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

October 18, 2018

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2018-Oct-18 (PDF)

L037 - Thu 18 Oct 2018 / Jeu 18 oct 2018

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 18 October 2018 Jeudi 18 octobre 2018

Orders of the Day

Access to Natural Gas Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur l’accès au gaz naturel

Introduction of Visitors

Sign-language

interpretation

Private members’ public business

Oral Questions

Employment standards

Fiscal accountability

Mercury poisoning

Automobile insurance

Minister’s conduct

Taxation

Executive compensation

Violence against women

Cannabis regulation

Violence against women

Cannabis regulation

Education funding

Government accountability

Horse racing industry

Municipalities

Visitor

Notice of dissatisfaction

Member’s privileges

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Health care

Small Business Week

Curriculum

Witness—Canadian Art of the First World War

CKGN FM

Ronald Colaco

Niagara region

Holodomor

Whitby technology sector

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

National Disability Employment Awareness Month

Impaired driving

Visitor

National Disability Employment Awareness Month

Impaired driving

Visitors

Petitions

Employment standards

Animal protection

Employment standards

Injured workers

Employment standards

Mental health services

Celiac disease

Injured workers

Curriculum

Private Members’ Public Business

Tax Fairness for Real Estate Professionals Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur l’équité fiscale pour les professionnels de l’immobilier

Human Rights Code Amendment Act (Genetic Characteristics), 2018 / Loi de 2018 modifiant le Code des droits de la personne (caractéristiques génétiques)

Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Helmet Exemption for Sikh Motorcyclists), 2018 / Loi de 2018 modifiant le Code de la route (exemption de l’obligation de port du casque pour les motocyclistes sikhs)

Tax Fairness for Real Estate Professionals Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur l’équité fiscale pour les professionnels de l’immobilier

Human Rights Code Amendment Act (Genetic Characteristics), 2018 / Loi de 2018 modifiant le Code des droits de la personne (caractéristiques génétiques)

Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Helmet Exemption for Sikh Motorcyclists), 2018 / Loi de 2018 modifiant le Code de la route (exemption de l’obligation de port du casque

Orders of the Day

Time allocation

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Access to Natural Gas Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur l’accès au gaz naturel

Resuming the debate adjourned on October 4, 2018, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 32,

An Act to amend the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998 / Projet de loi 32, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1998 sur la Commission de l’énergie de l’Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Further debate? The member for Kitchener–Conestoga.

Mr. Mike Harris: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m glad I get to finish off some quick remarks from—I believe it’s been almost two weeks ago now, since we were speaking on this. But just to recap a little bit about where I was, we were talking about how the opposition always likes to remind us every once in a while that, even though we have a majority government, we didn’t necessarily have all the votes, so to speak. I just want to talk a little more about furthering that.

Our government entered the 42nd Parliament with a definitive majority. Second of all, I’m sure that the majority of constituents in the members’ ridings who say a lot of these things would be pleasantly surprised to see their heating bills reduced, and especially in the winter months, as a result of this policy.

The opposition often tells us that they are the voice of working families and they are the voice of the people. Correct me if I’m wrong, Mr. Speaker, but the member from Algoma–Manitoulin is supposed to be a voice of the north. To be frank, I think to be unsupportive of Bill 32 and the common-sense proposal to expand natural gas and lower energy costs is only to do working families and the residents of northern and rural regions of this province an injustice.

I think that the CEO of the Ontario Home Builders’ Association, Joe Vaccaro, hit the nail on the head—and yes, there is a pun intended there—and I quote: “The decision to extend natural gas services will support future housing supply and choice in rural and northern communities while providing home owners and businesses with an affordable and reliable heating option that will keep their everyday costs down.” Constituents and stakeholders have spoken loud and clear in support of this policy.

I just noticed, Mr. Speaker, that the clock is not ticking, so I’m not sure where we are at time-wise here, but—

Interjection.

Mr. Mike Harris: Three minutes? Four minutes?

As I previously mentioned, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture and its partner organizations are in full support of the direction that our government is moving in on a number of policies, and especially the natural gas file. Just recently, Jeff Stager from the Waterloo Federation of Agriculture, which represents the local voice of farmers in my riding, told my office clearly that the lack of natural gas access in Waterloo region is a major issue. Despite it being the most inexpensive fuel source, many farmers still don’t have access. If they want it, they have to pay a huge cost for a supply pipe to be extended to the end of their laneway.

In a recent news release, the president of the OFA, Keith Currie, delivered a similar message to that of Jeff’s, stating: “Energy is one of the largest inputs on farms, and we need access to natural gas to help boost the competitiveness of rural Ontario communities, businesses and farms.” Natural gas is the single most important investment that our government will be able to deliver to grow that sector.

We are here this morning debating Bill 32. Whether or not it should pass through the House, the message from stakeholders and those who really need improved energy and access supply is clear: Expansion of natural gas services is what we need. It is what working Ontario families need, what rural Ontario needs, what northern Ontario needs and what Ontario businesses need.

That is why, when the Premier remarked on September 18, “We heard from people across Ontario that natural gas expansion is important in order to grow businesses, create jobs and compete,” we know he was speaking for the people—not just some of the people, as the opposition likes to say, but all Ontarians.

Every day, Ontarians and Ontario businesses benefit from natural gas. To hammer this point home, let’s look again at the most basic facts. Natural gas is the most common heating source in Ontario, and is more affordable than sources like electricity, oil and propane. Switching to natural gas can save an average residential customer—and this is the key takeaway here, Mr. Speaker—between $800 and $2,500 a year. That is a very substantial savings.

There are currently about 3.5 million homes and 130,000 businesses in Ontario that use natural gas. The changes introduced via Bill 32 could potentially enable natural gas connections for another 70 communities, connecting approximately 33,000 rural and northern households. Need I say more?

So I stand here this morning in support of Bill 32 because this is the right thing to do: natural gas expansion across the province, touching another 70 communities, 33,000 households.

I’ve had propane heat in the past; it is extremely expensive. I’ve had oil heat in the past; it is extremely expensive. And I’ve had electric heat in the past. I have moved around a little bit. But in northern Ontario, sometimes you don’t have a lot of options.

I’m looking forward to being able to see this proliferate through the province. I know that the people of Kitchener–Conestoga are looking forward to it as well.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Questions and comments?

M me France Gélinas: It was interesting, listening to the member. His wishes are wishes that we all share.

I represent a rural northern riding. We have those huge, 18-inch natural gas pipes that go straight through my riding but don’t connect any of us. We pay an astronomical amount of money, heating our houses with electricity. I would say that not a week goes by that I don’t have a constituent asking, “When are we going to be able to connect to natural gas?”

But between his wishes and what’s in the bill, there’s an ocean. There is no obligation for the gas companies to ever come to rural northern Ontario.

We all know exactly what will happen. In suburban areas, the natural gas will expand to a neighbourhood where half of it has natural gas and the other one doesn’t have it. But in northern Ontario and in Nickel Belt, which I represent, the natural gas companies make it really clear that there is no money to be made in connecting people who live far apart in the heart of the Canadian Shield, where you have to drill and dynamite through rocks to get anything more than half an inch under the ground.

So that is wishful thinking. Put in the bill that they will have to go to northern rural Ontario, that they will have to come to Nickel Belt and that they will have to serve the farmers of Nickel Belt, who tried really hard. But none of that is in the bill. In the bill, we give them the opportunity to collect $2.5 million a month from existing customers, and they do with it what they see fit. That means Nickel Belt is left behind, and I can’t stand for that.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Questions and comments?

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Our government was elected with a clear mandate: To make life more affordable for Ontario families and Ontario businesses. There is no better example than this bill. A lot of families were struggling. They were making really tough decisions between heating and eating. Many businesses were struggling. They were moving across the border because it was just unaffordable to have their business thrive here.

Those days are over because our government is offering hope and prosperity again for all Ontarians. Let me break that down into figures for you, Mr. Speaker. With this change to natural gas expansion, we can see bills for the average family drop by $80 a year, while small businesses are going to save $285 a year. That’s substantial. That’s real money going back into the pockets of people, because this government believes that people can thrive and prosper better if we’re putting money back into their pockets rather than taking it away. We believe in giving people prosperity and hope, rather than taking that away and fearmongering.

In addition to those numbers, what we’re also going to see in terms of electric heating and propane and how much people are going to be saving to switch to alternative fuel like natural gas is that the savings are going to result from about $800 to about $2,500 a year. Again, those are substantial savings for families and for businesses.

I would like to echo the fact that our government wants to work with the people. We want to make tomorrow easier than yesterday, next week easier than the week before and the next month easier than the month before that. We believe that we need to be working with the people of Ontario rather than working against them, similar to what the federal government could be doing. They could be working with us on an alternative to climate change, rather than taxing people to the ground.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I recognize the member from Mushkegowuk–James Bay.

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: Merci, madame la Présidente. I heard what they were saying, the government on the other side, but I think, like my colleague from Nickel Belt was saying: wishful thinking. The bill should speak about northern Ontario and Aboriginal communities. I’ll give you an example: Lac Ste.-Thérèse, M. Potvin, who takes care of the public in the Hearst area. He asked to get natural gas. If you leave it to companies, they won’t bring natural gas to outside rural. Why? Because if they don’t get a quick return on their money, it’s not going to happen. They asked to get natural gas.

The letter that came back from natural gas was saying, “No, unfortunately, because there are no major industries between you and there’s 17 kilometres, we can’t expand the line.” Well, there are two businesses in-between, mid-point: Rheault Distillery and Villeneuve Construction. And there are 109 houses a little bit further down. Yet, the natural gas company doesn’t want to expand.

What do you believe is going to happen when more people are asking to get connected: Moonbeam or, again, Kitigan? The line gets to Kitigan, but only six houses are connected. And two kilometres further there are two businesses and 20 houses that could get connected. Again, $140,000 to get connected. They didn’t get a letter saying, “No problem; we will.”

Leaving it to natural gas companies just won’t happen. Put in your bill that rural, northern communities and Aboriginal communities will get connected to natural gas that will expand in northern Ontario, not lip service.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I recognize the member from Mississauga–Streetsville.

Mrs. Nina Tangri: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and thank you to my colleagues and to the members opposite for your remarks on this very, very important topic. I’d like to thank our Minister of Infrastructure and his team for moving forward on this issue and listening to the people in the rural areas.

Currently, as we all know, about three and a half million residential customers and 130,000 businesses across the province use natural gas for heating. But we know that this is not enough. The fact is, most of Ontario, demographically and geographically, doesn’t have access to safe, affordable natural gas. Three and a half million customers is only approximately one quarter of our province’s population. That’s less than 20% of rural Ontarians who have access to natural gas, forcing them to rely on pricier energy sources such as oil, propane and electricity.

