minutes. At the end of that time, the Speaker shall interrupt and shall put every question necessary to dispose of the proceeding currently occupying the House, and thereafter immediately call orders of the day.

“37. Any divisions deferred under standing orders 10(

c) or 30(

h) shall be disposed of consecutively.

“37.1 If deferred votes continues past 1 p.m. on any day, the Speaker shall immediately call reports by committees once all deferred votes have been taken”; and

That, notwithstanding the order of the House dated March 19, 2020, the Standing Committee on General Government shall be authorized to meet on Monday, June 8, 2020, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. and on Tuesday, June 9, 2020, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. for the purpose of public hearings on 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; and

That the Clerk of the Committee, in consultation with the committee Chair, be authorized to arrange the following with regard to Bill 156:

—that the deadline for requests to appear be 10 a.m. on Thursday, June 4, 2020; and

—that the Clerk of the Committee provide a list of all interested presenters to each member of the subcommittee and their designate following the deadline for requests to appear; and

—that each member of the subcommittee or their designate provide the Clerk of the Committee with a prioritized list of presenters to be scheduled, chosen from the list of all interested presenters received by the Clerk by 6 p.m. on Thursday, June 4, 2020; and

—that the deadline for written submissions be 6 p.m. on Tuesday, June 9, 2020; and

—that the deadline for filing amendments to the bill with the Clerk of the Committee shall be 6 p.m. on Wednesday, June 10, 2020; and

—that the subcommittee on committee business shall be authorized to otherwise determine the method of proceeding on the bill; and

That the committee be authorized to meet on Friday, June 12, 2020, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 9 p.m. and on Monday, June 15, 2020, from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. for the purpose of clause-by-clause consideration of the bill; and

On Monday, June 15, 2020, at 7 p.m., those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved, and the Chair of the committee shall interrupt the proceedings and shall, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto. At this time, the Chair shall allow one 20-minute waiting period pursuant to standing order 132(a); and

That the committee shall report the bill to the House no later than the sitting day following Monday, June 15, 2020; and

That, should the committee fail to report the bill on that day, the bill shall be deemed to be passed by the committee and shall be deemed to be reported to and received by the House; and

That, upon receiving the report of the Standing Committee on General Government, the Speaker shall put the question for adoption of the report forthwith, and at such time the bill shall be ordered for third reading, which order may be called that same day; and

That, notwithstanding the order of the House dated March 19, 2020, the Standing Committee on Social Policy shall be authorized to meet on Monday, June 8, 2020, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m., on Tuesday, June 9, 2020, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m., and on Wednesday, June 10, 2020, from 9 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. for the purpose of public hearings on Bill 171,

An Act to enact the Building Transit Faster Act, 2020 and make related amendments to other Acts; and

That the Clerk of the Committee, in consultation with the committee Chair, be authorized to arrange the following with regard to Bill 171:

—that the deadline for requests to appear be 10 a.m. on Thursday, June 4, 2020; and

—that the deadline for written submissions be 6 p.m. on Wednesday, June 10, 2020; and

—that the deadline for filing amendments to the bill with the Clerk of the Committee shall be 6 p.m. on Friday, June 12, 2020; and

—that the subcommittee on committee business shall be authorized to otherwise determine the method of proceeding on the bill; and

That the committee be authorized to meet on Monday, June 15, 2020, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. and on Tuesday, June 16, 2020, from 9 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. for the purpose of clause-by-clause consideration of the bill; and

On Tuesday, June 16, 2020, at 4 p.m., those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved, and the Chair of the committee shall interrupt the proceedings and shall, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto. At this time, the Chair shall allow one 20-minute waiting period pursuant to standing order 132(a); and

That the committee shall report the bill to the House no later than the sitting day following Tuesday, June 16, 2020; and

That, should the committee fail to report the bill on that day, the bill shall be deemed to be passed by the committee and shall be deemed to be reported to and received by the House; and

That, upon receiving the report of the Standing Committee on Social Policy, the Speaker shall put the question for adoption of the report forthwith, and at such time the bill shall be ordered for third reading, which order may be called that same day; and

That the order of the House dated Tuesday, March 10, 2020, referring Bill 175,

An Act to amend and repeal various Acts respecting home care and community services, to the Standing Committee on Social Policy be discharged and the bill be instead referred to the Standing Committee on the Legislative Assembly; and

That, notwithstanding the order of the House dated March 19, 2020, the Standing Committee on the Legislative Assembly shall be authorized to meet on Monday, June 15, 2020, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m., on Tuesday, June 16, 2020, from 9 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m., and on Wednesday, June 17, 2020, from 9 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. for the purpose of public hearings on Bill 175; and

That the Clerk of the Committee, in consultation with the committee Chair, be authorized to arrange the following with regard to Bill 175:

—that the deadline for requests to appear be 6 p.m. on Tuesday, June 9, 2020; and

—that the Clerk of the Committee provide a list of all interested presenters to each member of the subcommittee and their designate following the deadline for requests to appear; and

—that the deadline for written submissions be 6 p.m. on Wednesday, June 17, 2020; and

—that the deadline for filing amendments to the bill with the Clerk of the Committee shall be 6 p.m. on Friday, June 19, 2020; and

—that the subcommittee on committee business shall be authorized to otherwise determine the method of proceeding on the bill; and

That the committee be authorized to meet on Monday, June 22, 2020, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m., and on Tuesday, June 23, 2020, from 9 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. for the purpose of clause-by-clause consideration of the bill; and

On Tuesday, June 23, 2020, at 4 p.m., those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved, and the Chair of the Committee shall interrupt the proceedings and shall, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto. At this time, the Chair shall allow one 20-minute waiting period pursuant to standing order 132(a); and

That the committee shall report the bill to the House no later than the sitting day following Tuesday, June 23, 2020; and

That, should the committee fail to report the bill on that day, the bill shall be deemed to be passed by the committee and shall be deemed to be reported to and received by the House; and

That, upon receiving the report of the Standing Committee on the Legislative Assembly, the Speaker shall put the question for adoption of the report forthwith, and at such time the bill shall be ordered for third reading, which order may be called that same day; and

That, notwithstanding the order of the House dated March 19, 2020, the Standing Committee on Justice Policy shall be authorized to meet on Wednesday, June 10, 2020, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m., on Thursday, June 11, 2020, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m., and on Friday, June 12, 2020 from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. for the purpose of public hearings on Bill 161,

An Act to enact the Legal Aid Services Act, 2019 and to make various amendments to other Acts dealing with the courts and other justice matters; and

That the Clerk of the Committee, in consultation with the committee Chair, be authorized to arrange the following with regard to Bill 161:

—that the deadline for requests to appear be 6 p.m. on Friday, June 5, 2020; and

—that the Clerk of the Committee provide a list of all interested presenters to each member of the subcommittee and their designate following the deadline for requests to appear; and

—that the deadline for written submissions be 6 p.m. on Friday, June 12, 2020; and

—that the deadline for filing amendments to the bill with the Clerk of the Committee shall be 6 p.m. on Monday, June 15, 2020; and

—that the subcommittee on committee business shall be authorized to otherwise determine the method of proceeding on the bill; and

That the committee be authorized to meet on Wednesday, June 17, 2020, from 9 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. and on Thursday, June 18, 2020, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. for the purpose of clause-by-clause consideration of the bill; and

On Thursday, June 18, 2020, at 4 p.m., those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved, and the Chair of the committee shall interrupt the proceedings and shall, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto. At this time, the Chair shall allow one 20-minute waiting period pursuant to standing order 132(a); and

That the committee shall report the bill to the House no later than the sitting day following Thursday, June 19, 2020; and

That, should the committee fail to report the bill on that day, the bill shall be deemed to be passed by the committee and shall be deemed to be reported to and received by the House; and

That, upon receiving the report of the Standing Committee on Justice Policy, the Speaker shall put the question for adoption of the report forthwith, and at such time the bill shall be ordered for third reading, which order may be called that same day.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Khanjin has moved government notice of motion number 77. I’ve been advised that there is a typo in the motion. It should say “Thursday, June 18,” and it says what?

The Deputy Clerk (Mr. Trevor Day): “Thursday, June 17.”

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): It says, “Thursday, June 17.” It should actually be the 18th. The Thursday is June 18, not the 17th.

Further debate? I recognize again the member for Barrie–Innisfil.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As you see by this motion, when our government got elected, we hit the ground running to accomplish so much for Ontarians. When I was knocking on doors and talking to many of my constituents, they often said, “What does the government really do for us? How can they achieve progress? We see a lot of debate, we see a lot of bickering, and we see a lot of things in the debate. What about grand achievements and really delivering on promises?”

You often heard from us, “Promises made, promises kept,” and that comes with great feedback. I know that the residents of Barrie–Innisfil, especially during this time of COVID-19, have really praised this government for some of the economic achievements we have achieved, because we’re in a better position to weather the storm.

Of course this is a health pandemic—and I want to, of course, thank all the front-line workers for all their efforts, whether it be Stevenson Memorial or whether it be Royal Victoria Hospital or Southlake—all hospitals that are very close to my riding. They’ve been doing incredible work. I just think of a lot of the retirement homes and long-term-care homes with a lot of their nurses and their PSWs who are doing so much work.

It’s one of the reasons that, on personal support worker appreciation day locally, I had launched a recognition award for the community to get involved, where they can nominate their local—whether it’s a nurse or whether it’s a personal support worker—to nominate to recognize them for what they’re doing today, because they’re working really hard. We need to respect that and do our part as well, and to keep plugging away and working through the summer. We really owe it to all Ontarians. We owe it to those who are keeping us safe and we owe it to the taxpaying residents of this province.

When you talk to nurses who are working day in and day out—we’re talking about sitting for a few hours a day, not even going into midnight, not even going to 4 a.m. But some of these nurses—and I want to thank many of them. One of them is a good friend of mine, Andrea Logan. She has been working, day in and day out, at Royal Victoria hospital on a lot of the shifts. She has been on different floors doing testing and what have you. I wanted to take this opportunity to also thank her for all her efforts.

She is a single mom and she has a 12-year-old son. You can only think of the challenges that she has had to overcome, like finding daycare. Of course, that’s something our government also took action on: providing daycare for our emergency workers and individuals like her, so that she can have someone take care of her son. So that’s wonderful to see.

