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

November 24, 2020

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2020-Nov-24 vol. A (PDF)

L212A - Tue 24 Nov 2020 / Mar 24 nov 2020

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 24 November 2020 Mardi 24 novembre 2020

Orders of the Day

Time allocation

Members’ Statements

Conservation authorities

Russ and Janet Arthurs

Dennis Fairall

Volunteers

Treaties recognition

Hindu Heritage Month

Season’s greetings

Retirement homes

Tenant protection

Diabetes

Question Period

COVID-19 response

Long-term care

Government accountability

Small business

College standards and accreditation

COVID-19 response in Indigenous and remote communities

Animal protection

Front-line workers

Government accountability

Climate change

COVID-19 response

COVID-19 response

Long-term care

COVID-19 response

COVID-19 response

Deferred Votes

Better for People, Smarter for Business Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 pour mieux servir la population et faciliter les affaires

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Government Agencies

Introduction of Bills

62 Grimsby Phantom Squadron Sponsoring Committee Act (Tax Relief), 2020

2257248 Ontario Inc. Act, 2020

Petitions

Optometry services

Community planning

Mental health services

Optometry services

Education funding

Autism treatment

Optometry services

Women’s issues

Optometry services

Injured workers

Long-term care

Equal opportunity

Orders of the Day

Time allocation

2020 Ontario budget

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Time allocation

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I move that, pursuant to standing order 50 and notwithstanding any other standing order or special order of the House relating to Bill 213,

An Act to reduce burdens on people and businesses by enacting, amending and repealing various Acts and revoking a regulation;

That the Standing Committee on General Government be authorized to meet on Friday, November 27, 2020, from 9 a.m. until 10 a.m. to receive a 15-minute opening statement on the bill by the Associate Minister of Small Business and Red Tape Reduction, followed by 45 minutes of question and answer divided into three rounds of six minutes for the government members, three rounds of six minutes for the official opposition members and two rounds of 4.5 minutes for the independent member of the committee; and

That the committee be authorized to meet at the following times, for the purpose of public hearings:

—on Friday, November 27, 2020, from 10 a.m. until 12 noon and from 1 p.m. until 6 p.m.; and

—on Monday, November 30, 2020, from 9 a.m. until 10 a.m. and from 1 p.m. until 6 p.m.; and

That the Clerk of the Standing Committee on General Government, in consultation with the committee Chair, be authorized to arrange the following with regard to the bill:

—That the deadline for requests to appear be 5 p.m. on Wednesday, November 25, 2020; and

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

—That each member of the subcommittee or their designate provide the Clerk of the Committee with a prioritized list of presenters to be scheduled, chosen from the list of all interested presenters, by 9 a.m. on Thursday, November 26, 2020; and

—That witnesses shall be scheduled in groups of three for each one-hour time slot, with each presenter allotted seven minutes for an opening statement followed by 39 minutes of questioning for all three witnesses, divided into two rounds of 7.5 minutes for the government members, two rounds of 7.5 minutes for the official opposition members and two rounds—

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): For some reason, the member for London West has stood on a point of order. I recognize the member for London West.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I believe that order number 98 is out of order, because it refers to sending a bill to the standing committee that has not yet passed second reading, so it’s referring to a process that would only kick into place once the bill has passed second reading.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Thank you for raising the point. I’ve been advised by the table that, indeed, the motion is in order, because if the bill that she’s referring to doesn’t get approved to go to the committee, then it’s null and void. But she is in order for introducing the motion at this time.

I’d ask the member from Barrie–Innisfil to continue, please.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Thank you.