Those of us who live in more urban areas almost take it for granted that we have access to great natural gas. It heats our homes; it heats our water. We use it even for our barbecues and to cook. We take it for granted. We truly, truly believe that everyone should have that access and that affordability. Our government wants to allow the people of Ontario to spend their hard-earned dollars the way they would like, and by enabling greater access to natural gas, we will be doing just that.

I would really like to thank again our minister and his team, and my colleagues here, for making sure that we listen to the people of rural Ontario and we take their needs very, very seriously. I’m really looking forward to when we can expand natural gas for everyone, all across this province.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I return to the member for Kitchener–Conestoga.

Mr. Mike Harris: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I’m sorry that you missed the tail end of what we were talking about earlier. I know you were glued to the edge of your seat when we were last speaking about this.

I would like to thank the members for Nickel Belt, Barrie–Innisfil, Mushkegowuk–James Bay and also Mississauga–Streetsville for their thoughtful comments.

I’d just like to share, quickly, my own story with propane versus natural gas. We have a family cottage just outside of North Bay, Ontario. It’s a fairly rural area in Nipissing township. The population on the south shore of Lake Nipissing is not a lot of people. We heat the house with propane. It’s very expensive—extremely expensive, in fact. It’s more than three times the price for me to heat my house in Waterloo region.

I think that, as you move further north and you move out into some of the more outlying areas and, like the members opposite were saying, around Sudbury and up north, east of Timmins and the Cochrane area, it is expensive to heat your home. Let’s face it: The cost of living in northern Ontario is more.

I am looking forward to being a champion for not only southwestern Ontario, where I live, but also northern Ontario, where I have many, many family members and many, many friends. I want to make sure that when we go forward with this bill—I know that the Minister of Infrastructure will be taking a lot of those comments into account and making sure that we do this in the most efficient manner in being able to make sure that we are able to reach the maximum amount of households. We campaigned on making life more affordable here in Ontario and making Ontario open for business again.

I know that’s what our Minister of Infrastructure and our Premier, Doug Ford, want to do. I am very happy to stand up in support of Bill 32.

Thank you to all of my colleagues, again, who have spoken today, and on the other side as well.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate?

Mr. Faisal Hassan: I want, first, to acknowledge my legislative assistant, who is here with us today: Jasmine Attfield.

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by congratulating all members of the House for their election to this chamber and congratulate you for your selection to the Chair.

It is a great honour and privilege to give my inaugural speech. Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge the traditional land of the Wendat, the Anishnawbe, the Haudenosaunee, the Métis and the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation.

I want to say how honoured and humbled I am to be the member of provincial Parliament for York South–Weston. I must thank all of my campaign volunteers who helped me talk to thousands of residents in every corner of my riding.

Thank you. Merci. Gracias. Shukriyaa. Mahadsanid. Grazie. Salamat. Obrigado. Cảm ơn bạn.

I would like to acknowledge the contribution of my predecessor, Laura Albanese, and I wish her well in her endeavours.

I’m looking forward to working with all of my colleagues, and I’m honoured to serve this House as a member of the NDP. It is my great honour to be the first ever member of the Somali community elected to provincial office anywhere in Canada. This election, our leader, Andrea Horwath, and the NDP elected a team that truly represents the great diversity of this province, and I could not be happier to be part of that team. Madam Speaker, I intend to be a strong voice and advocate for all 116,690 residents of York South–Weston.

Madam Speaker, my life’s adventure began in the Horn of Africa. I was in my late teens when I made the fateful decision to leave my home of Somalia. I arrived in Italy all by myself to start a new life. I worked odd jobs in Rome, basically to survive. I stayed there for almost three years. From there, I was given the opportunity to go to Winnipeg, and that is where my Canadian journey began. Imagine a young Somali man arriving in Winnipeg all alone, with only the clothes on his back. That was me in 1990.

Almost 30 years ago. I arrived in Canada—Manitoba, to be exact—on my own, but hopeful for the future. It is where I seized upon the dream, the ambition, the inspiration, that all Canadian newcomers harbour. I immediately started working at Eaton’s, and continued in order to pay my way through school. I earned a degree, I got involved in politics, and I tried to make a difference.

After graduating from the University of Winnipeg, I moved to York South–Weston. As a matter of fact, a job opportunity brought me to Toronto. I have lived there in Weston ever since, from Jane to Harding to Church, while exploring everywhere in between. I proudly reside in Weston. It is my community. I love our community. But the last 15 years have shown a deep need for change. It is this need that motivated me to run for office, so that I could help more people. I love York South–Weston, and I’m so proud to call it home.

Madam Speaker, I want to work assisting vulnerable newcomers, helping them secure housing and other essential social supports to ease in the transition to their new home. I was incredibly proud of that work and the difference it made to many who had experienced the ravages of war and endured severe hardship to arrive in this welcoming, safe, beautiful province we call home.

After a number of years of that work plus wonderful experiences as a writer, a radio broadcaster and a community activist, I was given the opportunity to work as a constituency assistant in my community. It was there, in a very short period of time, that we assisted hundreds upon hundreds of local residents with housing, social assistance, disability claims and numerous other provincial issues. No matter the issue, we rolled up our sleeves and tried to get it resolved. It was this commitment and constituent service that guides me to this very day.

From there, I went back to work in the social service field before the exciting election of Jack Layton in 2011. Madam Speaker, I was hired again as a constituency assistant in my community and worked at the local office on South Station Street, where for four and a half years we worked hard each and every day to make a positive difference in the lives of the people who call this riding home.

Madam Speaker, York South–Weston is as diverse as any riding in this province. People come here from all over the world to start new lives. Just like me, they come with dreams and ambition to succeed. But the reality is that they and everyone else who calls York South–Weston home have been let down by previous Liberal and Conservative governments. These governments were out of touch. They have delisted essential health care services, they have made life tougher for the most vulnerable members of our society, they have made daily essentials much more expensive, and they have neglected to adequately financially support our city.

Madam Speaker, let me share with you what the people in this culturally diverse riding have told me they want this Legislature to know. Over the last 15 years, their lives have gotten harder and harder. Our community continues to grow, each day, richer in diversity and population. Yet people still cannot easily travel to work, access health care without being forced into hallways, or afford to pay hydro or child care. Sometimes our youth cannot drive or work in their own neighbourhood without being stopped by police as a result of carding.

They cannot afford more cuts. They need us to look at investing in the public, with affordable child care for everyone, pharmacare and dental care. They need us to make life more affordable for everyone in our communities, reducing our hydro rates and making transit more accessible. They want efficient and affordable public transit. They want to be able to work and provide for their families.

It has become clear over the last 15 years, as systemic racism continues to go unaddressed, that Black youth and people of colour are not being given the same chance. Banning carding is one of many steps needed to address the imbalance in outcomes faced by many Canadians. They want us to address systemic racism. People deserve more from their government than declarations, symbolic gestures and more studies.

Carding disproportionately impacts racialized youth in my riding. It is unconstitutional and cannot be allowed to continue in Ontario. Every person in our province should be able to go about their day without fear of being arbitrarily and unlawfully detained because of their race or their ethnicity.

The racialized young people in my riding are also subject to unequal educational outcomes. Of all the Black students in our province, only 69 out of 100 will graduate high school, and only 18 of them will go on to post-secondary education.

The systemic discrimination faced by my constituents also includes limited access to transportation. People in our community are being hit hard by high auto insurance rates, simply because of where they live, of their postal code. It is time to end postal code discrimination in auto insurance.

And for those who rely on public transit, their options are severely limited. Every day, people in our community rely on Weston, Jane and Keele buses. Often they are left waiting, or riding in overcrowded buses, each day. The Liberals have not been able to improve this in 15 years of government. Liberals cut $4 billion from GTA transit in 2010, when Kathleen Wynne was transportation minister, slashing Toronto’s Transit City plans from eight LRT lines to four, thus creating the Save Transit City movement. In 1995, the Conservatives famously cancelled the Eglinton subway to Pearson, paying millions just to fill a hole.

For decades, these governments have given the residents in York South–Weston less and less service for higher and higher prices.

Another glaring example of this has been hydro. Hydro is not a luxury and should not be priced like one. Not a day goes by where I don’t hear from a person in our community who is struggling to choose between heating their home and paying for their rent or groceries, and more people still who have to forgo extracurricular programs for their children or saving for retirement because of the rising hydro bills.

Over the past 15 years, we have only seen this get worse and worse. This government is promising further privatization, and we all know that means that costs will go up. The NDP plan addresses the underlying costs of hydro instead of pushing problems into the future. Our plan would lower hydro costs for all ratepayers by up to 30% and keep those costs down.

As the cost of living under the Liberal and Conservative governments skyrockets, employment is on the decline. People in my community are struggling more and more each day to find employment. Young people who have degrees are still struggling. York South–Weston is a working-class community built on manufacturing jobs. But the Liberal government sat on the sidelines for more than 15 years while more than 300,000 manufacturing jobs left the province, and the Conservatives have no plan to bring it back.

As the jobs become more technical and competitive, education and training become ever more important. People in our community tell me how important it is to them that their children stay in school, and they ask that we help them fund good schools. They want after-school programs and youth-focused initiatives.

But it is not just young people who have suffered under Liberal and Conservative governments. Our seniors are struggling too. People in our community want our seniors respected with dignity and having access to services when they need them.

Our community is strong and diverse. We are multicultural. I know that our diversity is what makes us so strong and vibrant. But our community has its share of challenges. York South–Weston is a working-class community in the northwest of the city of Toronto, an area of declining manufacturing. It is the second-poorest riding in Ontario. Over a quarter of men, women and children in our community live below the poverty line. Nearly a third lack a basic high school diploma. Nearly half the population rent; they do not own their homes. One in seven residents is a senior, many of whom are living in poverty too.

York South–Weston is the former home of manufacturers such as CCM, Moffat stove, Massey-Harris, MacMillan Bloedel, Dominion Bridge, Ferranti-Packard, Kodak, and the list goes on and on. They have all left. Tens of thousands of jobs are gone. The people who worked here earned family-supporting wages, lived in modest, comfortable homes and shopped locally, building the local economy.

But now, with the jobs all gone, unemployment is a major concern in my community. The unemployment rate for York South–Weston is habitually higher than the national norm. Youth unemployment is even higher still. The few jobs that remain tend to be low-wage, precarious service sector jobs. Good-paying jobs with decent, family-supporting wages and benefits are the top priority for me and my community.

But even those who do find jobs here must find them outside the riding and must use public transit—which, in my community, is city buses—to get to work. Some have told me at the door that they spend as many as three and a half hours every day commuting, which is time taken away from their families.

Madam Speaker, my riding is home to many newcomers who want opportunities to start a better life. They can succeed when they have access to adequate programs and services. The Premier has decided to cut not only the funding for those public services but to cut Toronto city council to 25 seats from 47. This is not how governments acting for the people conduct themselves. At stake is the effective and efficient provision of vital services that are provided to working families and local communities, and programs that effect the quality of life of all Torontonians. He has meddled in an election that was already well under way so that he and his developer friends can have their way at city hall.