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention our paramedics, because it’s paramedics’ week. Certainly, they’re working day in and day out, and they look to their parliamentarians to respect the breadth of democracy and those who came before us, who fought in World War I and World War II so we can have the freedoms that we uphold within this Legislature, to debate and to have that discussion, which is another reason why this motion is so important.

Going back to paramedics’ week and how important it is to recognize those paramedics: When you do call and you need someone to help, they’re often the first ones to the scene, and they’re there to help you during challenging times. I know that when you do make that phone call, you’re in a very vulnerable situation. They are calm, collected and they are really out there.

They’ve always done a lot in the community. I know, back home in the Simcoe county area, every summer they do the stretcher race. I know that the minister for women and children did that stretcher race with me last summer. We would take turns riding the stretcher. They are all pushing the stretcher. They’re not just doing it for publicity; they’re doing it for the community, for fundraising. They did it to raise money for a cath lab, to save lives at Royal Victoria hospital.

If you are a heart patient, we know that time is muscle, and that the sooner you can get that heart patient to the hospital, the quicker you can save their life. So they went out on this very hot day—I would say that it’s very much like the day we have today—and they were just pushing the stretcher, and here I was, lying in it.

So I want to thank all the Simcoe county paramedics, of course, for all of the work they’ve been doing every year, day in and day out. They don’t take Christmas off. They don’t take Thanksgiving off. They’re always there. They don’t take summers off either. Again, we owe it to them to do our work as best as we can to uphold democracy, just as they do in the health care field, upholding their medical obligations and being out there to save lives.

On the topic of saving lives, we had, yesterday, a grand achievement within this Legislature. My colleague from Eglinton–Lawrence tabled a bill that does that very thing: save lives for those who may need access to a defibrillator. There are many public areas that don’t have a defibrillator.

I think of, back home in Barrie—we have a very tragic story: Chase McEachern. He was a young hockey player and he needed a defibrillator, but it was not there in time. So his parents—it was a challenging time for them, of course, to mourn the loss of their young son—wanted to do something about it to prevent other moms and dads to see that happen to their children. So many hockey arenas now have a defibrillator. But that same opportunity and possibility to save lives that is in our hockey arenas today isn’t in all public areas. For that family, the Chase McEachern family in Barrie, it means so much to them.

I wanted to thank the member from Eglinton–Lawrence for her ability to get this bill forward and pass it, and work with so many people. We worked with members of the opposition on it as well, and there was support from all around. It really shows you what can be accomplished in this Legislature when we do work together. And hey, we’ve got all summer now to work together, so there’s a lot of things to look forward to.

Again, when we talk about our member, she has been working really hard on that private member’s bill, so it’s good to see it achieved. The fact that it is going to be saving lives across the province—and that we can look back and say that during this pandemic, yes, the government and the entire Legislature unanimously agreed on motions like the emergency orders motions. We worked together on that. Protecting workers: We came back and did that.

But it shouldn’t just stop there; we need to keep going. There’s a lot more business that we need to have happen within this Legislature to bring progress to Ontario, because when you think about it, yes, there is a health care pandemic, but there are huge economic consequences. For the first time, I’ve heard a lot of individuals from all different walks and parties actually talk about businesses and the struggles they are going through. We have that commonality here in the Legislature, wanting to help small businesses, which is great because, as we know, they are the creators of the mass majority of jobs in our ridings.

You just take a drive in anyone’s riding, whether you’re in Kenora or you’re in Barrie or you’re in Muskoka or Eglinton–Lawrence or Markham–Stouffville: You see these businesses and their empty parking lots. They’re empty. Finally they’re coming back, but now that they are able to open their doors, if they have a street-front entrance, they are able to work, so why can’t they expect the same of their elected members? Which is why we are here—to really stand up for them and get things moving.

We talk about the supply chain. One of the things in this motion is talking very much about the supply chain when it comes to our agriculture sector. I know that in Innisfil—it’s not a surprise; it’s a statistic all around the world: We have more chickens than people. The agriculture sector there is certainly thriving. There’s not going to be a takeover any time soon, I’m hoping, but it is certainly thriving. We have a lot of dairy farmers, and certainly we’ve seen the impacts of dairy within this pandemic, of course.

I know that our Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs—I’ve been on several phone calls and Zoom meetings with him and with my local agricultural workers. These folks don’t get thanked enough, so I want to thank all the agri-food workers, those working at food processing plants, and our farmers. You’ve really stepped up to the plate for this pandemic. I’ve seen countless stories of food bank donations. I know that our colleague from Mississauga has been working with Sobeys to deliver food. We’re calling him our new Uber Eats politician because he’s bringing food to all communities.

In fact, in my own community, Nutrafarms is a place that provides local meats. They were able to donate some of their local meats to his efforts to deliver to families. Likewise, we are working with some local onion farmers to get some onions to make some recipes that he’ll be delivering to residents. So you really see how important that food supply chain is.

We need to address some of the red tape that happens within that food supply chain, and I certainly heard a lot of that through folks in my riding and a lot of farmers, and that’s why one of the things we will be debating this summer has to do with just that: with our agricultural sector and being able to get at some of the red tape that exists within the ag sector, but also to protect our farmers and protect the livestock. I think that a lot of us talk about biosecurity. That’s so important, and that is certainly something we’re going to be doing.

The other thing we talk about is how we actually transport those goods. We’ve got our member from Mississauga, who is getting in his car and delivering the food, but you need proper roads and you need proper bridges to get those supplies to market. When it comes to infrastructure and transit development of any kind, that is just so important to the entire supply chain, so of course it’s a very big priority. It’s something we embarked on as a province. It’s certainly a challenge, especially when we think about the Toronto Transit Commission and being able to fix some of that movement of people.

You can say that that is the service sector, getting people from point A to point B to their jobs, to their loved ones, and to get those support workers to their destination if that’s the method of transportation they are using. They rely on and expect that when they are working really hard day and night and working those night shifts, they have proper transit that gets them to where they need to go. It’s one of the things we’ll be debating again this summer and will be working on, because a lot of those individuals are working and they rely on us to do the same.

So, again, tying this back to the motion at hand, and thanking all those—something that hasn’t been mentioned a lot, but I know that our Minister of Transportation, our Associate Minister of Transportation, and our workers who are getting us from—the GO train drivers are still operating. The GO train, the GO bus drivers and the Toronto Transit Commission drivers, whether they’re driving the subway or the streetcar—all the stuff that they’re doing. The maintenance crew that are behind all of those efforts—to thank them, because they’re working through this whole pandemic. If there is a call for something that needs to be repaired, no matter what time of day it is, they’re there.

Likewise, as parliamentarians, we owe it to them, too, to be here and to be able to work throughout the summer on accomplishments for taxpaying residents of Ontario and all Ontarians. It’s so vital. But I did want to also take that moment to thank those workers because they’re out there, getting many residents to where they need to be, and doing it safely. We’ve seen many examples around the world of how you can use public transit safely. Certainly, all of them are washing their hands or they’re wearing gloves. We’ve heard a lot about, if you are in confined spaces, to wear a mask, and some of those things that you have to do.

On the topic of masks, it’s incredible to see how many people in our communities—I’m sure that all of you have examples of the families that step up to make these homemade masks. I know that the Richardson family—Jennifer Richardson’s husband has been at his sewer this whole time, making handmade masks for everyone in Barrie–Innisfil. I have picked up several masks from him for myself—I have one today with me. Certainly, I wear that when I need to wear it, but I have also been able to pick up masks for our senior communities that are in independent living and in their homes, and they may need those things.

They’ve really stepped up to the plate to make those masks. Certainly, we’ve seen many other individuals throughout the riding who have been making those masks.

I know that as I look around to my colleagues, as they were walking in here today some had their masks on. A lot of them were also made in their ridings—homemade. Some of them have personal touches and different colours; that’s really nice to see. But that’s the positive side of things. I think there is a lot of negativity out there. There is a lot of anxiety and stress. We have to hold on to those really positive stories in our community and thank the individuals for stepping up when it comes to this pandemic.

A lot of them who may be at home—they don’t have the ability to have a job. Maybe they have applied for the Canadian emergency relief benefit or other things. At least they know that, with the job protection legislation that we passed in this Legislature unanimously with support by all parties, they will still have a job to go to. But all of us also owe it to those individuals. We’re so fortunate to represent the people of Ontario. We have to ensure that we are here, working and passing legislation that will affect them first-hand because, coming out of this pandemic, it’s going to be all hands on deck as to how we get the economy rolling again.

I know that the Premier has committed to never being reliant on other countries or being vulnerable to not be able to secure personal protection equipment. That’s a huge economic opportunity in our province. We just saw yesterday—we’ve got the member for Whitby here. The General Motors plant is going to be making a lot of masks, which is incredible. That is a made-in-Canada and made-in-Ontario solution to this huge problem. But think about the jobs it’s going to create for the member for Whitby and those workers that can go back to work.

Our Minister of Finance has launched these jobs and recovery committees. I’ve had several already. One thing I had mentioned on the jobs and recovery committee is, when it comes to the auto sector and what they’re doing, they test their workers every day. They’re screening them. And they can call in; if they have any symptoms, they don’t have to go in to work. All these things are happening to protect our workers.

When we came together in this House to pass that bill, it was great because it really complemented a lot of those efforts that they’re doing right now within the other sectors of our economy that are so vital to keep things rolling and to keep things going. That’s going to be so critical after this, as we get through this together and as we turn our minds to what the Ontario economy looks like.

A lot of the things that are in the motion that we are debating today are very much a part of that: rolling the economy and being able to say, “Within the ag sector, what are we doing to protect the supply chain, to protect our livestock and to protect our farmers? But also, how do we get people moving with transit, and thanking all those transit workers?”

When it comes to community care and community medicine, we’ve seen how important it is. I’ve seen it. I spoke to it last week—our many senior homes in the ridings and the amount of work that those are doing. But there are a lot of seniors that live independently in their home. They want to stay there as long as possible.

Sandycove Acres is known to be the community of golf carts, and yes, they get around the community in their golf carts. Their most famous event is their Canada Day parade, where they all decorate their golf carts and go out and parade, and I’m in there and my fellow member of Parliament is there. Unfortunately, it won’t be happening like it normally does this year, but we’ll find an alternative way to make it happen safely.

But what did those members of Sandycove Acres do to help this pandemic? There were these ladies that lunch who get together, a group of seniors who get together, and they do fundraisers. The Barrie women’s shelter often relies on many donations. They receive some government funding, both federally and provincially, and through the county. But these ladies couldn’t get together to physically lunch because they wanted to be safe, of course—they’re part of the more vulnerable population—so they went online. They took to Facebook instead of all getting together for lunch, and they asked everyone to put in $10.