I’ll start with: with each presenter allotted seven minutes for an opening statement followed by 39 minutes of questioning for all three witnesses, divided into two rounds of 7.5 minutes for the government members, two rounds of 7.5 minutes for the official opposition members and two rounds of 4.5 minutes for the independent member of the committee; and

—That the deadline for written submissions be 7 p.m. on Monday, November 30, 2020; and

—That the deadline for filing amendments to the bill with the Clerk of the Committee shall be 5 p.m. on Tuesday, December 1, 2020; and

That the committee be authorized to meet on Wednesday, December 2, 2020, from 9 a.m. until 10:15 a.m. and from 1 p.m. until 6 p.m., for the purpose of clause-by-clause consideration of the bill; and

That on Wednesday, December 2, 2020, at 4 p.m., those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved, and the Chair of the committee shall interrupt the proceedings and shall, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto; and at this time, the Chair shall allow one 20-minute waiting period, if requested by a member of the committee, pursuant to standing order 132(a); and

That the committee shall report the bill to the House no later than Thursday, December 3, 2020, and if the committee fails to report the bill on that day, the bill shall be deemed passed by the committee and shall be deemed reported to and received by the House; and

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

That, when the order for third reading of Bill 213 is called, two hours of debate shall be allotted to the third reading stage of the bill with 50 minutes allotted to the government members, 50 minutes allotted to the official opposition members and 20 minutes allotted to the independent members as a group; and, at the end of this time, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings and shall put every question necessary to dispose of this stage of the bill without further debate or amendment.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): To the member from Barrie–Innisfil to lead off the debate.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: No further debate on my part.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Over here to debate what you just heard.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I rise today to speak to this time allocation motion dealing with Bill 213, which the government euphemistically calls the Better for People, Smarter for Business Act.

Speaker, we had a very emotional, heavy debate in this place yesterday that referred specifically to

schedule 2 of Bill 213, and that is the schedule, as everyone in this chamber knows, as I’m sure the people of this province know, that legislates degree-granting authority to an institution that was founded and is led by one of the most controversial and notorious homophobes, transphobes and Islamophobes. That is why, when we have stood to speak to this bill, we have continued to focus on

schedule 2 as a poison pill that really makes this bill unsupportable, regardless of what else is in here.

The

schedule deals with a process that circumvents the normal process that an institution would go through in order to get that degree-granting power, and it does so to reward a donor to the Premier’s party. That, Speaker, is something that we must not support. We must not support a bill that allows a backroom process to provide an institution with degree-granting authority—an institution, as I said, that is well known because of the comments that have been made by its founder and its current president.

There is a lot in this bill. It is a grab bag omnibus bill—29 schedules. It deals with many different ministries across those schedules. It deals with the Business Corporations Act; as I said, the Canada Christian College, which is the institution that is the subject of

schedule 2 that would be allowed to award university degrees; it deals with the Change of Name Act; it deals with the Family Responsibility and Support Arrears Enforcement Act; it deals with the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, the Forfeited Corporate Property Act, the Insurance Act, the Marriage Act, the Mining Act—there are many different schedules in this bill that address a gamut of issues.

When you have omnibus bills such as this one, it’s important that there be as much time as possible for deputants to come and speak to MPPs about the contents. When there are 29 schedules, it’s quite likely that you will only be able to have one stakeholder per schedule, and, actually, probably, many fewer stakeholders than the 29 schedules would allow. That, Speaker, is a problem. When you’re looking to get the best kind of feedback possible, when you’re looking for opportunities to strengthen and improve legislation, you want to hear from more than one stakeholder per sector.

This is the problem with a bill such as this one that is so broad: It deals with so many different legislative issues that it would be hard to get the kind of feedback that would be helpful to improve the schedules of the bill.

The bill also addresses intercity transit. My colleague the member for Toronto Centre spoke at great length about the transit implications of this bill. That was a very interesting debate that she had, and it reflects the kind of feedback that might be gathered if there was sufficient time for people to come to the committee and to talk about all of the schedules of the bill, because what I envision is that most of the deputations that come before the Standing Committee on General Government, as set out in this motion, will want to speak to

schedule 2, because that is the

schedule that is so abhorrent, that has generated so much controversy, because it is completely opposite to the kinds of legislative initiatives that we should be talking about in this House.