This deliberate interference is unprecedented in Ontario history. It shows the same contempt for democracy that marked the Mike Harris regime, the last time Conservatives ran this province. This move is driven not by a pursuit of savings but by the shadowy special interests that want to reduce accountability so that they can profit from the resources of our city. Doug Ford is abusing the power of the Premier’s office to meddle in Toronto’s municipal election and is targeting his political enemies by scrapping some regional chair elections altogether. It is the kind of behaviour we expect from dictators, not the Premier of Ontario.

The people in my community are asking us to hold public consultations to examine all of the ways Toronto could be better run and then to propose appropriate legislation in plenty of time to bring in reforms prior to the next municipal election. Doug Ford’s unilateral decision to shrink the size of Toronto city council is—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): The member is reminded to refer to members by their titles or their ridings and that we do not impute motive. The member will withdraw.

Mr. Faisal Hassan: Withdraw, Madam Speaker. Thank you.

I am also deeply concerned about this government’s decision to cancel Ontario’s cap-and-trade pollution pricing system. It is equally wrong to break clean energy contracts and to cut green rebates for homes, schools and businesses. These kinds of decisions will hurt people who want to save money by saving energy. They are costing us jobs and investments by chasing away clean economy business. They are putting Ontarians on the hook for billions of dollars in cancelled permits and unnecessary legal fees and undermining public trust in the reliability and consistency of Ontario’s laws and commitments.

Instead of going backwards, Ontario needs a real climate change plan that includes a price on pollution that assists people and small businesses to lower their emissions. But unfortunately, it’s clear that this government does not have the foresight to make any plans whatsoever.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions and comments?

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I’m proud to rise here today to support Bill 32, the Access to Natural Gas Act, introduced by the Minister of Infrastructure.

As the minister said, we campaigned on a promise to make life easier and more affordable, including relief for skyrocketing energy costs, and that is exactly what Bill 32 will provide. It’s a promise made and a promise kept. In many parts of rural and northern Ontario, families and businesses will now be able to change from expensive electric heating, propane or oil to affordable natural gas. This will save them an average of $800 to $2,500 per year.

Madam Speaker, it is worth taking a moment today to remember how far we have come in just two years. Two years ago in this place, the former Minister of the Environment, the former member from Toronto Centre, was talking about eliminating natural gas from all of Ontario. In response a question from the member from Sarnia, the Liberal minister said, “In Toronto, where I live, my building and others in my neighbourhood don’t need to be running on natural gas.”

Rather than saving families and small businesses $800 to $2,500 per year, this would have cost families in my riding $800 to $2,500 each year. Rather than looking for ways to make life easier and more affordable, our previous Liberal governments were looking for ways to make life harder and less affordable.

Thank you again to the Premier and our Minister of Infrastructure for taking a different approach. I urge all members to join me in supporting Bill 32.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions and comments?

Mr. Paul Miller: I would like to start off by saying congratulations to the new member from York South–Weston. He did an excellent maiden speech. I must commend him for the journey that he took starting in 1990 in Rome—Somalia, then Rome. It’s amazing, in that short period of time, to be sitting in this House, and I’m extremely proud of what you did. Your determination to overcome and climb those hills is certainly remarkable.

Imagine the odds against you getting here, and how you started off. Even if you had a great education from where you come, the boundaries you had to go through and the hills you had to climb to achieve your education, to put yourself through university with no assistance, unlike a lot of us in here, who have had—my family has been here well over 150 years. I certainly had a better chance. But the bottom line is, I want to remind everyone in this chamber: We are all immigrants, except the Indigenous people. So when I hear the word “immigrant,” I’m talking about myself too.

We’re all Canadians. We’re proud Canadians. The diversity in our country is wonderful. Look at this room. Look at the backgrounds of the people who are sitting and making judgments for the people of this province. You should all be proud of yourselves. The backgrounds that you all come from were building blocks for our community, and I’m glad to serve in this House with all of you. We do have our differences occasionally—it does pop up—but certainly the people that put us here are proud of what we’re doing and how we’re building Canada.

Thank you for your service, thank you for your journey, and welcome to our caucus.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions and comments?

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: Madam Speaker, we have heard from people across Ontario that natural gas expansion is important in order to grow business, create jobs, and compete. By cancelling the cap-and-trade carbon tax, we have already acted to bring natural gas prices down for Ontario families and businesses. Now we are taking the next step, to ensure that the benefits of natural gas expansion are shared throughout the entire province.

The Access to Natural Gas Act, if passed, will ensure agricultural competitiveness and a thriving rural economy. The Ontario agri-food sector is one of the world’s most diverse, with almost 5,000 farms, contributing $106 billion to the province’s GDP and supporting 1.2 million jobs. That’s one in eight Ontario workers.

Expanding access to natural gas will put money back in people’s pockets, as residential customers can save between $800 to $2,500 per year by switching from electric heating, propane or oil. Madam Speaker, expanding natural gas will make Ontario communities more attractive for job creation and new businesses. This is part of our government’s plan to bring quality jobs back to Ontario and to send a clear message that Ontario is open for business.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions and comments?

Ms. Laura Mae Lindo: I am so honoured to stand up and say congratulations to my new colleague from York South–Weston. Having an opportunity to hear your passion and commitment to your community gives me hope, because that’s the kind of passion and commitment that we actually need in order to move Ontario forward.

I just wanted to take a minute to point out some of the key pieces. I know you spoke a lot about how diverse your community is etc., but one of the pieces that resonated the most with me was your discussion of the need for action in order to bring change. We can’t actually address the issues of youth unemployment without real action. We can’t say that we’re doing anti-racism work if we’re not going to ban carding. We can’t actually achieve without real action. I think what was most passionate and what was most moving for me was to hear you speak about it in your own journey, as well.

Thank you very much for bringing those words to this House as a reminder not only of the work that we’re doing here for our constituents, but of the work that we have done to actually come here, to arrive here in this place, and to make the kinds of decisions that are going to have an impact on everybody.

Again, congratulations.

May we all take some time to listen to this call to action and find ways to work across our differences.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I return to the member from York South–Weston for his remarks.

Mr. Faisal Hassan: I would like to thank the member from Mississauga–Lakeshore for participating in the debate, and also our own Hamilton East–Stoney Creek member, the Scarborough–Rouge Park member, and my friend from Kitchener Centre.

Instead of going backwards, Ontario needs a real climate change plan that includes a price on pollution, that assists people and small businesses to lower their emissions. Unfortunately, it’s clear that this government does not have the foresight to make any plan whatsoever.

In communities across Ontario, Ford Conservatives’ cuts are already being felt.

It is time that we urge this government to rethink its priorities and establish priorities that can assist all Ontarians regardless of where they live, regardless of their gender, regardless of who they are—not merely a very few well-to-do Conservative members or Conservative donors.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate?

Miss Kinga Surma: I want to congratulate the member from York South–Weston. He is my neighbour to the east. I look forward to working with him over the next four years.

Madam Speaker, looking towards the other side of the House leaves a lot to be desired—because the truth of the matter is, on this side of the House we are doing great things for the people of Ontario.

I rise today in support of Bill 32, the proposed Access to Natural Gas Act. I want to thank my colleague the Honourable Monte McNaughton, Minister of Infrastructure, for bringing forward this bill, which, if passed, would make it possible for more people to have access to affordable natural gas.

The demand for expanded natural gas access across Ontario is high. Most Ontarians who lack access to natural gas live in rural, remote and First Nation communities. These communities are in need of new natural gas networks to make life easier and more affordable for their families and their businesses.

Natural gas is an affordable heating option for families and businesses. Approximately 3.5 million residential customers and 130,000 businesses across Ontario currently rely on natural gas.

Madam Speaker, during the campaign and even well before then, constituents in my riding and across the province strongly expressed that affordability was their greatest challenge when asked what could be done better to improve their lives.

The government has heard from families, businesses and communities across Ontario that natural gas expansion is important in order to grow businesses, create jobs and compete. The switch from electric heat, propane or oil to natural gas can save an average residential customer between $800 and $2,500 a year, putting money back into people’s pockets.

Since the House was called into session immediately following the election, we have taken action to address the issue of making life more affordable for the people of Ontario by moving critical legislation. The very first thing our government did to make life more affordable for Ontarians was to get rid of the cap-and-trade carbon tax that was imposed by the previous Liberal government. We ended the era of Ontario’s carbon tax.

A cap-and-trade carbon tax increased the price of absolutely everything. That is why our party took immediate action to wind down the cap-and-trade carbon tax, benefiting all Ontarians. We’re committed to putting more money in your pocket. By removing the cost of the cap-and-trade carbon tax from natural gas bills, we’ve saved families approximately $80 a year and small businesses approximately $285 a year.

In addition, the conclusion of cap-and-trade is a key step forward to fulfilling our government’s goal to reduce gas prices by 10 cents a litre. After only being in office for four months, drivers across Ontario have been seeing the benefits of a PC government. Gas prices across the province dropped an average of five cents per litre. This did not happen by accident. A huge contributor that helped decrease the price was our government’s decision to eliminate the cap-and-trade carbon tax—promise made, promise kept. It was a tax that was hidden, buried in the price at the pump.

For someone like me who drives every day, whether to work, to visit constituents or to attend events that are important to my community, this makes a difference. Whether the NDP would like to admit it, there are many people who rely on vehicles to get them to work and to drive their children to hockey practice. It is simply not realistic to assume that everyone can accommodate their activities without the use of a vehicle, and they shouldn’t be penalized for that in their pocket. Eliminating the cap-and-trade carbon tax will save the average family $260 per year.

In addition to saving families money, the elimination of the tax will remove a cost burden from Ontario businesses, allowing them to grow, create jobs and compete in neighbouring jurisdictions. It is anticipated that through the cancellation of cap-and-trade and by reducing the fuel tax, Ontario will create an estimated 14,000 jobs. I think that’s something to be proud of, and definitely something to look forward to. And we have done everything we can to ensure that no additional cap-and-trade carbon tax cost will be imposed on suppliers to avoid passing these costs down back to consumers.

The very next step that we took was to tackle Hydro One. Hydro One was the number one example of the misspending scandals and waste that defined the Liberals’ time in government. While struggling families were stuck choosing between heating and eating, connected insiders were getting rich off of taxpayer money, giving themselves bigger and bigger pay packages. Nothing angered the public more, certainly in Etobicoke Centre.

During the election, we promised we would clean up the hydro mess and restore accountability and trust in Ontario’s energy system. On August 16, we were pleased to announce that the Hydro One CEO, along with the rest of the old hydro board, was dismantled. Our government has appointed a new 10-person board. They are ready to get to work on getting Hydro One back on track. The Hydro One Accountability Act will ensure that these shady practices played under the Liberals will never happen again under any administration.

Hydro One will also be required to annually publish on its public website a record of the total annual compensation paid. Hydro One can now play a constructive role in Ontario’s electricity system as our government works to bring hydro bills down for the people of this province, making life more affordable.