Their goal was to raise about $1,000, and they exceeded that goal. They were able to get a cheque from the Sandycove Acres ladies that lunch group and send it to the Barrie women’s shelter. Where there is a will, there is a way, Mr. Speaker.

Here, too, this government has a will to work and help all Ontarians, as I know all members of the House have a will to do that, because we do come here every so often to extend the emergency orders, and we do come back here to have question period and to have that democratic debate—so, so important. It makes me think of all those other efforts we have throughout our ridings with people who constantly work and put those efforts in.

But I just wanted to mention some of those things and just remind people why we’re here, and really kind of reach—this is really formidable for all of us in our ridings. No one could predict this was going to happen. All of us owe it to really step up and do what we can to help our communities, like I was saying earlier, whether it’s delivering groceries or I know many of our members have been out there delivering personal protective equipment to local residents. I know that care kits have also been delivered, a lot of that, and just those feel-good efforts so that we can really get through this with kindness and positivity and not negativity.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Sudbury I think has a point of order.

Mr. Jamie West: I appreciate all the comments and the information about what’s happening in the member’s riding. I don’t see how it relates to the motion under debate. It was a last-minute motion that was brought forward. I’m interested in hearing about why it is very important. The other colour commentary is interesting, but I feel like we’ve sort of veered into the weeds, and I was wondering if we could get back on track.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member is quite right: The comments in the debate have to relate to the motion or the bill. But I find that the member for Barrie–Innisfil is speaking to the motion, and would ask her to continue.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Thank you to the member opposite, but they’re just examples to show you that while people are working and doing all these efforts in all of our communities, we also owe it to them to be here and to be working on those efforts.

Some of the bills that I had mentioned in the motion that we will be debating have first-hand impacts on local members. I know we had another member, from Etobicoke–Lakeshore, come to Innisfil, to the Harry Eisses farm, where biosecurity is really important to them. So passing the biosecurity is so important.

We saw first-hand what Harry Eisses does, where, before you walk in to see where the egg production is made and all of that is done, you’ve got to put on layers: You’ve got to cover your shoes; you’ve got to cover your clothes; you’ve got to wear a hairnet, gloves, everything. Think about what’s happening now. Everyone is wearing gloves and covering their face and whatnot. But that’s their day-to-day. That’s how they protect their chickens to make sure that there is no infection that happens there.

Certainly, we were able to walk through and see how amazing his operation was, and, more importantly, how important this bill is going to be to him, because for him, that’s his livelihood. If there is some sort of infection or some sort of outbreak at his chicken farm, that’s his livelihood. But also, just from a caring perspective, those are animals that you don’t want to see hurt. You don’t want to see them ill, just like you don’t want to see a human ill. Certainly, that’s something that he cares about. You have a lot of cattle farmers—same thing.

They don’t want to see their cattle ill because someone has marched onto their property, trespassing illegally, not allowed, and suddenly you have an outbreak there.

I think, now more than ever, this is so relevant and so important because we’ve seen what has happened with the outbreaks in our community with COVID-19, but you imagine what the other side of things are, what happens in our agri-food sector, that you don’t want that happening. That is our food supply.

I know right now—he normally has this part of his farm where you can go in. He calls it the vending machine for eggs, but really it’s just that you take the eggs you want to buy and you drop off the money. It’s the honour system. There’s a little till there to make change if you need change, and you pick up your eggs. But right now, during this pandemic, that area is closed. Again, he wants to protect his livelihood but also the chickens so that there’s no outbreak or anything amongst his workers or amongst the chickens there. There are actually pylons when you drive by; there are lots of pylons.

I’ve had many residents ask me when they are going to open, because they want their fresh eggs. Unfortunately, I can’t really give them much of a reply because we have to take safety and health—utmost importance. Certainly, that takes precedence, but it shows you why our supply chain and the agri-food bill that we will be debating this summer are so important.

When I talked about the Minister of Agriculture—he actually came to Innisfil, and we did a round table with farmers about the bill. You had grain farmers and you had livestock farmers etc., and they said that this was needed years ago. They’re finally excited that a government is actually moving through with it. So that’s very good to hear.

I know that the member for Eglinton–Lawrence—of course, transit is very important to a lot of members. Another thing we’ll be talking about this summer is really getting people moving. We owe it to Ontarians to have a state-of-the-art transit system. Frankly, when we all travel—when we were allowed to travel before COVID-19—if you compare Ontario to other areas, again, you talk about movement of goods, but you also talk about the service sector and movement of people. That has to be seamless. That’s going to have a huge impact on our economy.

If we can get that right, that has a direct impact on our economy, and we need that more than ever coming out of COVID-19 because of all the things that are linked to transit projects. That’s a lot of jobs, job creation—the entire supply chain.

Near my riding I have Decast. It’s just outside the riding. They actually make all the molding for the subways. They’re ready. They said, “It’s great. You guys, when you’re getting this better, faster transit stuff through”—they’ll want to come to the helm to help. It’s local pride for a lot of people, but that’s jobs.

They do have a few jobs open now. They’re still going and they’re still working—working safely. Certainly, if there’s anyone watching at home who is looking for job opportunities, there are lots out there. I’ve seen a lot of “help wanted” signs. Those economic opportunities exist out there.

We, as a government, have the opportunity to make even more economic opportunities coming out of this pandemic, and that is through a lot of this legislation that we’re going to be debating here over the summer. I want to thank everyone for their time. I look forward to seeing you in the summer and having more progress.

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

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I rise today to participate, in the debate on this motion that was brought forward by the government, as the acting House leader for the official opposition. I want to say at the outset how striking is the difference in tone in this Legislature yesterday and today when you reflect back on the earlier sessions we have come together for during this state of emergency.

Yesterday, we saw the government bring forward three bills with no notice whatsoever to the official opposition. Very late yesterday, they scheduled this motion that we are debating today with, again, very, very little notice to the official opposition. The other days that we had met in this place were determined through a process of negotiation and collaboration and consensus. That, Speaker, is how the people of this province of Ontario expect us to function in a democracy in the middle of a pandemic.

It’s more important than ever that we have that kind of cross-party negotiation, discussion, collaboration and agreement—agreement on what we should be talking about, what the priorities are of the people who we represent, and what the concerns are that all of us bring on behalf of our constituents.

It is disappointing, as I said yesterday, that the government has chosen to depart from the way that we have functioned previously. The state of emergency is still very much in effect, and yet we have this new, kind of arbitrary approach by the government as to how we are going to do business in this Legislature.

I heard the member from Barrie–Innisfil talk about the democratic process. Speaker, it is so disrespectful to democracy to act in the way that we see this government acting, to act in the way that we saw them act yesterday. Bringing bills forward with no advance notice to the official opposition limits our ability as MPPs to participate meaningfully in the debate and bring forward the concerns that our constituents want us to talk about. But most of all, in the middle of a pandemic, the concerns and priorities of our constituents have shifted, Speaker.

People are looking at the most pressing issues that are before them, and the bills that we talked about yesterday really had nothing or very, very little to do with the issues that we are facing in this COVID-19 emergency.

One of the most disappointing things that we saw here yesterday was the government voting against a unanimous consent motion to allow the critic for the official opposition to stand down the lead on Bill 184, a bill that addresses social housing in the province and purports to provide further protections for tenants.

You know, the government operates with cabinet ministers who are supposed to have knowledge of their files, and that is how the official opposition is structured as well. We have critics who have a lot of knowledge and expertise in their files and who get briefings from the ministry about legislation that is going to be brought forward. It is the critic’s responsibility to do the in-depth analysis of the bills that we are going to be debating in this place. To refuse the opportunity for our critic to participate in the debate was really unconscionable. It was disrespectable to the democratic process.

It was disrespectful to the way that we are supposed to treat each other in this place, listen to each other in this place and, through our voices, listen to the views of the people we represent.

I have to stay, Speaker, I don’t know if you had an opportunity to read some of—there were some recent articles in the New York Times about the countries that have been most successful in dealing with COVID-19. Interestingly, they are led by women. In particular, Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand is being held up as a model leader, but others—Angela Merkel in Germany; the Prime Minister of Finland—these are countries that operate on a system of proportional representation. In my critic responsibility within the official opposition, that is another one of my critic roles: democratic reform.

You have to reflect on the way that an embedded system of proportional representation forces parties to work together. It forces solutions to be worked out that take into account the views of many diverse opinions and people who have different political perspectives. You reach a better decision once you engage in processes like that.

The motion that we have before us today is the counter. It’s the exact opposite of the approaches that have been so effective in other countries that have political systems that allow the back and forth and that allow the participation of all members of the Legislature in determining how the government is going to address the needs of the people in Ontario.

This motion proposes that the Legislature return beyond the already agreed-upon sitting days—as I pointed out, those dates were set through a process of consensus and negotiation at the House leaders’ meeting. But this motion proposes additional sitting days: four additional days in June and nine additional days in July.

For people in Ontario who hear that, they may think it’s really important that the Legislature continue to sit, that the Legislature debate issues that are critical to our ability to move through this pandemic, to reopen the economy safely, to ensure that workers are protected, to address the horrifying situation in our long-term-care facilities. These are all high priorities for our constituents.

People seeing this motion, hearing that there are 13 more days that the government has proposed that the Legislature convene, might think this is a good idea because we’re going to be able to really look at issues related to COVID-19.

Unfortunately, when you actually look at the motion, after it sets out the 13 additional sitting days, it dictates exactly what is going to be addressed in those additional sitting days. Nothing that the government wants to address, that’s set out in this motion, relates to COVID-19. That is a concern. That is a real concern. We see a government that is blindly focused on continuing to push through its agenda, and it’s using its power as a majority government to bring in a motion that is going to do exactly that: to push through four pieces of legislation that were developed long prior to the pandemic and really are not the top-of-mind concerns for people that we represent.

Not only that; this motion proposes to use a virtual committee process to deal with these bills, to get public input on the content of these bills. My friends from the independents and the Liberals and the Greens are not here today, but certainly they were with me—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to remind the House that you can’t point out the absence of any member.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: Apologies.

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

Ms. Peggy Sattler: Okay—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I know you didn’t mean it in the—but I think I should point that out.

Ms.