That

schedule dealing with Canada Christian College has many, many people upset. In particular, members of our Muslim communities across this province, members of the LGBTQ community, trans folk across Ontario are all very, very concerned about this schedule, and we know what happens when a bill that has a controversial

schedule goes forward to committee: almost all of the deputants only want to discuss the one schedule, because it merits such deep discussion and debate.

We saw that on a bill that this government passed recently dealing with long-term-care-home liability protection for for-profit operators who had residents die in their care. Families wanted to have the ability to pursue legal action against a for-profit long-term-care-home operator when they had lost a loved a one. It is an important part of dealing with the grief that families have experienced across this province—2,000 families who have lost a loved one in long-term care—and want the ability to pursue legal action against the government.

There was another

schedule in that bill dealing with ranked ballots and the ability of municipalities to conduct ranked ballot voting. What happened when that bill went to committee is all but one of the committee spots were taken up by stakeholders who wanted to address one

schedule of the bill. For the ranked ballot

schedule of the bill, there was only the opportunity for a single stakeholder to come and speak to that bill, and that was the mayor of London, Mayor Ed Holder.

One of the things he said to that committee is that London should at the very least be exempted from that legislation because London had already made an investment of $515,000 to implement a highly successful ranked ballot election in 2018, and this particular legislation, when it went to committee, took away that right and would require London to invest another $51,000 to revert back to first past the post. That is an example of a committee process that does not allow enough time for stakeholders to come forward and speak to the very different sections of the bill.

The bill that I was just using as an example was a bill with only two schedules, but they dealt with completely different issues. This bill, Bill 213, as I mentioned, has 29 schedules, and I gave you a sense earlier of the breadth of those schedules, and, in some ways, the importance of the issues that they address.

I want to get back to the whole

schedule about intercity transit. This

schedule gives the Lieutenant Governor in Council broad regulatory authority over passenger transportation vehicles under changes to the Highway Traffic Act enacted with

schedule 24. The significance of that is that it eliminates opportunities for intercity buses. I think, Speaker, that your community, Windsor, is probably similar to my community of London: We have a network of transit options within the city, but really struggle with that intercity connection. That has been one of the ongoing discussions about the southwestern Ontario transportation strategy, because a transportation strategy that doesn’t include a robust network to link cities between each other is not a regional strategy.

We saw this government bring forward a southwestern Ontario transportation plan that was really little more than a vision. It was not the kind of plan that your community needs to see, my community needs to see or other communities across our region. It did not include the detailed outline of how we’re going to get to a truly interlinked regional transportation system. That is something that stakeholders may want to come to the Standing Committee on General Government to talk about, to raise concerns about this deregulation of intercity bus services, and what the impact of that will be on our community in particular in southwestern Ontario.

I know that there are concerns among other communities, similar concerns about the lack of a networked transit plan. Certainly this was raised in a recent public survey dealing with the greater Golden Horseshoe area, and that is something that we know we hear often from our colleagues in northern Ontario, about the lack of connection between communities in the north. This is an issue that is important to many different regions in the province, and it’s something that people will want to provide input to the government about when this bill goes to committee.

As I said, the fact that this bill includes

schedule 2, the highly controversial

schedule that was, in fact, condemned by this Legislature in a motion that was debated and passed here yesterday, that makes me believe that there are going to be even more voices who want to be heard, even more people who will want to go and appear before this committee and let this government know how that action, that legislative measure that’s included in

schedule 2, how that makes them feel in terms of their rights as citizens of this province.

We know from many people in our communities that what it does is it has actually made people feel even more under threat in the midst of a pandemic which has seen troubling, disturbing increases in incidents of Islamophobia. The last thing that this government should be doing is legislating hate and legitimizing hate. I suspect a lot of people are going to want to come to appear before the Standing Committee on General Government to speak specifically to that

section of the bill.

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

M me Lucille Collard: I’m rising again this morning to raise concerns with Bill 213 as it currently stands and speak about the lack of oversight, transparency and due process engendered in this bill that has become typical behaviour from this government.