We could not address electricity rates without repealing the Green Energy Act. Under the last government, energy rates tripled, hurting families and driving manufacturing jobs outside of Ontario.

One of the first actions we took as government was to cancel 758 expensive and wasteful energy projects as a part of our plan to cut hydro rates by 12% for the people of Ontario, saving $790 million for electricity customers. The original Green Energy Act led to the disastrous feed-in tariff program and skyrocketing electricity rates for Ontario families. It took the power away from municipalities and townships to stop expensive and unprecedented energy projects in their communities.

All the Green Energy Act did was help Liberal insiders get rich while families across Ontario were forced to choose between heating their homes and putting food on their tables. The Green Energy Act made it harder for businesses in Ontario to stay in business. Thousands of jobs were lost across Ontario because manufacturing plants were too expensive to operate.

Our legislation has given government the authority to stop approvals for wasteful energy projects where the need for electricity has not been demonstrated. This would put the brakes on additional projects that would add costs to electricity bills that the people of Ontario simply cannot afford. After years of skyrocketing electricity rates, your hydro bills will finally start coming down, making life more affordable in Ontario.

What I’m particularly happy about is eliminating unnecessary red tape, like the outdated Drive Clean program, which no longer was effective. In the past, Drive Clean was effective at reducing vehicle pollution. However, industry standards have significantly improved since the program was created in 1999. This has resulted in a steady decrease of passenger cars that fail the emissions test. As such, the Drive Clean program no longer effectively provides value for taxpayers. As a result of this decision, taxpayers will avoid costs of upwards of $40 million annually.

This government is making sure that every taxpayer dollar counts by improving programs that help target the biggest polluters and protect Ontario’s air.

It’s evident that in the last four months we’ve been exceptionally busy—exceptionally busy making life more affordable for the taxpayer. Now we’re keeping our promise to make life more affordable for the residents of northern Ontario. I’ve never been to northern Ontario myself. I hear many wonderful things from my colleagues on this side. I cannot believe how challenging it was for residents in northern communities in terms of access to affordable natural gas.

During the election, our Premier and our party heard from the people. We heard how important access to natural gas is—key to business growth and job creation. Our action on this will ensure that the benefits of natural gas expansion are shared throughout the province, especially in northern Ontario. I will repeat it again: The proposed natural gas expansion program will result in savings between $800 and $2,500 per year for a residential customer.

Madam Speaker, I know that every cent matters to the people of Ontario. It all adds up in the end, helping to make life more affordable, not to mention the positive impact that the changes will make to business growth in the province. This new program will help encourage more private gas distributors to partner with communities to develop projects that expand access to affordable and efficient natural gas.

Access to natural gas will have positive ramifications on the rural community. The Access to Natural Gas Act, if passed, will help ensure agricultural competitiveness of our rural economy. Our rural community includes 50,000 farms, which amounts to $106 billion to the province’s GDP. Ensuring this industry continues to thrive in Ontario is key to the province’s economic vitality.

The changes we are making are incredibly important to the prosperity and growth of this province. Now, I may be young, but there is one thing I know for certain: Jobs and a strong economy are the foundation to prosperity and success. The era of the previous Liberal government was a dark one. I could not understand why a government that so often claimed it was the only suitable option for Ontarians imposed terrible policies that only resulted in hurting job creation and growth.

During the campaign trail, every single small business owner I spoke to told me that they were hurting, not because they weren’t working hard enough or providing a great service, but because the government was making it impossible for them to succeed. These business owners employ people. They are responsible for our local economies, and they were in trouble. It was shameful. Our side of the House wasn’t afraid to listen, and over the last four months we weren’t afraid to take on fixing all of these challenges. We are determined to restore economic prosperity to this province.

Expanding natural gas access will make Ontario communities more attractive for job creation and new businesses. This is part of our government’s plan to bring quality jobs back to Ontario and send a clear message that Ontario is open for business.

Now, many of you may be wondering why a member from Toronto, one who has never been to northern Ontario—but I will be going, I assure you—volunteered to speak to this bill. Part of it was, of course, to congratulate Minister McNaughton for his great work on this file and to acknowledge all of his staff that worked tirelessly to execute it.

But the reason why this is so important to me is because not only is making life more affordable for the constituents of Etobicoke Centre and the residents of all of Ontario a priority, but because I believe that a government has a responsibility not to overregulate, but rather to create an environment in which businesses can prosper. This bill does exactly that.

On April 6, I stood before 400 of my constituents, alongside the Premier, at my campaign office, where I made a promise to the people of my riding that we would bring prosperity to Ontario by making it open for business. It was a positive message. It gave everyone hope and a sense of relief that help was on its way. I am proud to be a part of that. We may not always get it right, but we are going to work damn hard until we do.

I hope even the members opposite will consider supporting this bill. I want to thank the minister again. This is a job well done, and I look forward to hearing what my colleagues have to say.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions and comments?

Mr. Jamie West: I want to begin by congratulating my colleague from York South–Weston on his inaugural speech. It was amazing. It reminds me of the importance, when we’re sitting in here—it’s too bad you don’t see it very well on the cameras. Across from me is an eagle. Across from the government is an owl. The reminder for the government is the owl, to make wise decisions. The reminder for us is to be critical and eagle-eyed to improve the—

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Ever vigilant.

Mr. Jamie West: Ever vigilant. Thank you. I think it’s important that you mind that the owl doesn’t mean you are always wise. It means that you have to make wise decisions. There’s room for improvement, continuous improvement.

When I think of just the inaugural speech and the examples that we learned from the member from York South–Weston—from Somalia to Rome to Winnipeg and then into Toronto; racialized experience, and public transport that takes three hours to get to work. Where I live, if you lived three hours away, you wouldn’t work in my city. You would live in some other city. Those different experiences are important. If you exclude them, if you block your eyes, you’re not going to make wise decisions. You are not going to grow from it.

When we make criticism, it’s not to tear down what you are doing; it’s to improve and make it better for all of Ontario. When we say, “Let’s make sure that the bill includes rural, Indigenous and northern Ontario,” that’s important.

The member from Etobicoke Centre talked about never being to northern Ontario, and then earlier in the same conversation said the NDP don’t realize that people need to travel by car. You’re telling me, from Sudbury, that I don’t know that? Or from Nickel Belt or Thunder Bay or Mushkegowuk, that we don’t know about travelling by car? Of course we do. We need to listen to each other and understand, and not just throw barbs. I apologize if it comes across the wrong way. I’m just saying, we need to listen.

If we care about drivers, then let’s walk the talk. Let’s support the member from Oshawa’s Bill 43. Let’s remove the unfair tolls from Highway 412 and the future tolls that could be on Highway 418. That’s what we need to do. We need to work together for continuous improvement, where an auto is right on either side.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions and comments?

Mr. Jim McDonell: It’s a privilege to get up to comment on the member from Etobicoke Centre. It was a great speech where she talked about all the benefits of natural gas and a party that’s listening. We’ve heard for years and years from the previous government how this was going to happen, but of course it never did.

I go back to a business in my riding that had tried for years to get natural gas. This goes back about 15 years ago when I was on council. When they finally put it through, in the time of not getting it to the time he got it, he lost about half a million dollars in costs by not having natural gas and having to use propane.

St. Mary’s Centre, a community centre in our area, had received natural gas just a couple of years ago. They were expecting some savings, not expecting it to be a lot, but their bill went down by 50%. They were saving over $8,000 a year by getting natural gas over oil, and of course the convenience that goes along with that. It shows the savings. In rural Ontario, those are big. We need to catch up.

We have a system of electrification that went through with the telephone. That was all based on a subsidy back when urban areas were able to get it much cheaper. That subsidized electrification and the telephone throughout this country. I remember back in the mid-1980s, we were considered to have the best telephone system in the world because of the full access and the quickness. That was all to do with the system we had in place.

So, moving towards this system with the natural gas, the previous government was going to fund 10 projects, which really didn’t touch anything. This is going to take 70 communities, so it’s a great project. We’re looking forward to this. I’m looking, finally, to get natural gas. You know, it’s just another example of a promise made, promise kept.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions and comments?

Mr. Jeff Burch: I would first of all like to congratulate my friend from York South–Weston for an excellent inaugural speech. It’s just incredible the journey that he has made to come to this country and have such great success, so congratulations to him.

I listened to the member from Etobicoke Centre taking a very wide berth on the subject of gas distribution. First of all, hydro: Let’s understand that the privatization of hydro is the main cause of the energy prices that we’re struggling with. The Conservatives passed the legislation to privatize our hydro and the Liberals carried through with their plan to further privatize it. That is the struggling we’re dealing with when it comes to energy.

The Green Energy Act that the member touched on: It’s not perfect, but let’s stop pretending that the whole thing was garbage. With the Green Energy Act, there were parts of it that were very good. There were parts of it that were creating jobs and creating business. This government, by going back on contracts, destroyed those jobs and created layoffs in our communities. People who install doors and windows and others—we have all kinds of businesses across the province who suffered because of that short-sighted decision.

Let’s also remember that this government has absolutely no plan to deal with the environment. That is incredible to me, Speaker, that a government in this day and age in North America—I believe they’re the only one—would have no plan to deal with the environment. I don’t know how you go from this House back to your community, talk to your children and say that you have no plan in this day and age to deal with the environment so that they have a planet to live on. There are a lot of people who are older in this House; we’re not going to be around in 20 or 30 years, but our children will. For a government, in this day and age, to have no plan is absolutely disgusting.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions and comments?

Ms. Christine Hogarth: Thank you for letting me add my comments to today’s discussion. I just want to comment on my colleague from Etobicoke Centre. We campaigned on making life more affordable for people. I know that when we were all knocking on doors—life has been harder. Life has been harder for the last many years, and that’s why this government was voted in. Relief is here for people.

I say it’s a good start with Bill 32 and our cap-and-trade act because under the Liberal government energy rates tripled, hurting families and driving manufacturing jobs out of Ontario. We sat at committee yesterday and we talked about these manufacturing jobs that were leaving our communities and leaving small-town, rural Ontario. Where does that leave your children? It leaves your children without jobs in the future. We have to make sure that Ontario is open for business by cutting these prices down and by giving people the opportunity to have choice in the way they want to fuel their businesses.

I have lived in northern Ontario. I lived in Thunder Bay, I lived in Sudbury and I lived in Sault Ste. Marie. Heating is not a luxury. When we were growing up, at Hallowe’en time we had to make sure our Hallowe’en costumes fit over our snowsuits. That was just how it was. So heating is not a luxury. Today in Toronto we may have a little frost on the ground, but I know, where I grew up, in Thunder Bay, there was a snowstorm last weekend. So heating is not a luxury in some of these northern and rural communities. We need to give people the choice so they can afford to heat their homes and they don’t need to choose between eating and heating. That’s just unfair.