Peggy Sattler: My friends from the Liberals and the Greens and the independents will know that, during the House leader meetings that we held when we were discussing the sittings of the Legislature and the issues that were going to be dealt with—they will have heard the government House leader say that, given that we have never in this Legislature held virtual committee meetings before, we would do sort of a trial run, that we would bring forward a single, relatively non-contentious bill—for example, a bill like the Legislative Assembly Act, a bill that was dealt with rather quickly in this Legislature because there was widespread agreement that that the measures set out in that bill would improve the functioning of the Legislative Assembly.

So the government House leader had said to us, “Why don’t we use a bill like the Legislative Assembly Act and do a trial run of this virtual committee process, where we’re going to be enabling presenters to come and speak before the committee, we’re going to be enabling members of the committee to participate virtually?” Whenever you implement a new process, there are always going to be kinks. There are always going to be unanticipated challenges that need to be worked out.

Speaker, I cannot understand why this government has changed its mind about proceeding in that way and why it has decided that it is going to push through four bills which are—honestly, Speaker, they are highly contentious bills. They are bills that are very polarizing, and this government has decided that they’re going to implement a virtual committee process for four bills at the same time. It’s not even that they’re doing a single contentious bill and going to see how that works out virtually; they’re doing four contentious bills at exactly the same time in an untested, untried, brand new virtual committee hearing process.

That is a real concern, Speaker: whether that process is really going to allow people in this province to engage in debate on bills that aren’t on the top of their priority list, because they’re preoccupied, as they should be, with COVID-19. But still, we do want to ensure that when these bills come to committee, there are full and meaningful opportunities for the public to participate, so that is a concern.

The other significant concern with this motion is the days that it proposes that the Legislative Assembly meet. The four days in June are Tuesdays and Wednesdays, and certainly that is the

schedule that we have operated under last week, this week and next week. I think that that was an agreement that was reached through consensus at the House leaders’ meeting, and generally that has worked well for us for these three weeks.

But at the same time that the government wants to push through its legislative agenda, the legislative agenda that did not serve the people of this province well—when you think about the cuts to public health that compromised our ability to respond effectively to this COVID-19 emergency, when you think about the decision to end proactive inspections of long-term-care facilities that made our long-term-care homes so vulnerable to the devastation of COVID-19, and the lack of support for PSWs—at the same time that this government is just laser-focused on pushing through its legislative agenda, it is also closing its ears to any possibility that private members may have some good ideas about how to address the COVID-19 emergency.

I know in my community the only thing I’m hearing from people in London West is related to COVID-19. Private members’ public business, which is held on Thursdays, will not be possible under the terms of this motion because this motion proposes, as I said, that we sit for Tuesdays and Wednesdays in June, and then Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays in July. That completely eliminates any opportunity for discussion of private members’ public business.

It was interesting. I heard the member from Barrie–Innisfil talk about the grand achievement that was secured here yesterday in the Legislature with the passing of Bill 141, which was a private member’s bill brought forward by the member for Eglinton–Lawrence, but more than that, it was the result of a collaboration between several MPPs. My colleague the MPP for Nickel Belt and the member for Ottawa South had also brought forward PMBs that were similar; they dealt with the same issue of the defibrillator registry.

As I said, without notice, we had that bill come forward here yesterday morning in the Legislature, and we saw its passage with support from all members of the House, but that shows you the power of private members’ public business. That shows you the importance of enabling members to bring forward private members’ bills or private members’ motions whenever we gather together to participate in this democratic project.

We have seen in this place many grand achievements as a result of private members’ initiatives. We saw presumptive WSIB coverage for PTSD and first responders. Again, that was a private member’s bill. That began with a private member’s bill by my former colleague the member for Parkdale High Park, and it was taken up by the government. My colleague the member for Nickel Belt had a private member’s bill on banning tanning beds, and that was also taken up by the government and moved forward.

There are many ways that MPPs can participate in the legislative process and bring forward good ideas that everybody recognizes are important and that should have an opportunity to be considered. Yet this motion that is before us provides no opportunity to allow that consideration to happen because it excludes Thursdays from the

schedule that the Legislature would meet. That, Speaker, is a huge loss for democracy and, honestly, for the government.

The government does not have a monopoly on ideas as to how to respond to COVID-19. Members on our side of the House, members of the official opposition, independent members, and even their backbench members for goodness’ sake, might have some valuable input that should be considered and should be acted on by the government. But, as I said, there will be absolutely no opportunity to consider those things.

I know in my community, one of the things that I’m hearing about and am deeply, deeply concerned about that I would be interested in as a private member’s motion or a private member’s bill has to do with the increase of sexual violence, gender-based violence, as a result of this pandemic. We are hearing women’s shelters; their calls are through the roof. The calls are absolutely through the roof. Even the domestic violence and sexual assault treatment centre at the hospital has reported a significant spike in people who are coming to the hospital to report a sexual assault. This is a grave, grave concern.

There is a lot of research to substantiate the high, high risk to women as a result of this pandemic. We should be looking at how we are going to respond collectively as a province going forward to this abuse that so many women have been experiencing throughout this pandemic.

Another issue that is of huge concern to my community, and I’m sure to all members in this place, is the risks that children have been experiencing as their families are struggling with the financial hardship of COVID-19. Schools are closed. Child care centres are closed. Those are places where, if a child was experiencing abuse at home, it could be first identified and then reported to a CAS.

I am deathly afraid for all of those children who are in maybe a one-bedroom apartment on a high floor, with no access to green space. Their parents are struggling with the financial consequences of COVID-19. They are struggling to try to implement a learn-at-home agenda without technology. Maybe they work in a convenience store without access to PPE. They’re coming home. They’re worried about carrying infection to their family members. They’re worried about whether they are letting down their responsibilities as parents to implement learn-at-home.

They’re worried about their children cloistered in this small apartment without being able to play with their friends. I think, Speaker, that there is a very, very real risk that we are going to see so many more children who will need supportive services after this pandemic ends.

Again, when I earlier talked about the government being determined to push through an agenda that has not served the people of Ontario well, we only have to look at that issue of protection for vulnerable children. We saw this government—one of the first things it decided to do was to eliminate the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth. And, my goodness, Speaker, if ever there was a time when children and youth will need an advocate in this province, it’s in the wake of this global pandemic.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Who takes away the advocate?

Ms. Peggy Sattler: Yes.

Most recently, in the budget that was brought down just prior to the pandemic, we saw significant cuts to children’s mental health services. We saw this government re-organize children’s mental health, from the Ministry of Children and Youth Services over to the Ministry of Health. But in the Ministry of Children and Youth Services, there were people there who understood children’s mental health. We now have a monster Ministry of Health that is obviously preoccupied with other issues. It’s very, very, very concerning, about where children are in this government’s agenda. Certainly, we don’t see children in those bills that the government is proposing to deal with over the summer.

I wanted to start to address more specifics of the motion. The motion talks about four bills that will go to committee in June. There’s Bill 156, and that is the bill that deals with biosecurity and the protection of our food supply; Bill 171, the bill that deals with building Toronto’s transit; and Bill 175, the bill that deals with the reorganization of home care. Speaker, timing is everything. Who reorganizes home care in the midst of a global—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Timing is everything. Exactly; I agree.

It is now 10:15. I’m compelled to interrupt the member, but I thank her for her presentation.

Debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Homelessness

Ms. Rima Berns-McGown: Long-term care is not the only humanitarian disaster unfolding in Ontario. Homelessness was in crisis before COVID, and now it is a public health nightmare.

Folks like Michael Eschbach are falling ill to COVID because they can’t self-isolate. They are terrified, forced to sleep rough or in tents if they don’t want to be in shelters that are petri dishes for COVID-19. Shelters, respite centres and drop-ins are maxed out. No one can self-isolate. The government has refused to explicitly include front-line shelter and drop-in workers in the wage top-up so they continue to work multiple sites, potentially carrying the infection with them—precisely why COVID exploded in long-term-care facilities.

There is still no universal testing across the shelter system, so the infection continues to spread. When shelter users are kicked out for the day, they share public spaces, including transit, with essential workers, contributing to the community spread that is preventing Ontario from opening safely. Clearing encampments without offering people hotel rooms where they can self-isolate contravenes United Nations and CDC guidelines, but cities do it anyway because they don’t have enough hotel rooms.

Cities are overwhelmed. The province needs to step up and provide the money and logistics for hotel rooms for all Ontario’s unsheltered people.

This is a nightmare that is about to become worse: people who have lost their jobs, who can’t pay their rent or arrears are going to swell the ranks of the homeless, and Bill 184 actually makes it easier for landlords to evict tenants mid-pandemic. The government needs to fix this now.

COVID-19 response

Mr. Daryl Kramp: Today I would like to take this opportunity to say how absolutely humbled I am to represent the riding of Hastings–Lennox and Addington. I continue to be inspired by the exceptional kindness of so many individuals in this very challenging time. Like so many across the aisle and here, my heart is broken as I witness the hardships, the pressure this pandemic has caused for so many people and to so many businesses. My team has worked tirelessly to answer questions and provide resources and assistance to families, businesses and individuals in our riding.

My peers—my colleagues in this House—have demonstrated tremendous leadership: engaging with stakeholders and ensuing that we are accessing and working with all the professionals and advice, and making the best possible decisions with the information we have.

As I consider my riding as a snapshot of ridings across the province and across this country, I am hopeful in our future. I can tell you, it certainly won’t be easy; I think we all recognize that reality. But we are resilient. We recognize the value of hard work, the power of information and innovation, and the spirit of co-operation. I am confident and I remain confident not only in our systems but in our members’ representation and all of our supporters that we as Canadians and we as Ontarians can and will move forward together. Thank you, and God bless.

Long-term care

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: Yesterday, the Canadian Armed Forces released a report on the state of the five long-term-care homes that they were deployed to because of the coronavirus. What the Canadian Armed Forces uncovered was unspeakable. I can’t imagine how families and their loved ones in long-term care are feeling, how they are processing this information, and how they must be filled with worry and, quite frankly, disgust.

My office heard from Lyndsay that her mother-in-law shares a room with someone who had tested positive for COVID, and the for-profit long-term-care facility didn’t know what to do in that instance. It took days before she was removed from that room she was sharing with someone.