We need a government that is responsible in making these tough decisions to ensure that the people moving forward have jobs, can create new jobs and can afford to feed their families.

Other things this government is doing over the last 100-and-some-odd days—I think we are at 112 now. We have ensured that we are creating an environment and that we are open for business in Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Thank you. I return to the member from Etobicoke Centre for her remarks.

Miss Kinga Surma: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Thank you to my colleague Christine Hogarth, the member from Etobicoke–Lakeshore, and I want to thank the members opposite, the member from Sudbury, and the member from Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry for his feedback and his comments.

I believe I got into politics for all the right reasons. During the nomination, post-nomination and leading up to the campaign, I canvassed every single day. Every single day, I was at the doors because I told myself I wanted to speak to every single person in their house at least—minimum—one time. That was a goal I set for myself. What really hurt me was how many families were coming to me and saying, “I’ve worked hard my whole life. I have a decent job. My husband has a good job. We’ve started a family here in Etobicoke; it’s a great community.

But every year it’s getting harder and harder, and our salaries are not keeping up with all of these costs and all of these fees and all of these taxes.” It was absolutely heartbreaking.

Our message was loud and clear during the election. This was something we saw across the board happening in every single part of the province: Affordability was a key issue. I am so pleased with our team and with the Premier. Everything we are doing is going to make life more affordable for the people of this province. We’re going to do that, and we have started doing that, by lowering hydro bills, eliminating the cap-and-trade carbon tax, lowering gas prices and eliminating the unnecessary Drive Clean program.

The next step forward is that we’re going to focus on making sure our businesses have the resources, the environment and the tools they need to succeed in this province. We’re going to get rid of overregulation. We have a wonderful minister and a great caucus that are working incredibly hard.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): It being 10:15, this House stands recessed until 10:30.

The House recessed from 1015 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I wish to call the members’ attention to the fact that we have with us in the Speaker’s gallery a delegation of members of the Committee on European Affairs from the Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic. They are led by Mr. Tomáš Hanzel, the vice-president of the Chamber of Deputies. Please join me in welcoming this delegation from the Czech Republic to our Legislature today.

Also in the Speaker’s gallery, we are joined by the Minister of Intergovernmental and Northern Affairs and Internal Trade, the Honourable Dominic LeBlanc. With him are two of his staff, Ryan Dunn and Vincent Hughes. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Mr. Speaker, not often do we have somebody come down from Timmins, but from the realtors we have Michel Blais, who is here all the way from the city of Timmins in order to participate both at question period and during the debate today.

Ms. Jane McKenna: I’d like to welcome two realtors from Burlington, Sean Morrison and Bonnie Prior. Thank you for coming today.

Ms. Suze Morrison: I’d like to welcome to the Legislature today Farrah Khan, who is the manager of Consent Comes First at Ryerson University. She is also the former co-chair of the round table on ending violence against women.

M me Nathalie Des Rosiers: I also wanted to welcome Farrah Khan, a close friend of mine. We want to celebrate today that it’s Persons Day for women, so I think it’s appropriate to welcome her here. Thank you.

Mr. Dave Smith: I’d like to welcome an exceptional young gentleman from the city of Peterborough, a member of Adam Scott Intermediate School, today’s page captain, Ian Williams.

Ms. Marit Stiles: It gives me great pleasure to welcome to the members’ gallery today my mother, a resident of Ottawa–Vanier, Katherine Stiles.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I welcomed over 100 CEOs in support of basic income in the media studio today. Some of them are joining us in the members’ gallery: Audrey Mascarenhas; Floyd Marinescu; Sheila Regehr; Danny Tseng, who I think is on his way; Samir Nurmohamed, who is on his way; as well as Mike Garnett. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Robert Bailey: I’ve got two long-time friends and guests here, Mr. and Mrs. Andy and Betty Ruff, here from Sarnia–Lambton, at Queen’s Park today.

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: I know they’ve already been introduced, but I’d be remiss not to personally recognize and welcome the delegation from Czech Republic here today in the Speaker’s gallery. We had a very productive meeting this morning on trade relations between Ontario and Czech Republic. I look forward to continuing that via email. Thank you and welcome.

Ms. Jill Dunlop: I’d like to introduce my constituents who are with me today visiting the Legislature: Courtney Ostic, Ryan Sher, Ashlynn Hill, Paula Couter and Cindy Ferguson. Thank you for making the commute here today.

Mr. Parm Gill: I want to welcome grade 12 students from my great riding of Milton. They are coming from Bishop Reding Catholic Secondary School. They’ll be joining us here in the gallery for a few minutes later on.

Mrs. Amy Fee: I’d like to welcome a long-time supporter and volunteer of mine, Rob Shatzky.

Mrs. Gila Martow: I want to welcome Ori Barda from Netivot HaTorah Jewish day school in Thornhill, as well as his dad, Ilan Barda. Welcome and bruchim habaim.

Hon. Steve Clark: Speaker, I want to introduce to you, and through you to members of the Legislative Assembly, a visitor from Winnipeg, Manitoba. She’s the mother of one of my very valued staff, Hannah Anderson. Please welcome Dianne Anderson to Queen’s Park. Welcome.

Hon. Jim Wilson: It’s my pleasure to introduce to the House the Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, the federal Minister of Intergovernmental and Northern Affairs and Internal Trade, my counterpart at the federal level. Welcome, Minister.

Sign-language

interpretation

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the member for Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound on a point of order.

Mr. Bill Walker: I seek unanimous consent to move a motion without notice regarding ASL services during statements by the ministry this afternoon.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound is seeking unanimous consent of the House to move a motion regarding ASL services this afternoon during private members’ business. Agreed?

I recognize the member.

Mr. Bill Walker: I move that sign-language interpreters may be present on the floor of the chamber today to interpret statements by the ministry and responses.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound has moved a motion. Agreed? Agreed.

Motion agreed to.

Private members’ public business

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Ottawa–Vanier.

M me Nathalie Des Rosiers: Mr. Speaker, I believe that we have unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding private members’ public business.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Ottawa–Vanier is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to put forward a motion regarding private members’ public business. Agreed? Was there a no?

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Okay, agreed. The member may proceed.

M me Nathalie Des Rosiers: I move that, notwithstanding standing order 98(c), a change be made to the order of precedence for private members’ public business such that Ms. Wynne assumes ballot item number 39; myself, Nathalie Des Rosiers, assumes ballot item 51; and Mr. Gravelle assumes ballot number 79.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Madame Des Rosiers has moved that, notwithstanding standing order 98(c)—

Interjection: Dispense.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Dispense? Okay. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We passed the motion.

Motion agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Timmins on a point of order.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Just for the House in the future, when moving points of order, it would be good that they state in the request what it’s about, because it’s pretty wide open when it’s just moved the way that it was. So, “I want to move a unanimous consent motion regarding the switching of ballots during private members’,” just so we’re clear what we’re going to be voting on.

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

It is now time for oral questions and I recognize the leader of the official opposition.

Oral Questions

Employment standards

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I first want to just acknowledge that today is Persons Day. Back in 1927, the Famous Five began the journey to making sure that women became identified as equal persons to men in our country.

On that note, Speaker, I want to direct my question to the Acting Premier. Does the Acting Premier believe that a woman fleeing domestic violence should be able to take a day off to get her kids to some counselling without fear of losing her job?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Minister of Tourism.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Thank you for the question. I am going to take a leap of faith and assume that you are talking about a recent change to the round table. I don’t think that there is a member in this chamber who would ever suggest that workplace violence in our schools, in our classrooms or in our homes is appropriate. We all need to work together on this issue. It is non-partisan, and we need to get past the throwing of knives back and forth and actually work together.

In the supplementary, I’d like to highlight some of the important work that we have been doing on our side.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Unfortunately, the minister made the wrong leap. We actually already have worked together to try to make a difference for women who are facing domestic violence. It’s called changes to Bill 148 that are currently in place, where a woman now is able to leave the workplace in order to deal with the domestic violence that she’s facing, to try to help her to ensure that she and her children are safe. Those protections are one of the many hard-earned rights that the Premier has pledged to tear up when he strips the protections from Ontarians’ Employment Standards Act.

Can the Acting Premier explain how a woman taking time off work to protect her family is bad for our economy?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Minister of Labour.

Hon. Laurie Scott: I appreciate the question from the Leader of the Opposition. I think all parties in the past have brought forward motions, have supported private members’ bills and have had great discussions in the Legislature on what more we can do to protect women against violence and to get to places that can help them leave those difficult situations.

The Leader of the Opposition is referring to Bill 148. We have said that we are reviewing Bill 148. I’ve had many, many meetings with a variety of stakeholders, including associations that represent people who are fleeing from domestic violence—women’s associations, shelters etc. We will be bringing information soon, this fall, to the Legislature on those discussions.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I just want to say that most employers that I talk to want to see those protections remain in place. It’s not just a matter of all of those fantastic women’s organizations that are supportive and helping women to escape these kinds of situations, but most employers that I talk to want to see those particular protections remain in place.

The law is designed to make sure that every woman actually has that protection if she needs it, which is what leads to one question: Who is asking the government—if there is anybody, we would like to know—to take away the provisions in the Employment Standards Act that enable women to leave work when they’re fleeing domestic violence? What I’m hearing from the employers’ side is they are not interested in having that happen.

Hon. Laurie Scott: The Leader of the Opposition is correct. I think collectively, as a society, we’ve been able to shine more light on the fact that there’s a large increase of women being affected by violence and it should not be tolerated in any situation—in the home, in the workplace or anywhere. I myself, when I was in opposition, passed many bills to try to protect women. We continue to believe in that on this side of the House.

As I said, I have met with a variety of stakeholders and individual people. All of our caucus colleagues have heard from people in their ridings about the increasing violence against women and the need to do more. So to the Leader of the Opposition: We will have more to say on that in the days to come.

Fiscal accountability

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is for the Acting Premier. The Financial Accountability Office revealed earlier this week that $500 million in cap-and-trade spending has not actually been cancelled, but the Ford government refused to reveal where the money is now going. Can the Acting Premier tell us why the government won’t share that information?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Minister of the Environment.

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member: Thank you for the question. The FAO report did make a number of things clear, including—and I will speak to the member’s question—but it made clear, principally, that Ontarians were going to save $264 per family. It made clear that the estimates we’ve made around the wind-down of the credit market of $5 million in costs were accurate. And it made clear, shockingly to some, that the total cost of a federal carbon tax would be close to $650 per family.

It also talked about the orderly wind-down. As we have discussed, we will be winding down certain programs. Other programs, including transit and housing programs, will be continuing. These are the sorts of programs that were spoken about in our platform, the important transit changes that are being made in the GTA and otherwise. When the entire program is wrapped up, which will happen at the end of October—for example, when the windows program, which is part of the orderly wind-down, has happened—there will be further reporting on the details.

But Mr. Speaker, I think the important part of the FAO report was saying that the government was on track in terms of returning money to Ontarians and on track in terms of winding down cap-and-trade.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Families have heard promises from governments before, and they’ve also seen governments refuse to be clear about the facts. What they heard from the Financial Accountability Office this week was they will be paying more; the government is adding $3 billion to the debt; there is no climate plan; and their own government is refusing to tell them where half a billion dollars is now going.

Why is the government not being up front, clear and transparent with the FAO and Ontario families?

Hon. Rod Phillips: I’m not sure what plan or what the Leader of the Opposition was reading, but what was clear was that the government had been very specific. We had said that we would have an orderly wind-down of the program; that is happening. We had said that there would be a $5-million charge for the wind-down of the credit market—a market that the Leader of the Opposition had said would cost $4 billion. No doubt it would have cost $4 billion if the Leader of the Opposition had had the chance to make it cost that much. They also said very clearly that $264 will be saved by families and that a Trudeau carbon tax will cost $650.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, as the programs are wound down, we will make sure that Ontarians, unlike the previous government, see where the money has gone and they see that cap-and-trade is gone and that a carbon tax doesn’t replace it.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, what the minister still refuses to do is what he refused to do, or what the government has refused to do, in terms of a query from the FAO, which is disclose where this half a billion dollars is now going. Families have heard promises from governments before, and they’ve also seen governments scramble to hide the facts. What they heard from the FAO very clearly, earlier this week, is that they will be paying more. The government is adding $3 billion to the debt. There is no climate plan. And their own government is refusing to tell them where half a billion dollars is going.

Why is this government not being up front and transparent with the FAO and Ontario families?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, because the Leader of the Opposition has given me the chance, we are, of course, going to have a climate plan. We were clear in the campaign that we would have a climate plan. We were clear, when we cancelled the failed climate plan, that we would have a climate plan. We were clear when we introduced Bill 4 that there would be a climate plan.

Now Ontarians can give us contributions to that at ontario.ca/climatechange, where we’re collecting information on the climate plan.

But let’s be clear: The NDP have not been at all transparent when it comes to their plans. That’s why you had a $7 billion hole in your budget plan. When we talk about $3 billion less in revenue, that’s $3 billion less of government programs for you. That’s $3 billion in Ontarians’ pockets, where we think the money should be spent.

Mercury poisoning

Ms. Andrea Horwath: This is my final question in this series and it’s to the Acting Premier. Earlier this week, my colleague in this House, the member for Kiiwetinoong, rose to remark on the life of the late former chief of Grassy Narrows, Steve Fobister Sr. I wouldn’t mind taking a moment to add to my colleague’s comments. I mourn his loss and I give my deepest sympathies to the community as well.

The former chief died due to complications from Minamata disease—mercury poisoning—that he had been living with for decades. Does the government acknowledge that former chief Steve Fobister Sr. suffered from the effects of mercury poisoning and that this is what contributed to his death?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Minister of Indigenous Affairs.

Hon. Greg Rickford: As I rose in this place some days ago, Mr. Speaker, I had an opportunity to reflect on a person I’ve known for almost two decades, sitting across the table from him in my law office in Kenora. I had a chance to admire and respect a man whose legacy is without comparison. From a small northern community, he led the charge not just for issues for his community, opportunities for Treaty 3, but also with respect to mercury contamination.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, to the shame of successive governments, former chief Fobister and the people of Grassy Narrows had to go across the ocean in order to get help and recognition for the mercury poisoning they suffered from. Experts determined that 94% of the population of Grassy Narrows suffered from and continue to suffer from the debilitating effects of exposure to mercury. Yet the majority of the community suffering from mercury disease still doesn’t receive any compensation through the Mercury Disability Board, a board, as we all know, that was set up for that very purpose.

Will the government commit to updating the Mercury Disability Board so that all Grassy Narrows community members suffering from the effects of mercury exposure can receive the full and fair compensation that they so rightfully deserve?

Hon. Greg Rickford: I should also mention that we had an opportunity to spend some quality time with Chief John Paishk from Wabaseemoong. All too often it gets lost in the discussion that members of that community were affected and of course comprise a critical mass of the people on that pension.

Mr. Speaker, it was a significant policy advancement to index those pensions for the people who had been recognized by medical experts historically as having been impacted by the contamination. I know, in visiting with the community and celebrating in traditional ceremonies, that we had done the right thing to update a 30-year-old pension, ensure that it was done retroactively so those folks could experience an increase to reflect historical challenges with the pension and, moving forward, would have a fully indexed pension from the mercury contamination.

Automobile insurance

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: My question is to the Minister of Finance. We have been hearing a lot about fairness in the auto insurance system. The Liberals and the NDP have talked a big game on auto insurance, but time and time again, we saw that it was followed up by no action.

It’s clear that the Liberal-NDP system of failed stretch goals on auto insurance is broken. The private member’s bill introduced on Monday by the member from Milton would, if passed, move us forward in developing an auto insurance system that is fair and serves the needs of drivers across Ontario.

Could the minister please explain the importance of this initiative and how our caucus is working to ensure that Ontarians can benefit from an auto insurance system that treats the people of Ontario fairly?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you to the member from Scarborough–Rouge Park for that question. Once again, I want to take a moment to congratulate the member from Milton on his initiative.

His bill, if passed, would end auto insurance discrimination by scrapping the outdated territory system and preventing auto insurance companies from discriminating by using someone’s postal code or area code, and it does so in a responsible, practical manner. The rationale behind this bill is simple: A good driver in Brampton should pay similar rates to what a good driver in Ottawa pays today.

With this bill, if passed, there will be more consumer choice, fairness, and a local focus on personal responsibility. I look forward to continuing to work with the member from Milton on this initiative.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: Thank you to the minister for his answer. It’s clear that the member for Milton brought forward a thoughtful approach that looks at this issue with a province-wide lens and which, if passed, would ensure there would not be unintended consequences for drivers in other parts of the province.

It does not appear that the same can be said of the member for Brampton East. After taking some time to review the bill he put forward in the House, it seems clear that it would have the opposite effect. In fact, there appear to be major concerns that his bill would raise rates on Ontarians in other parts of the GTA. Can the minister please elaborate on these concerns?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Once again, thank you to the member for that question. As I said yesterday in this House, the NDP member from Brampton East wants the GTA to be considered a single geographic area when insurance companies set their rates. However, this will serve only to increase insurance costs across the entire GTA. In fact, the member’s plan would cause rates to rise in many of his caucus colleagues’ own ridings.

On the other hand, our member from Milton got this right. He took the time to consult, to listen and to develop a plan that will deliver real fairness to the system. If passed, all drivers across all of Ontario will benefit from the thoughtful plan he put forward.

Minister’s conduct

Mr. Taras Natyshak: My question is to the Minister of Community Safety. As the minister should know, the OPP’s economic crime and corruption unit has been conducting an investigation concerning a waterfront cottage owned by Vaughan council candidate Eliana Di Biase. The OPP are investigating links between work done on this cottage by contractors and over $150 million in contracts granted by Mrs. Di Biase’s husband to those same contractors.

Speaker, the Minister of Community Safety is responsible for the OPP, and he knows that his office should be above and beyond reproach. Yet he has been actively campaigning for Mrs. Di Biase throughout this municipal election. Why does the minister responsible for the OPP think that it’s appropriate to be campaigning for a candidate who is currently at the centre of an OPP investigation?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Mr. Speaker, first of all I want to make it clear that I am here as a member of the Legislature. This morning I did send a letter to the individual in question, as it has been brought to my attention that she has been using my photo on her campaign brochure.

As a recently elected member of Parliament, I understand that emotions and activity levels run high in the heat of a campaign and that, at times, an overenthusiastic volunteer might take steps which are inappropriate or unapproved by some of the individuals involved. I understand that this may be the case in this instance.

Be that as it may, I’ve stated publicly on several occasions that it is not my intent to endorse any single candidate during the municipal election.

I do, however, commend every candidate who has chosen to put their name forward on a ballot and run in a democratic process to work for the people.

Interjections.

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

Supplementary.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Speaker, I believe that the minister has just acknowledged a disturbing pattern that we’ve seen by the members of the crown on the other side.

First, we have a Premier who has been seen campaigning for neo-Nazi sympathizers. Now we have a minister responsible for the OPP campaigning for—

Interjections.

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

Stop the clock.

Interjections.

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

Interjections.

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

I’m going to caution the member for Essex on the use of intemperate language. I will recognize him to put his question.

Restart the clock.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Speaker, again, I’ve spoken to a disturbing pattern that we’ve seen and the potential conflict of interest in the offices of the ministers and the Premier himself.

My question is, simply, how can the minister think that it’s appropriate and responsible for him to be campaigning for a candidate who’s at the centre of an OPP investigation?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Mr. Speaker—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I mentioned, I commend every candidate who has put forward their names on a ballot to stand up and ask the citizens of municipalities across the province to give them a chance to serve as an elected representative. For those who are successfully elected, it will mean years of difficult, important work to be done on behalf of deserving, hard-working citizens.

I, myself, benefited by growing up in a community and a province and a nation served by politicians of fortitude and integrity. The society these great men and women helped build provided me, my family and millions of other people a safe and prosperous place to grow and learn and work and raise a family of their own.

While I cannot predict the future, it is my strong hope that each of the candidates who are successful in the upcoming municipal elections will want to work collectively to do the best for the province and for their municipalities.

Taxation

Mr. Daryl Kramp: My question today is for the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks.

Regularly, like many of my colleagues, our constituents contact our office with concerns regarding the cap-and-trade carbon tax. They struggle to understand how it is improving the environment, and they’re uncertain as to the costs that they will eventually have to bear.

But there are several things that they are quite aware of. They are familiar with the difficulty of putting food on the table or paying one’s hydro bill. And it’s surely not too hard to figure out their concern if they have enough gas to make it home from work. They feel the burden that the cap-and-trade carbon tax has placed on them.

Mr. Speaker, the people need to know, we all need to know, how Ontarians will be impacted should any kind of carbon tax ever be imposed on them.

Hon. Rod Phillips: Thank you to the member from Hastings–Lennox and Addington for the question. All Ontarians do deserve to know what the costs of the cap-and-trade program would have been and the potential costs for the Trudeau carbon tax. That was made clear by the FAO in his report: $312 a year would have been the cost by 2022 of the Liberal cap-and-trade program. That’s one of the reasons that we got rid of it. But more concerning today is that $648 by 2022 will be the cost of a Trudeau carbon tax.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to our visitor in the gallery, I’m not sure what they’re smoking up in Ottawa, but this is not going to fly with Ontarians. This isn’t a program that they want. This isn’t a tax that they want. This isn’t something that the people of Ontario or the people of Canada can afford.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Daryl Kramp: Mr. Speaker, through you and back to the minister: I certainly am very pleased that our guest is here to hear our comments today. Thank you for helping us understand the impact of a carbon tax and what it will have on Canadians.