We cannot allow this government to express outrage with words of anger on the failings of what’s happening. They are part of that. There are many governments that are at fault here, but what we need to do is we need to make sure we can take action. We need to make sure we can get inspections back on track, take over all long-term-care homes that are not safe, and call on this government to put a full, independent, transparent inquiry. It’s a find-and-fix. It doesn’t mean that they can’t make interim changes that will actually help families and their loved ones suffering in long-term care now. They have been suffering under the coronavirus and have been suffering before.

We need to make sure we do the right thing. This is or opportunity. I call on this government for a full public, independent inquiry.

COVID-19 response

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. Throughout these challenging times, we have all witnessed incredible acts of kindness, generosity and compassion in our communities.

Ontario’s front-line health care professionals deserve our thanks for their sacrifice and determination to saving lives and defeating this disease. Like other front-line medical professionals, my wife is a medical doctor. I admire her courage and commitment to her patients every morning she leaves the house for work.

In my riding of Markham–Thornhill, I receive phone calls almost every day from doctors, nurses, personal support workers and other front-line staff. I know we say it every day, but we can’t say it enough: These people are our heroes. There also are many ordinary people doing extraordinary things. I have worked with community donors not just in Markham but across the GTA to deliver face masks, meals and other essential supplies to those most in need.

I want to say thank you to the generous support from SDI Supplies, Exact Imaging, Claire Lin, Peter Zhou, SuOn Academy, Parya Trillium Foundation, the Islamic Society of Markham and the Indo-Canadian community for your efforts. The kindness you have shown to your fellow Ontarians during this time is an example to us all.

Northern municipalities

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: Small municipalities in the north face a devastating fiscal situation. While they all have limited fiscal capacity, small towns must face new COVID expenses and keep up with infrastructure that cannot be shut down. Moosonee, for example, continues to operate the main airport of the James Bay, in spite of having lost most revenues. They must keep the airport alive because they serve medical, flood, forecasting and cargo operations. Also, most northern municipalities have taken relief action.

Hearst, for instance, paused a tax increase while facing a revenue loss of a quarter of a million dollars between mid-March and April. Other towns have waived interest and penalties, offered payment deferrals or service rebates to small businesses.

Not long ago the Premier said that he won’t spare a penny to help the people of Ontario. Families, people and workers depend on northern, small towns’ services and infrastructure. The Premier needs to stick to his word and offer direct financial aid to northern municipalities before it’s too late.

Family caregivers

Mr. John Fraser: This pandemic has been hard on families across this province, especially families in long-term care, those families who have someone who is sick and being treated in hospital, and someone who is chronically ill. There’s some risk in this pandemic where we may lose something that’s really important, lose our humanity. One of the things we are at risk of losing is the role of essential family caregivers and the role that they play to keep their loved ones well: sometimes feed them, sometimes bathe them, sometimes avoid medical accidents, to ensure that they get the care that they need. Essential family caregivers are just that: They’re essential. They are not visitors.

When I read the story of Leonard Rodriques this week, where his wife was not allowed to come into the emergency room with him, even though he was desperately ill—then, he was sent home. I wondered, if she had been there, would he have been sent home? That’s happening across this province in hospitals and long-term care. This government needs to have a plan to bring essential family caregivers back into health care situations. It needs to be part of our pandemic plan because, simply, it’s better for patients, it’s safer for them and it’s the human thing to do.

COVID-19 response

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: From the onset of the outbreak of COVID-19, the government of Ontario has taken significant steps to curb the spread of this virus and to reduce its impacts on the health of Ontarians and our economy. During this time of crisis, volunteers and organizations from Brampton West and Brampton have rallied to provide support for vulnerable people in society.

Organizations like Knights Table Brampton, Khalsa Aid, Regeneration Outreach, United Sikhs, Canada India Foundation, Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama’at, My Indians in Canada Association, care4cause, Punjabi Food Seva Mississauga and Brampton, Thapliyal Foundation and other similar organizations, and their volunteers are working very hard to keep people and families safe, fed and socially supported during the COVID-19 pandemic. Such organizations and their volunteers are stepping up to ensure food can reach Bramptonians who need it the most.

Today, I take this opportunity to stand here in this House to acknowledge the efforts of these volunteers and our heroes out there in Brampton, Ontario and across Canada who are supporting communities every single day by ensuring that no one goes hungry during these trying times. I salute these unsung heroes and want to reiterate that we’re all in this together and hope is on the horizon.

Church-Wellesley Village

Ms. Suze Morrison: I rise today to share my concern with this House and directly with the Premier about the future of the Church-Wellesley Village.

The Village is more than just a neighbourhood; it’s a living, breathing testament to the strength and resiliency of queer and trans communities. It’s a gathering place for 2SLGBTQ+ people seeking refuge—a place to be themselves, to build community and to organize for queer and trans rights.

The Village was already suffering from skyrocketing rents before COVID-19 even started. It was forcing many of our beloved queer- and trans-owned businesses to close their doors before the pandemic even started. Over the years, we’ve lost Zipperz, the Barn, Fly, Byzantium, Slack’s, Fire, Zelda’s, 5ive, Babylon, Slack Alice, the Barracks, the Club, Richmond Street Health Emporium, Roman II Health and Recreation Spa and, most recently since COVID-19 started, Club120.

Many, many more are at risk because of the direct failure of both the provincial and federal governments to come to the table with meaningful supports for this community. The only rent relief program being offered right now relies on commercial landlords to opt in, which they are not.

The Village needs commercial rent subsidies, we need a ban on commercial evictions and we need a real plan that’s going to support queer and trans communities. Premier, it takes a village to save the Village. I’m asking you to join us today and commit to the supports that our community needs.

COVID-19 response

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Members’ statements? The member for Scarborough Southwest.

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: In the fight against COVID-19, the residents of Scarborough–Rouge Park have been more resilient than ever. I want to recognize the incredible work by our neighbourhood groups and organizations, such as the Centennial Community and Recreation Association, the West Rouge Community Association, the Highland Creek Community Association, Muslim Welfare Canada, the Inforce Foundation, Feed Our Community: Scarborough and the National Council of Canadian Tamils.

My team and I launched the #SpreadKindness campaign when a senior contacted me, asking for immediate support in providing groceries such as milk, bread, fresh fruit and vegetables for 120 senior units in his apartment building. These seniors had been self-isolating and were running low on food supplies. With the support of local business owners, T Dot Auto Collision and Allied Community Legal Services, we bought groceries for the entire seniors’ building. Since then, we are continuing to spread kindness to hundreds of seniors with the help of many businesses, including Petro-Canada and Giant Tiger.

From the bottom of my heart, I want to thank all the community leaders and volunteers who generously offered to join hands to support our seniors during this challenging time. The Scarborough–Rouge Park community is standing together.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I thank the member for Scarborough–Rouge Park and apologize for getting his riding name wrong.

COVID-19 response

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos: Since the beginning of the pandemic, people in my community of Oakville North–Burlington have stood firmly behind our front-line health care workers and other essential workers. They are keeping us safe and keeping us healthy.

With sirens blasting and horns blowing, police, firefighters and paramedics regularly parade by our local hospitals, Joseph Brant and Oakville Trafalgar, showing their support. The community has joined in by clapping for our health care workers from their front porches. Businesses stepped up, donating PPE. Walker’s Chocolates, Habitat for Humanity, Mattamy Homes, Grasshopper Energy, Geotab and all others have given thousands of masks.

The Oakville Chinese Community Response Fund has raised $30,000 in just two days; the Beer Store collected empties and donated the money; and we are keeping our food banks, like Food for Life Halton, going.

With GlobalMedic, we delivered 600 pounds of food to the Salvation Army and Oak Park Neighbourhood Centre; local restaurants, such as Senhor Frango, Loch Side and Ritorno, made meals for our health care workers and those in need; and the famed Snowbirds flew over our local hospitals to help boost the morale of our health care workers. To top it off, friends celebrated Julie, a six-time gold medallist at the Special Olympics, with a drive-by birthday parade.

This is the Halton spirit on display. This is the Ontario spirit.

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

I’ve been advised that a member has a point of order they wish to raise. First I will recognize the member for London West.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: Thank you, Speaker. I rise on a point of order. Our lead questions are to the Premier, and the government has not confirmed whether the Premier will be attending today or not. I would ask if the government can let us know if he will be late, and if he will be, we would like a UC to stand down the lead—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): That’s not a point of order. Again, I would remind the members that it’s a long-standing tradition of the House not to point out the absence of any member. I would suggest, especially at this time, we—but you were asking—

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I seek a UC to stand down our lead until the Premier arrives.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for London West is seeking unanimous content of the House to stand down the lead questions for the official opposition until the Premier arrives. Agreed? I heard some noes.

The government House leader on a point of order.

Hon. Paul Calandra: I’m seeking unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice respecting the voting procedure today.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader is seeking unanimous consent to move a motion without notice respecting the voting procedure today. Agreed? I heard a no.

Question Period

Long-term care

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My first question is to the Premier, whom people deserve to have sitting in his place answering questions today. Yesterday, the Canadian Armed Forces—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to interrupt the leader and remind all members of the House that it’s not appropriate to point out the absence of any member. Again, there’s a reason for it. It’s a long-standing tradition. From time to time, any of us might be away from the House, so it’s a courtesy to all members.

Again I’ll recognize the leader of the official opposition.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Thank you, Speaker. In these horrifying times, my first question this morning comes to the Premier. Yesterday, the Canadian Armed Forces presented a devastating report into the neglect and abuse of seniors in Ontario’s long-term-care homes. The report is heartbreaking and horrifying, especially for families and seniors in these homes. I spoke with some family members from Orchard Villa this morning, and they are devastated, not because they’re surprised but because it confirms the warnings that they had been screaming at this government for weeks.

The Premier has had 24 hours to think about it; maybe that’s what he is still doing now, somewhere off in this august place.

Will the Premier now agree that the Minister of Long-Term Care failed to protect seniors in our homes, and ask for her resignation and call for a full public inquiry into long-term care?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Once again—and maybe this is the last time, I hope—I’m going to ask the members not to make reference to the absence of any other member.

I’ll look to the government to respond to the question. The Minister of Long-Term Care.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you, Speaker, and thank you for the important question. Our government is absolutely committed to transforming long-term care and health care. That is why, all this time, we’ve been transforming to Ontario health teams and to Ontario Health. We’ve taken the long-term-care sector very seriously, understanding the need for transformation. I spent almost 30 years as a family doctor, caring for people—our most vulnerable people—and understanding their needs. That’s what I came here to do.

Some of the issues were long-standing; some of them had occurred over decades: the staffing crisis, the congestion in our homes, the lack of redevelopment. Then COVID hit. COVID has impacted homes around the world. Ontario is no different. We have been taking measure after measure, tool after tool, to create the stability in these homes. We knew these particular homes were in crisis, which is why we brought in the Canadian Armed Forces. So I’m very grateful. As we move forward, we will be sure to make an independent commission to find the solutions and the answers.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Families who read devastating reports yesterday of ongoing abuse and institutional neglect deserve so much more from their government. Instead of acknowledging the role that the cuts and neglect played in creating this crisis, the Premier and his minister offered excuses. Instead of accountability, the Premier blocked plans for an inquiry and defended his team.

Seniors are suffering abuse and literally dying in long-term-care homes, where they are supposed to be protected. If that’s not grounds for dismissal or for an immediate resignation by this minister, my question is: What exactly is grounds?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you again to the opposition for that question. When you look at long-term care, as I have for decades, you understand that our most vulnerable people are in long-term care. The report was appalling; there is no question. How we respond to that now with an independent commission that allows the public to be heard, that allows for public hearings, that allows for a public report, is absolutely critical. Those voices need to be heard.

The vulnerable people in long-term care, as I’ve said for the past—almost a year since becoming the Minister of Long-Term Care. They deserve respect and dignity. I have sung that from the rooftops for the last year and all my career as a family doctor, knowing that the importance of how we treat our vulnerable in society is how we will be judged as a society. So I implore the opposition, who has known about the issues in long-term care, to be part of this solution. We all play a role in being part of this solution. This cannot be in vain. The lives lost must be valued. Thank you.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, a commission is not good enough. That was something that the women from the home that I spoke to this morning actually agreed with. They think a commission is the wrong way to go, and so do we.

The Premier and his minister cannot claim to be surprised by a crisis that they had a hand in creating. For months, workers in homes and families of residents have been sounding a relentless alarm bell about the conditions in long-term care, the horrifying things that they were watching before their eyes happening to their loved ones in long-term care. The Ford government either knew what was happening or chose not to know.

The Premier can do the right thing today, admit that his Minister of Long-Term Care failed to protect seniors in homes, ask for her resignation and call a full public inquiry. Will the Premier do that? And if he won’t, why not?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you again for the question. Long-term care was in crisis before COVID hit. Our government was committed, is committed and will be committed to the care of and compassion for our most vulnerable citizens. I rose in the chamber on March 12 to talk about how this is a time for caring and compassion; it is not a time for vitriol. I will say today that it is a time for finding solutions.

These problems have been festering in long-term care for decades. Our government is committed to making sure that long-term care is part of the transformation, that it is integrated into our health system in a significant way that will make a difference to the lives of those living in long-term care and those who have passed and to their families and to staff. Our number one commitment was to the safety and well-being of residents and staff. That is why this work must continue and we must have a full understanding through an independent commission.

You’ve also heard the Premier say that everything is on the table. We had four EOs and changes to regulation to provide flexible staffing for our long-term-care homes leading into this, anticipating the problems that COVID would cause. We called in the military when it was absolutely essential, looking around the world where homes have been abandoned.

We have taken every measure. I live with my conscience. I know that I’ve done everything. I know that our government has done everything.

Long-term care

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also to the Premier. Look, if this was their number one commitment, they have failed miserably. They have failed miserably, and everybody knows it now. We all knew it before. We did here in this chamber, here on the opposition bench, because the previous government failed as well. But now everybody knows the failure in long-term care.

Yesterday, the Premier claimed he was shocked at the treatment of residents in homes like Eatonville Care Centre. Over a month ago, on April 24, families of residents of that home filed a statement of claim alleging failure to protect residents, including sworn affidavits detailing residents not being cleaned after soiling themselves, residents being denied testing even when exhibiting signs of COVID-19, and one family who did not learn that their loved one had COVID-19 until the funeral home actually informed them after his death. We read these documents. They were around over a month ago. The media reported on these horrifying situations over the last number of weeks.

Were the Premier and the minister briefed on this situation, and if not, why not? And if so, how can they claim to be surprised by what the armed forces found at Eatonville?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Long-Term Care to reply.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you again for the important question. I have said many times that long-term-care homes were on the front lines of this battle with COVID. When you consider the report, it’s very clear that there was a war going on in our homes against COVID—and the fact that the military had to be called in to support these homes, and the staffing shortages that suddenly became magnified many times more when COVID came into the homes. It would spiral into an abyss very quickly, and that’s why the military was called in.

These are not normal times. We are in a state of emergency, and our long-term-care homes have been facing the brunt. All the tools that we have taken—we have moved quickly. Government does not move quickly, and that’s why we brought emergency orders, to make the process faster, to deal in a decisive and swift way. The very last emergency order included one case of COVID because that’s why we have to move fast. This is a different setting, and our government has taken every measure possible.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, the minister stood in this House and assured Ontarians back at the end of February that everything had been done, that they had a plan, that long-term care was going to be fine. And then the Premier talked about “the iron ring” around long-term care. They said they were going to spare no expense on long-term care—all of these empty words over and over and over again, for weeks and weeks and weeks, while family members and residents became more and more desperate.

Eatonville and the Hawthorne Place Care Centre were also the subject of a court ruling on April 23. A judge intervened on behalf of front-line workers at those facilities who were desperately, desperately trying to protect residents who were not being cohorted, and staff who were denied access to personal protective equipment. When those workers first decided to take legal action, there were six cases of COVID in that facility. There are now 43 residents who are dead.

Were the Premier and the minister briefed on this court ruling? If not, why not? And if so, how can they claim to be surprised by what the armed forces found at Hawthorne Place?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you once again for the question. Our government has been committed, and you can see that from the very beginning of our government’s commitments. We look at the 15,000 beds that were to be developed and redeveloped. What we’re finding is the ward rooms, the lack of redevelopment, the lack of new space. Our hospitals were also at capacity with hallway health care.

This was an entire system reorganization: Ontario Health, Ontario health teams, integrating long-term care into that process so that they could be more integrated with expertise involving infection control and also the expertise for our long-term-care homes so badly needed. Our personal support workers were short in supply. We asked the government to help us streamline that process to make that easier. The staffing crises, the capacity in our hospitals—it all needed addressing, and our government was working on that from the beginning.

We all know that health care deserves transformation. Our most vulnerable people in their time of need deserve that care. We’ve taken measures throughout this, and we will continue to take measures after years of neglect of this system by the opposition not supporting change in long-term—

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: In February 2019, the Ministry of Health conducted a resident quality inspection at the Altamont Care Community facility. They found that the facility failed to keep the home furnishings and equipment clean and sanitary, walls were covered in food stains, and residents with bedsores were not being properly treated. This resident quality inspection was one of only nine conducted in over 626 homes in Ontario. It was one of only nine inspected. The Premier scaled those inspections back dramatically after private long-term-care operators described those inspections as “red tape.”

Were the Premier and the minister briefed on this inspection report? If not, why not? If so, how can they claim to be surprised at what the armed forces found in Altamont?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you again. These homes were in crisis, and that’s why the military was called in.

I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the majority of our homes and the majority of our personal support workers, who are doing, day in and day out, a tremendously challenging job. I would make note of the good work being done in many homes.

You’ve heard the Premier say that it is not right to paint all homes in the same vein as the homes that are in crisis. We need to be supporting our homes. We need to be supporting our personal support workers and those who are doing a good job who are not in outbreak, especially those who are doing important work—crucial work, critical work—to support our most vulnerable.

Our whole health transformation has been about caring for the vulnerable: people in a time of need, whether they need acute care or whether they need long-term care. We have started that work. It will continue, and it will continue with a commitment that other governments have not had.

Long-term care

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, my next question is also to the Premier—the same Premier who cut funding to long-term care and virtually eliminated long-term-care inspections, who has no right at all at this point in time to be shocked by the state of long-term care, and no credibility whatsoever when he says he will investigate.

To quote front-line workers, “We have had to fight the provincial government every step of the way to ensure long-term-care companies were keeping workers and residents safe.... These decisions came from his desk.”

Why does the Premier think that families desperate for change will be content with an internal review led by the same Premier and the same minister who have done everything in their power to protect the status quo in long-term care and, I would even say, drag us backwards in long-term care?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Long-Term Care to reply.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thanks for the question. I have to push back. I have to clarify. I have to tell the truth. And the truth absolutely is that the inspections were never stopped. We have done more inspections than ever before.

What you’re describing is something that started with the Liberal government in 2016 after an Auditor General’s report to address—

Ms. Andrea Horwath: There’s something called facts.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: —and I think it’s very important that we clarify, because reality matters. The truth matters.

Looking at a public inquiry versus a commission, a commission will provide us with the answers faster. It will provide us with the transparency faster. Public inquiry and commission are both included under the Public Inquiries Act. The commission that we’re describing, an independent commission, will be a commission that will allow public input. It will have a public report. There will be public hearings. To construe it in any other way is inaccurate. We need to talk about the truth.

Health care needs to be transformed. Our government is committed to doing that. We will continue to do what we started, and we will do it with a commitment that—

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, I would say to the minister and to the Premier: Resident quality inspections matter. They matter. And to take them down to nine a year when we have 626 long-term care homes in Ontario is negligent. It is them not doing their duty as a government.

I would also say that suggesting that a behind-closed-doors process is equal to a public inquiry does not pass the smell test, because it is not the case. It is not equal. It is behind closed doors. It is not public. The Premier either knew about the serious problems in long-term care or he chose not to know. Thankfully, our armed forces were able to break the iron ring of silence, and I have to say thank you again. The Canadian Armed Forces did all of us here in Ontario a very important service.

Families and front-line workers have been consistent and clear that they want real change this time. They want real change. Will the Premier do the right thing and call a full, transparent, independent public inquiry today?

Interjections.

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

To reply on behalf of the government, the Minister of Long-Term Care.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you for the question. Our government is committed, and that’s why it began with the redevelopment of our long-term-care system. It put almost $2 billion towards building capacity and redevelopment. They’re undergoing a staffing study to inform a comprehensive staffing strategy. We are addressing Justice Gillese’s report and the important work done by the Auditor General as well.

This government is absolutely committed to doing that. You can see that with the Ontario health teams and Ontario Health. We need to address the needs of an aging population, a growing and aging population, and support for our most vulnerable people. That’s been ongoing. An independent commission that will have public input, that will have public hearings, that will have a public report—but the Premier has said that all options are on the table. We need expediency. We need to get to the bottom of this. We need to do it in a way that is transparent.