As we all know, as I’ve stated before and most of us have experienced, many, many Canadians are struggling with making ends meet due to the rising costs. I know my constituents are so pleased that they finally elected a government that truly understands and will listen to their concerns. Yet, over and over again, at various levels, we see the Liberal Party, the NDP and the Green Party rise in this House in support of a cap-and-trade tax—another tax. The FAO report confirms our deepest concerns: The carbon tax will take money out of the pockets of every Canadian.

Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of the Environment describe to us why this regressive cap-and-trade carbon tax program will not work for Ontarians?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member: I am going to take another opportunity because, as I’ve promised, we are putting a plan forward that will work for Ontarians. We’re looking for their input at ontario.ca/climatechange.

To the question: Clearly, as the Auditor General had said when she talked about cap-and-trade as an ineffective tax, poorly conceived, that would ship hundreds of millions of dollars out of the country, cap-and-trade was not going to work. The question, I think, to the opposition party, is a good one. The NDP member from Ottawa Centre advocates a $150-a-tonne carbon tax. Let’s put that into terms people can understand: That’s a 35-cent-a-litre increase in gasoline.

Our elimination of cap-and-trade has already cut gas prices by almost 5 cents. We will cut it by a further 5 cents. But that gas tax increase is $4,100 for the average—

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

Executive compensation

Mr. Taras Natyshak: My question is to the Acting Premier. We’ve just received some pretty shocking breaking news. Can the Acting Premier confirm that the Premier’s former campaign tour director has been now appointed as the Ontario trade representative in Washington and will be getting an almost $75,000 pay hike over his predecessor, which would actually leave him earning more than Canada’s current ambassador to the United States?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Minister of Economic Development and Trade.

Hon. Jim Wilson: Thank you to the honourable member for the question. Actually, Ian Todd will be appointed October 22 to be our trade representative in Washington and a special additional role that the previous representative in Washington didn’t have, as a special adviser to the Premier. His compensation will be very comparable to what Monique Smith, the previous representative, was making. Monique Smith, in addition—

Interjections.

Hon. Jim Wilson: Listen to this—in addition to her salary, she was receiving pension contributions and a one-year severance. Mr. Todd will not be receiving that.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Speaker, apparently, the Ford gravy train has arrived at Queen’s Park and it’s all aboard. It’s all aboard, if you’ve been a member. This is insane.

Most Ontarians would be lucky to earn $75,000 a year, never mind getting a $75,000 bump in pay. Media reports today indicate that Ian Todd, a former campaign adviser, is going to be representing Ontario in Washington and that he’ll be taking home more than the Canadian ambassador.

How does this government justify handing a Conservative insider this job and paying him $75,000 more than the person he’s replacing?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Members take their seats. Order. The opposition benches will come to order.

Minister?

Hon. Jim Wilson: Once again, we see NDP math. Can’t you understand over there? He’s getting a salary like Monique Smith did, but he’s not getting pension contributions or a one-year severance.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, we fired the consultants and we fired the lawyers. The retainers are gone, and that office will be saving $710,000, clearing Mr. Todd’s rate.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Order on the government benches.

Start the clock. Next question.

Violence against women

M me Nathalie Des Rosiers: Ma question est pour la procureure générale.

A couple of weeks ago, the day after the testimony of Christine Blasey Ford at the Brett Kavanaugh US Senate confirmation hearing, two different women came into my constituency office and confided in me that they’d been sexually assaulted in the past. This disclosure happens often when there are—it’s the essence of the #MeToo movement, essentially, because disclosure triggers memories.

I referred them to the rape crisis centre and, in the context of my conversation with the rape crisis centre after that, they explained to me that they had not received confirmation of the funding from the Attorney General for the services of legal advice and accompaniment for survivors of sexual assault.

Can the minister confirm to this House that she plans to continue to help survivors of sexual violence access the legal system?

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: I thank the member opposite for the question, and I want to express the fact of my view and the view of this government that we feel for the women who came to you. We encourage all women who are experiencing violence to come. They were incredibly brave to come to you and tell you their stories.

Our government believes that all Ontarians should live free from violence and the threat of violence. That is why we take the programs that our ministries offer to keep Ontarians free and to help them through the justice system—we take those programs very seriously. We’re looking at them because we want to make sure that they are delivering the services in an effective and efficient way, so that they can actually provide the real help and services that the women need.

I am committed to looking at all those programs across our government. We are all doing that. We will have more to say on that in the future.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

M me Nathalie Des Rosiers: I think there’s a certain urgency for them to get to know what the answer is, and that was the point of my question.

I just want to say as well that today is Persons Day in Canada. We celebrate the historic decision that women are persons and therefore could be appointed to the Senate. Indeed, we celebrate this day because we celebrate the importance of ensuring a voice of women in politics, but also in policy-making.

I understand that the minister wants to respond adequately to violence against women and to respond to policy gaps that exist. To empower women to be part of the policy process is really important in the context of violence against women, and because individual women who have experienced violence sometimes want privacy, governments in the past have often found it useful to seek the advice of organizations that work with women who have experienced violence.

Would the Attorney General consider the advice of the Barbra Schlifer Clinic, CALACS, and all the organizations that were part of the Roundtable on Violence Against Women? Would she admit to having one round table for her ministry to ensure the presence of the voice of survivors in policy-making?

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: I’d like to thank the member opposite for giving a voice to the women who came to her to bring their concerns to this House. I have had the opportunity to sit down directly with members of the Barbra Schlifer clinic, as well as other members representing individual organizations that do the important work that we need them to do. And I continue to do that. I know my colleague, the minister responsible for women, has also been doing that.

I will continue to the hold round tables and also to meet with organizations individually so that I can speak to them about their concerns as well as learn directly from them about the important work that they do. The work that they do in our province is valuable and we need to make sure we are funding those organizations that are doing that work, but we do so in an effective and efficient way so that we help the women who are in need.

Cannabis regulation

Ms. Jane McKenna: My question is to the Minister of Finance. Yesterday, as a result of federal Liberal legislation, recreational cannabis became legal in the province of Ontario and across Canada. This coincided with the passage of our own government’s legislation, Bill 36, which was the result of extensive consultation with municipalities, First Nations, police services and public health officials.

I was pleased to see our government continues to make the safety of our children and youth a top priority. There is no question that every decision our government makes with respect to cannabis must have the best interests of Ontario’s children and youth top of mind.

Minister, could you please tell the House how safety continues to be the top priority in our government’s plan for cannabis legislation?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: I want to thank the member from Burlington for the question. It was our responsibility to develop a retail and distribution system that protects youth and combats the illegal market. Yesterday, the Ontario Cannabis Store retail website began to provide a safe, secure and reliable outlet for consumers 19 and over to purchase cannabis. I want to congratulate the hard-working men and women of the Ontario Cannabis Store for producing for the people of Ontario.

As cannabis is delivered to homes in Ontario, it will be incumbent upon those receiving those packages to provide valid ID proving they are 19 years of age or over to complete the transaction and receive the cannabis. The Ontario Cannabis Store’s online channel is the only legal place in the province to buy recreational cannabis. This will be followed by a licensed private retail store in April 2019, and we continue to foster a healthy competition to combat the illegal—

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

Ms. Jane McKenna: Thank you, Minister, for answering my question. It is clear that Ontario has put in place a robust system for the federal Liberal decision to legalize cannabis. It is reassuring to see a system in place for cannabis legalization that prioritizes the safety of our communities and combats the illegal market. It’s clear that this retail distribution system was designed to ensure that cannabis remains out of the hands of people under the age of 19.

Although I am confident our approach will not tolerate anybody sharing, selling or providing cannabis to anybody under the age of 19, I am concerned about players in the illegal market continuing to target our children and youth. Can the minister please inform the House about the resources our government is providing to combat the illegal market through enforcement against those operating outside the legal regime?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thanks again to the member for that question. Once again, ocs.ca is the only legal place to buy cannabis in the province of Ontario. Cannabis retail and dispensary stores operating in Ontario today are doing so illegally. The government has given the police the tools to shut down illegal cannabis store operators. Further, we’ll be providing municipalities with $40 million over two years to help with increased costs due to the federal government’s decision to legalize cannabis. As of yesterday, illegal operators face significant fines and they will never be granted a licence to participate in the legal market.

Since we began working towards building a distribution model to comply with the federal government’s decision, we have been abundantly clear that there will be zero tolerance for those who operate outside of the law on cannabis or attempt to market to our youth.

Violence against women

Ms. Suze Morrison: My question is to the Acting Premier. Prior to the election, the Conservatives promised to honour the gender-based violence plan that would have provided sexual assault centres across Ontario with a 33% funding increase. This much-needed funding would have enhanced services at existing centres and expanded programs to underserviced communities.

Instead of supporting survivors, this government has broken its promise. Funding has not flowed, and this week we learned that the government has also dissolved Ontario’s provincial Roundtable on Violence Against Women, prompting the resignation of co-chairs Farrah Khan and Pamela Cross.

As a sexual assault survivor myself, I find this government’s actions both heartless and cruel. Why aren’t survivors of gender-based violence a priority for this government?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Minister of Tourism.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Look, as I said at the beginning of question period, there is no one in this chamber who understands and appreciates our role as legislators to protect women who have experienced violence in their homes, in their workplaces, in their schools—frankly, even in this chamber.

I want to reassure the member opposite that we very much appreciate the work that the co-chairs have done. It is unfortunate that they chose to resign. I don’t know if that was a political decision. I’m not going to go there. What I am going to say is our minister and our government are 100% committed to make sure that the women in this province who have been abused in the workplace, in their homes, in their schools will get the help they need.

Interjections.

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

Supplementary?

Ms. Suze Morrison: In the midst of the #MeToo movement, survivors are finally in a place where they can summon the courage to seek the supports that they need. The Hamilton sexual assault centre has seen a 100% increase in the calls to their crisis line in the past three years. Their wait-list for counselling is seven months long. The funding that they were promised would have allowed them to hire a full-time counsellor to address their increased demand.

Will this government honour the gender-based violence plan, release the funding that was already promised and immediately reinstate the provincial round table on ending violence against women?

Interjections.

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

Minister.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I know that my colleague is working hard on this issue. I know that as individual MPPs, we all hear from the shelters in our communities.

Look, we know that it has changed. The system has changed. We have people coming to shelters who have far more challenging issues than 20, 25 years ago. We cannot keep operating the same way and expect that we are going to solve this problem.

I want to remind the member, even though she was not here, that it was actually my colleague and friend the now-Minister of Labour who initiated the Select Committee on Sexual Violence and Harassment. We are actively engaged in this file. As I want to reiterate, we will get it right, and it’s not just about doing the same old thing and expecting a different result.

Cannabis regulation

Mr. Jim McDonell: My question is to the Attorney General. Yesterday, recreational cannabis became legal in Canada. This was a policy implemented by the federal government, one that was left to the provinces and municipalities to navigate.