Students

Mr. Parm Gill: My question is to the Minister of Education. Parents, teachers and students in my riding of Milton are doing their best in these very difficult circumstances. They’re being flexible, they’re working hard and they’re being creative. I’ve heard from countless parents who find that their kids are best supported when their teachers conduct live classes. This includes Adriana, who says, “As a parent, I would love for my kids to get the live interaction with their classmates and teachers so they can be engaged and actually learning at this time.”

Can the minister please outline what our government expects from educators in delivering at-home learning for our students?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you so the member from Milton for his question and his leadership. I want just to start with a recognition of gratitude to our educators, to our students and parents for rising to the challenge in this truly unprecedented time.

We believe, as students now are spending one quarter of their academic year at home, it is incumbent on all of us to give them every option, using every opportunity, every tool and every technology to aid them in learning while they are home. That’s why we believe in, as many parents have called for, live, synchronous learning to create a classroom experience that will not emulate the in-class experience. We acknowledge that being in class, of course, is best. But at the time of COVID-19, we have an opportunity to improve delivery of education to these students by embracing that community online.

That’s why we’re urging our school boards and partners to implement this, standardize it and improve learning for all students in this province.

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

Mr. Parm Gill: Thank you to the minister for the answer. In these difficult times, it’s more important than ever that our education system adapt to the needs of students. This is critical, especially when it comes to mental health. Anxiety, depression and other mental health challenges are on the rise, and tragically, our kids are not excluded from this.

I know that mental health is top of mind for our government as we seek to support students during these difficult times. Can the minister please provide some examples on how our government is prioritizing students’ mental health?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you again to the member for Milton for the question. I know that mental health is a priority for all members of the House, and I actually appreciate my conversations with the critics in all parties and the leader of the Green Party, discussing this very issue. It is why in part the Premier announced some weeks ago an additional $12-million investment to support mental health, to enable our young people to have the strength that they need through this difficulty.

Part of that aid was more funding to Kids Help Phone and School Mental Health Ontario to provide a continuum of care. We’ve called on boards to unlock all mental health workers and para-professionals to do the best they can in a virtual environment. We have aided and enabled boards this summer to enable them to continue providing services through the summer—normally, they would end in June—so there’s a continuity of service delivery for these kids. We’re providing more investments in special education, as well as more guidance to parents to help them through this difficulty.

We’ll continue to invest in mental health, continue to invest in our most vulnerable and give them the path to success this year to graduate, and in September, when they return to class.

Long-term care

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: My question is to the Premier. The government spent months saying they were monitoring long-term care closely but yesterday claimed to know nothing of the horrific conditions in our long-term-care homes. The horrifying report from our armed forces comes after the government’s decision to virtually eliminate proactive resident quality inspections in long-term care. The government insisted that this would have no impact on care. In fact, last April, the minister claimed that Ontario has “the most rigorous” inspections “in Canada” and didn’t need resident quality inspections.

Speaker, families are hurting today, and they need answers. My question to the Premier: If Ontario actually had a system of rigorous inspections, how could they not know what was happening in our long-term-care homes?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Long-Term Care.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you for the question from the opposition. Our government is absolutely committed to long-term care and reforming health care. In our long-term-care system, we are monitoring the homes. We are moving in the right direction. Our homes are improving. There are a handful of homes that have been under exceptional stress, largely due to staffing issues. We use certain criteria to identify red homes versus yellow homes versus green homes. We’ve been actively monitoring that all this way.

To characterize this as not knowing is inaccurate, and it is insulting to all the people who are doing the work on the front lines. Our staff, the managers, the personal support workers—everyone is contributing. Everyone is doing what they can. We all have a role to play. I acknowledge the anger that people are feeling from a loss and being in the state of emergency, but anger will not bring us solutions; it is dedication, everyday hard work, and making sure that we put residents at the centre of care, which has not been done.

Our government is doing that. When I was speaking at the homes that I was visiting for almost a year, I would talk about that, and nobody was interested. The media didn’t come. Only at a time of death and devastation did people respond. It should not have taken that. It should not have taken that.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question: the member for Brampton Centre.

Ms. Sara Singh: Speaker, it’s difficult to believe that this government had absolutely no idea about the crisis in long-term-care homes when conditions like the ones detailed in the Canadian Armed Forces report are happening across this province, including in cities like Brampton. The Premier said himself that he believes that there are also other homes that are impacted.

Is the Premier and this minister going to keep pretending that they had no idea about the conditions in our long-term-care homes?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you for the question. In fact, there was a crisis in long-term-care homes. We knew that there was a shortage of personal support workers. That contributes greatly in a time of absolute crisis, like COVID-19.

Our government was transforming long-term care. We were in the process of doing that—Ontario Health, Ontario health teams, working with public health, working with all our partners and colleagues to get through this unprecedented, devastating time.

We are in a state of emergency. This is not a normal time. We acknowledge the shortcomings. That’s why I’m here. That’s why I’m doing what I’m doing. That’s why our government has committed to reform and change.

To characterize this as denying the crisis is absolutely out of touch. It’s absolutely out of touch. Our government is committed, and we will continue our good work.

Long-term care

Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Minister of Long-Term Care.

We’re all very deeply disturbed by what we read in the Canadian Armed Forces report yesterday into the five long-term-care homes in this province. Speaker, through you to the minister: When was the minister first made aware of conditions in these five homes, and what led her to ask for the help of the Canadian Armed Forces?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you for the question. We were actively monitoring these homes—as I’ve mentioned, red, yellow, green—homes that were particularly on the radar for staffing crises. We had been taking measures all along in terms of our emergency orders to understand and anticipate how government could move quickly.

Beyond all the changes and the acknowledgement that our whole health care system needed to be improved for our most needy and our most vulnerable and those who need it at their time of need, we understood the critical nature of the staffing issues—which had been a long time festering; many, many years.

Looking at how we address that, we had labour inspectors. We had our own inspectors from long-term care. We had public health risk assessments. We had infection prevention and control teams. We had rapid deployment teams from the acute care system. Everything was being monitored.

COVID takes over homes very quickly. We anticipated that these homes would be in dire need, and that’s why we brought in the military.

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

Mr. John Fraser: I was hoping the minister would provide a more direct and specific answer as to when she knew.

I’m trying to understand when the minister knew and what led her to call in the military in the first place, because I know that residents, their families, staff, organizations that represent them and MPPs in this House have all alerted the government, her ministry and her to these concerns. I think for all of us, it’s important to establish a timeline here.

The situation must have been pretty bleak to make the request that the minister did. Speaker, I will ask once again: When was the minister first made aware of the conditions in these five homes, and what led her to ask for help from the Canadian Armed Forces?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: We have numerous eyes watching the homes and monitoring, and making sure that they’re in close contact with the homes, looking at the red, the yellow and the green. These homes were having difficulties; there was no doubt about that. As we called in the military—it takes time. That’s why I can’t give you a precise date.

We looked at how we initiated that. There were other ministries involved in that process until we could actually get the military in. And as you know, there are other provinces that are also affected. Our neighbouring province has needed military help in a vast way. We understand the limitations of what our military can do. That’s why, as we speak, we’re understanding our next measures to take, because the military—we’ve asked them to stay. We’re hoping they will stay. We’re asking the federal government to help us.

We need that support now, but as our homes stabilize, there will be further measures taken to support them.

Long-term care

Mr. John Fraser: My question again is for the Minister of Long-Term Care. Given the disturbing report from the Canadian military into the conditions in these five long-term-care homes—like these five homes, there are dozens of homes with double-digit deaths across this province. Given that the ministry’s most prominent response to the Gillese report was to only do resident quality inspections—full inspections—in nine out of 626 homes last year, Speaker, through you: How can the minister assure Ontarians that what was reported today isn’t happening in other homes in this province?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: If you look at the devastating effect of COVID-19 on our homes that were already in crisis situations with staffing going into this pandemic, our government and my ministry were taking every measure possible to address that. We were looking at volunteer portals. The nursing associations were assisting with volunteers. We were looking everywhere for support, and our long-term-care homes need to be places where people want to work.

How we integrate our long-term-care homes with the acute care system into a new form, a new way of doing things—the previous governments, leading up to this point of being hit by COVID, never did that, all these years.

These homes were being actively monitored. There were investigations ongoing. We had an increase in terms of calls to our action line. We had almost 3,000 inspections and numerous other inspections, so let’s be honest about this.

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

Mr. John Fraser: Speaker, why did it take us a month to raise the wages of the lowest-paid workers in long-term care, like other provinces did? Why did we take a month not to have workers working in more than one home, to stop the spread of disease? Why did we wait months and months to give ourselves the power to take over long-term-care homes and then actually do it?

My colleagues from Ottawa–Vanier, Orléans and many members of this House have been raising concerns with the ministry and the minister about homes in their ridings, and these concerns are genuine. They’re coming from families. Families are telling you and staff members are telling you and unions are telling you. Everybody is saying this.

Learning of yesterday’s reports, it’s natural for Ontarians to be concerned about their parents and their grandparents. Through you, Speaker, to the minister: How can the government assure Ontarians that seniors living in other long-term-care homes across this province are not experiencing similar conditions to what we heard reported yesterday?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you for the question. I share concern over our vulnerable people in society. Our government embarked on a transformation of care because it understood the need. Ontario health teams integrating long-term care into our acute care setting and into the community: These are absolutely critical pieces as we move forward.

We’ve done work over the last year. We prepared for COVID. COVID has hit the global vulnerable populations of those over 80 and in long-term-care homes. If you bother to look, if you bother to understand what’s happening globally in other countries, you will understand that. All these measures, the emergency orders to have government work faster—because government does not work quickly—the processes we have in place are meant for a time that is not COVID time. We have adjusted for that.

Our homes are actively being monitored. We know the situation in our homes.

Long-term care

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is to the Premier. Mr. Speaker, back even as the pandemic was just unfolding, sadly, many in the sector—some of us included—predicted that this was going to result in a massacre of the vulnerable and the old. I, for one, wish that that was not true, and I know we all do, but it has come to be.

The Premier said yesterday that he was shocked by this report from the armed forces, but he and his minister have known what was coming, and that’s very clear. I want to just point out that on April 28, I wrote to the Minister of Long-Term Care outlining just issues that have been raised in my own constituency, in my own riding, by members in my community, including the lack of testing of people who had family members in long-term care, oversight in long-term care, personal support workers who were not allowed—not allowed—to have protective equipment. I have yet to receive a response to this letter, Mr. Speaker.

The minister is right that the situation was in crisis for a long time, but this minister and this government have failed those families. They have failed the workers who have lost their lives in those homes and across this province. I want to ask, Mr. Speaker, why the minister has not yet offered her resignation and why the Premier has not asked—

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

The Minister of Long-Term Care to reply.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: I appreciate the anger that you have, and I appreciate your frustration. I look back on the last few months, dealing with our long-term-care system in this COVID world we live in, and it is absolutely heart wrenching, gut wrenching. As a physician who spent 30 years not only looking after our vulnerable people but looking after members of my own family, to insinuate that I sat there and did nothing is absolutely incomprehensible to me when I know the truth; I know the reality. I know the commitment that our government has had. I know the commitment that I have had.

That is why I am here, and that’s why we took every measure, every tool, all the emergency orders. Everything was on the table. We acted swiftly and decisively.

COVID is a beast. And years of neglect by the previous government, supported by the NDP, have led us to a precarious position for our long-term-care homes. COVID-19 is a beast. It’s been a beast around the world. Our government has been committed—it is committed now; it will be committed in the future—to making sure that we transform health care and long-term care for our most vulnerable.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Resign. Resign.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

The supplementary question: the member for Waterloo.

Ms. Catherine Fife: To the Minister of Health: That answer, though, was not good enough for the people of the province. In Waterloo region, we’ve seen the painful fallout from declining standards in long-term care, like Revera’s Forest Heights home. Fifty residents—50—have died from COVID-19 in this home. Scared and angry families have reached out to myself and the MPP for Kitchener–Conestoga. Why? Because, before COVID-19, families were spending up to six hours a day caring for their loved ones.

They knew that there were no minimum standards of care; they knew that the staffing ratios were poor; they knew that there were reduced in-person inspections. Families were holding this broken system together. The health minister was also Patient Ombudsman. She would have heard these serious concerns and the pain from these families. The pain and the suffering of these residents is not subject to cabinet confidentiality.

To the Minister of Health: We agree that the former government neglected our long-term-care system, but it’s this government who looked the other way when the pandemic began. There was no iron ring around these homes. Why did this minister not act decisively?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To reply, the Minister of Health.

Hon. Christine Elliott: As the Minister of Long-Term Care has stressed repeatedly today, we have taken this seriously from the very beginning, putting in place protections for people in long-term care, making sure that we had the personal protective equipment that they needed. It might not have been used by the management in some of these places, but the personal protective equipment was there.

In addition to that, as things were worsening, I have had discussions with the Minister of Long-Term Care, and we have had the arrangement made where hospitals can consider long-term-care homes work sites, with the result that people were asked at hospitals to go and help in long-term-care homes. Over 40 hospitals have stepped up to do that. They are continuing to assist in providing care and they will continue to do so until this COVID-19 threat has been dealt with.

Broadband infrastructure

Mr. Jim Wilson: My question is for the Minister of Infrastructure. I am frequently contacted by constituents about the need for high-speed Internet in many areas of my riding. One recent email was from Essa township councillor Keith White, who’s concerned about a resident who may lose her Internet service. Like many residents, Keith wants to know what the province is doing about improving service, not removing it.

The government recently released Up to Speed: Ontario’s Broadband and Cellular Action Plan, with the intent of expanding broadband and cellular access to rural, remote and northern communities. Well, we’ve been hearing these big-dollar announcements from provincial and federal governments for years, but there still seems to be a problem, particularly in the rural areas in my riding. In fact, I have to admit, I made a similar announcement some 20 years ago when I was Minister of Energy, Science and Technology, and I’m hoping today maybe this minister can do a better job than I did.

Can the minister tell the people of Essa township when they will receive up-to-standard broadband services?

Hon. Laurie Scott: Thank you to the member opposite for his question. While our government has been a steadfast funding partner for broadband projects in Ontario, like the Southwestern Integrated Fibre Technology project, known as SWIFT, I’m sure the experienced member opposite knows that providing reliable and affordable broadband service is a responsibility of the federal government. With that being said, I have raised this issue on countless calls with the federal minister responsible, urging her government to join Ontario and our municipal and private sector partners in closing the digital divide that the COVID-19 epidemic has brought to the forefront.

On this side of the House, we are not about lip service, I can assure the member opposite; we are about action. Our $315-million action plan has the potential to expand access to up to 220,000 homes and businesses. It includes a $150-million, Ontario-led broadband plan, and nearly $64 million to SWIFT, which includes the communities in Simcoe–Grey.

I’ll have more to say in the supplementary.

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

Mr. Jim Wilson: Thank you to the minister. I know that everyone in the House can agree that the need for high-speed Internet is only increasing during this time of the COVID-19 virus, because people are working from home and because of the e-platform for education.

Michael Birch, who lives just three minutes outside of Tottenham, says that the lack of Internet options has become particularly problematic during this crisis. His household is trying to run two essential businesses from home, and his two children are completely frustrated trying to access e-learning platforms.

Gary Wilkinson, who lives five minutes away from Collingwood, told me that when the COVID crisis began, all the Internet companies said to him that they would waive overage fees and give everyone unlimited data—everyone, it seems, except for folks in rural areas. “How,” Gary asks, “is it that in this day and age, proper, reliable and affordable high-speed Internet is not available to rural areas?”

Speaker, can the minister elaborate on her first answer and maybe tell me when the rural areas of Simcoe–Grey will actually receive Internet services? I am counting on you, Minister, to be a better minister than I was and to act and deliver rural Internet services to Simcoe–Grey. There is the challenge for you.

Hon. Laurie Scott: I thank you and I accept that challenge.

As someone who has been born and raised in rural Ontario and who represents those rural communities, I understand the frustrations raised by the member opposite and his constituents very well. While we’re all working remotely to adhere to physical distancing, I too have had dropped phone calls and been faded out on Zoom calls, and download speeds just aren’t what we need. That’s why we have made infrastructure a marquee part of our mandate. We are stepping up to the plate. We’re taking a whole-of-government approach to bringing Ontario up to speed.

I want to commend my colleague the Minister of Education for his work in connecting more students to e-learning platforms during the COVID-19 outbreak, assuring that every high school will have high-speed Internet up this fall; and the Minister of Northern Development and Mines for making investments and delivering broadband to Indigenous communities and in northern Ontario.

Mr. Speaker, I do have more plans coming out shortly, and I want to encourage the member opposite to join me in asking the federal government to help us bring Ontario up to speed. Truly, more than ever, we need all these partners together. We can make it happen.

Long-term care

Mr. Michael Mantha: My question is to the Premier. Ontarians know that these problems are not new. Just a few months ago, I sat here in my chair and looked at my leader when, along with my colleagues, we were accused of being fearmongers. Well, the fear is real, Mr. Speaker. Families have been hurting for years because of Liberal and Conservative inaction.

In January 2018, it was revealed that the former government kept a secret list of high-risk facilities. All these facilities—the government knew that the long-term-care private operators were often breaking the rules, failing to comply with directives and not doing their job of taking care of our loved ones.

Speaker, the Premier had a list of high-risk facilities. Why did it take the military report to say that he is shocked by the system, when it has been known for years how bad things really are?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Long-Term Care to reply.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you for the question. When I look at long-term care in Ontario—you have probably heard me say that Justice Gillese said it was a system that was strained. COVID-19 came along and broke it.

I cannot speak to any list, because I do not believe that that list is applicable now.

If you look at COVID-19, it affected some homes in a more disastrous way. Others were unaffected. Over 70% of our homes are not in outbreak, and our outbreaks are resolving. The military being called in was in anticipation of the monitoring and knowing that these homes were in dire situations. I wish I could have been able to pull a lever and have them show up the following day. The processes don’t work like that.

I am grateful to the Canadian Forces for being there for our residents, being there for our homes and for our families and staff. The red, the yellow, the green were in continual interaction with our homes. COVID-19 makes things change very quickly. The speed with which COVID-19 takes over a home—when you speak to people who are in homes, it is shocking. That’s why the military was there, in anticipation of these homes having issues.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question, the member for Mushkegowuk–James Bay.

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: The previous government and this one have been slow to fix the problems with long-term care. Back in 2017, the Auditor General found that the government cut its inspections after it did a cost-benefit analysis of them and found inspections to be too expensive. That change in inspections resulted in a backlog of over 3,000 complaints and critical incidents. This government kept the new system, which has meant the quality of inspections of Ontario’s long-term-care facilities has dropped.

Why did this government keep a failed inspection system rather than change it?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you for the question. Issues surrounding inspections have been raised from the beginning of this pandemic. We have multiple types of inspections. We conducted almost 3,000 inspections, as well as inspections of the homes every year.

Inspections would not have solved the staffing crisis that we experienced with COVID-19. The staffing crisis was apparent for years, and our personal support workers were on the front lines. It doesn’t matter how many inspections you would have done; it would not have provided the care that residents needed. It was a staffing crisis, which is exactly why we called in the military, with staffing getting sick with COVID-19, having to isolate and perhaps being afraid to come in. We know that the military was needed at that time, and I am grateful to the military. It is not an issue of inspections.

We need to make sure that we understand what’s happening in our homes, and that will be ongoing.

Long-term care

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: My question is for the Premier. Experts have been sounding the alarm on the crisis in long-term care for decades. The Premier cannot pretend that this is the first he’s hearing of it or that he’s shocked, because workers represented by SEIU sent out a cry for help to the government and several times since, asking the government to step up and ramp up and care when private operators turned them away. Just in January 2020, Unifor commissioned the Ontario Health Coalition to produce a detailed report called Caring in Crisis, which they gave to the government. Workers have been alerting the government for years about this situation.

Why have the Premier and this government ignored cries for help from workers on the front line for two years, when we know how badly families have been hurt?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Long-Term Care.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you for the question. I do value all these questions. I think they are important times to address the stress and strain that long-term care has been under.

I would like to read you a short message from Miranda Ferrier, the national president of OPSWA: “Since the onset o

Document details

Collection	Ontario — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	2020-05-27
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	p42 s1 2020-05-27 hansard html
Language	en
Format	html
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	c73f6a0b959244350c3740c9c3180c9fef8d8bce

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (html).