I know our government has been working diligently since being elected to establish a plan to protect our children and combat the illegal market. I was glad, like many others across this province, to see these efforts result in yesterday’s passage of Bill 36. I know this bill was based on wide-ranging consultations that were undertaken across the province, and it makes me proud to be part of a government that works hard to embody the voice of the people. I also know that we heard from many stakeholders during the committee process on this bill who also shared support for the government’s efforts in this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I was wondering if the Attorney General can share with the House some of the feedback we received about the government’s plan to address legalization and Bill 36.

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: I’d like to thank the member from Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry for the question. Over the past several months, our government has worked diligently with stakeholders across the province, including law enforcement, public health organizations, parents, municipalities, consumer groups, businesses, Indigenous organizations and other provinces with private retail models.

During our consultation process, we heard loud and clear that any plan on recreational cannabis needed to achieve three objectives: protect children, keep our roads and communities safe, and combat the illegal market. Well, Mr. Speaker, Bill 36 does just that.

But don’t take my word for it. In a submission to the Standing Committee on Social Policy, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business said, and I quote, “We are very encouraged by the overall direction that the government is taking on cannabis under Bill 36.”

“The government ... has done a good job of highlighting the dangers of driving with cannabis and the importance of keeping cannabis out of the hands of young Ontarians.”

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Jim McDonell: I’d like to thank the Attorney General for the response. It’s always welcome to hear that the government’s plan has widespread support and has been developed in partnership with a ride range of industry experts and professionals.

I know the people in my riding will also be happy to know that our government takes its responsibilities very seriously and is working hard to keep their families and their communities safe.

The Attorney General has spoken at length about the importance of combating the illegal market and the role that a private retail system will have in achieving that. We know that the previous Liberal government’s plan to establish a government-run retail model for cannabis would not have been effective in protecting children and communities by combatting the illegal market.

Mr. Speaker, I’m wondering if the Attorney General can share some of the feedback she received on the change of direction by our new government.

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: Mr. Speaker, I’m happy to share that information. We chose to move ahead with a tightly regulated private retail model because the public model that had been proposed by the previous Liberal government and championed by some labour groups would be incapable of seriously competing with the illegal market.

Under the previous model, our communities would have been left more vulnerable and susceptible to the underground market. Instead, a tightly regulated private retail model was the preferred and only responsible choice in Ontario.

During committee, we heard from the Ontario Chamber of Commerce that, “The OCC supports Bill 36 and the government of Ontario’s commitment to developing a private retail model for the responsible sale of cannabis in licensed retailers.... ”

And, “that safety and social responsibility must be the first overwhelming priorities ... taking into account ... about the underground economy, health and safety.”

I’m pleased to say, Mr. Speaker, that Bill 36 achieves this for the people of Ontario.

Education funding

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is to the Minister of Education. Hundreds of parent groups and school councils from every school board across the province have been waiting patiently for a response from the ministry about the status of their applications for the Parents Reaching Out Grants. My office has been flooded with questions about what’s going on.

Yesterday, the minister stood here and admitted that this important parent engagement funding won’t be coming at all. Will the minister explain to these parents why the government couldn’t be bothered to inform them that this funding was never going to come?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: First of all, to the member opposite in the NDP, she needs to get it right and go back and check Hansard. I did not say that.

Furthermore, I think Ontario taxpayers will respect the fact that we’re being responsible. After 15 years of mismanagement and absolute nonsense that was created by the past Liberal administration, taxpayers in this province are supporting how we’re going through a line-by-line audit to make sure we’re getting the best result for the investment made.

As we hit the pause button to consult from one corner of this province to another, we are doing the right thing, because we have to identify the priorities from the people who are impacted. We need to ensure that the consultation carries on and that we fulfill every requirement we’ve set out so that our voices are heard and we have the right priorities going forward.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: Mr. Speaker, through you again to the Minister of Education: You’ve actually said nothing. You’ve said nothing to parents at all. The only thing you’ve communicated is through this House when we asked you.

Parent and school councils have been blindsided by this government’s sudden cut to this program, and they deserve to know why. I’m going to give you some examples. One group was planning a series of free parenting workshops with a focus on well-being and mental, physical and sexual health, along with a lending library for parents. Another school had planned an event focused on STEM. They told me, “This school does not bring in a huge amount of funds from the community because our parents are living with lots of everyday life costs. We have very little money to use towards trying to improve our student experience.”

Will the minister explain to these parents why supporting parent engagement in education ranked so low on their priority list, and will you restore the funding now?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): It would seem an opportune time to remind all members to make their comments through the Chair.

Minister, response.

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: My number one priority is ensuring that every single voice across this province is heard in terms of identifying and having a chance to say what matters to them.

We’re listening to the people and we’re moving forward for the parents specifically with our consultation. Fortheparents.ca is the place for people to exercise their voice. The opposition NDP are just trying to create chaos. The fact of the matter is, I am so proud of my team in the Ministry of Education. They are doing an amazing job, and we are hearing so much. The responses that we are getting from our written submissions based on the consultation are second to none.

Once again, to hear from the parents across this province, go to fortheparents.ca. Let your voice be heard.

Government accountability

Mrs. Robin Martin: My question is to the Minister of Finance. This week, the Select Committee on Financial Transparency began to hear from witnesses regarding the findings of the Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry report. The committee heard from the Auditor General and senior public servants about the previous Liberal government’s accounting and financing schemes. These officials provided an overview of the decisions made and concerns raised about the Fair Hydro Plan and the details about the pension asset disagreement with the Auditor General. What we heard regarding the previous government’s treatment of Ontario’s books continues to shock.

Can the minister please share with this House his impressions of what the committee heard this week?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you to the member from Eglinton–Lawrence for that question. We know that all members of this House have been watching the work of the select committee with great interest as it begins to look into the findings of the Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry. The importance of this committee’s work in restoring accountability and trust cannot be understated.

It was alarming to learn from officials testifying before the committee that they repeatedly expressed worries about the Fair Hydro Plan to the previous government, only to be ignored.

The Auditor General was equally scathing during her testimony, saying that she would have left her client if she was a private sector auditor.

It’s clear that the previous government’s rate mitigation plan was a questionable scheme right from the start.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mrs. Robin Martin: Thank you to the minister for his answer.

Not only do we need to fix the financial problems we have inherited from the previous government, but we must also determine how the situation was ever allowed to get this bad.

As the committee continues its work, I know we remain committed to ensuring that the people of Ontario receive answers. The select committee will continue its work next week as we continue to learn more about the Liberals’ accounting schemes, how they came to be and who made these decisions.

Can the minister please outline the importance of the committee’s work to get answers for the people of Ontario?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: The committee continues to hear from important witnesses who will help them get to the bottom of how this happened and why.

We know that the advice of the Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry has been invaluable to our government. The Auditor General gave our government’s public accounts their first clean bill of health in three years when the President of the Treasury Board tabled them last month.

Our government will continue to work to fix the mess left behind by 15 years of Liberal waste, mismanagement and scandal, and ensure that everything we do results in better government for the people.

We appreciate the work of the Select Committee on Financial Transparency and look forward to their report back to this House with their findings.

Horse racing industry

Mr. Percy Hatfield: My question is to the Minister of Finance. Good morning, Minister. It was good to hear you talking about transparency.

This government has been making secret backroom deals with owners and operators of the horse racing tracks across Ontario. They’ve been doing this without consulting the communities, the workers or anyone else impacted by the deals. New Democrats have been asking in this House for the details only to find out that government has required everyone involved to sign non-disclosure agreements.

The public has a right to know what’s happening to our racetracks. This government—so transparent. Why did this government demand a gag order to be placed on the details of the secret deals that they’ve struck with those racing operators?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Our government has kept its commitment to bolster the horse racing industry and repair the damage done by the previous Liberal government, only made possible with the support of the NDP. Agreements in principle have now been reached to keep slots at Kawartha Downs and Ajax Downs, and to providing additional funding to continue horse racing in Fort Erie and Dresden. The commitment will directly support the horse racing industry and rural communities.

Our government has made a generous offer to these racetracks, including for the return of slots to Fort Erie and Dresden, but both made a business decision to accept enhanced funding instead.

Speaker, we continue to support this sector and support rural Ontario. The members opposite would do well to join us in that support.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary? The member for Niagara Falls.

Mr. Wayne Gates: Back to the Acting Premier: There is no clearer example of a backroom deal than the one that was made to keep the slots out of the Fort Erie Race Track. I was at closing day at the Fort Erie track on Tuesday, and everywhere I went, the same question: Why would the Premier break his promise to this town to return the slots and the jobs that come with them? To be honest, Mr. Speaker, we don’t have the answer to that question because the Premier never consulted the town of Fort Erie or the residents.

My question is this: Will the Premier keep this government’s promise to the town of Fort Erie and bring a meaningful number of slots to the racetrack, as well as the jobs that come with them?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: I’m very pleased to see that the NDP member opposite finally recognizes the importance of the horse racing industry, considering they supported the Liberals when they gutted the industry recently. The member may also want to take time to acknowledge the industry’s real needs. We made a generous offer to return slots to Fort Erie, but the owner of the racetrack made a business decision to accept enhanced funding instead.

We’re committed to supporting the horse racing industry in Ontario, and we’re listening to the needs of the industry stakeholders and, again, Speaker, the member opposite would be wise to listen as well.

Municipalities

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: Local Government Week is a reminder that municipal government is where many civic-minded people have their first experience with politics. Whether it’s casting a ballot, volunteering to knock on doors in their community or running for office themselves, it’s a great way to get politically engaged and to understand what public service is all about.

Many in this chamber actually started their political careers either with local council or with a local school board. In fact, I myself had my first political experience campaigning for local representatives at the young age of 14.

I’d like to ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs: As a former mayor yourself, can you explain how that experience played a key role in how you got to where you are today?

Hon. Steve Clark: I want to thank the member for Ottawa West–Nepean for that excellent question. He’s right. As a young person, I was very civic-engaged and I was very fortunate. It was a great honour for me, at the age of 22 in 1982, to be elected to represent the citizens of the city of Brockville as their mayor. One thing that that experience taught me is that we, as elected officials, have to engage young people and encourage them to get involved in the local government process.

That’s why, Speaker, Local Government Week is so important. It’s a week that gives young people the opportunity to understand the importance of local government, to instill the importance of voting, especially in this election year. I firmly believe that by engaging young people, they’ll be the next generation of local school board trustees, local councillors and local mayors.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: Thank you, Minister, for that answer. Your life of public service is certainly one that sets a fine example for any young person interested in getting involved in politics.

Election day is next Monday, October 22, and it’s great that this year’s Local Government Week falls so close to that election. We know that municipalities are the level of government that are most connected to Ontarians. It’s those services, like collecting waste and recycling and making sure that our streets are cleared of snow that really matter to people. In fact, during my own election in Ottawa West–Nepean, the number one issue that I heard at the doors was potholes on local roads.

Minister, what is your message to Ontarians as we approach the next municipal election day this coming Monday?