Schedule 2, particularly, has been the focus of a lot of concerns in this House so many times, even ad nauseam, I would say. For those who didn’t know Charles McVety, I would say that it certainly raised his profile, but I don’t think in a positive way. It’s surprising and disappointing that this government has not yet backed down from supporting this special deal. The impression that it leaves on Ontarians is a sentiment of betrayal. I guess the government will have to live with this, and it should weigh on every member of the government’s conscience.

Beyond

schedule 2, this bill contains several problematic shifts of power away from the elected Legislature and towards cabinet and ministerial discretion. Bill 213 contains a series of concerning trends that we’ve seen from this government. It replaces important legislative oversight with ministerial discretion in several important areas relating to the environment and the disposal of public lands, and appears to grant valuable concessions to public friends of the Premier and this government. Both of these trends fly in the face of our legislative tradition.

They reduce transparency by preventing legislative scrutiny and public participation in decision-making. They reduce due process by empowering cabinet with the ability to make discretionary decisions on matters that can seriously impact Ontarians. Finally, when we rush legislation through the House without proper time to examine its implications and to consult with the public, we contribute to the impression that due process and consultation are formalities, and real influence instead comes from the interests of cabinet and favoured friends and stakeholders.

This trend also pushes important decisions behind closed doors where scrutiny and public participation become more difficult.

We’ve seen these efforts to centralize critical decision-making powers under cabinet before, such as with the COVID-19 emergency orders and the direction of community legal aid clinics and, just this week, with conservation authorities, taking away their authority and giving the minister the power to ignore their advice for the protection of the environment. These actions by the government reduce transparency, accountability and public participation in important decisions that affect them.

We must be particularly concerned about these proposed changes and the broader trends of lowering accountability and due process in favour of ministerial discretion behind closed doors. It signals to both industry and the broader public a really negative trend.

Firstly, it is worth noting that this bill is being tabled by the ministry of small business and red tape reduction and is nominally about improving Ontario’s economy during a pandemic. How is accrediting private colleges to offer various degrees at all related to this objective? How is the public, as well as our democratic ideals of accountability and due process, better served by these sections being buried in an unrelated bill where they can’t receive dedicated scrutiny, rather than being tabled as a separate act?

Secondly, what are Ontarians supposed to take away from decisions that grant ministers the ability to remove obligations on industry to conduct environmental conservation work or to properly consult with Indigenous communities? At best, this is exchanging minor conveniences for the creation of significant potential for abuse and a signal to the public that when environmental and Indigenous matters conflict with the business interests of industry, business interests take priority. This is not responsible corporate citizenship, it’s not sustainable and it’s not just.

We members in opposition are here to hold the government accountable, but government isn’t listening. Yet again, this government has tabled a bill under the guise of supporting the province through this pandemic when it really seeks to achieve the government’s misplaced priorities. We should all be concerned and we should all vote against this bill.

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

Ms. Suze Morrison: I’m only going to take a few minutes. I want to leave some time on the clock for my colleagues, but I did want to speak a little bit today to time allocation and a little bit about the good process of committee.

We have a committee process so that members of our communities—the stakeholders, the organizations, the individuals who are affected by the issues that we’re here debating and legislating—can come into this space, although virtually right now, and tell us what’s good about a bill, what’s bad about a bill. But those folks are not full-time legislators. It’s not their full-time job to do that work in most cases, and the general public needs time to even know that a bill is before the House, right?

They rely on newspaper articles, they rely on communications coming out of this place to even know what’s before this House. Then they have to do the work of going through a bill. They don’t have staff like we have staff to help us understand the legalese and the research. They have to understand how it impacts their area of expertise, the area of the world that they occupy. They have to understand how it’s going to affect their lives and their communities, and then think about whether that’s good or bad, and any changes or things that they want to see or any priorities that they want to refocus the government towards.

With a time allocation motion like this, you’re effectively saying to the public, “We don’t care what you have to say or what you think. We’re not even going to give you time to find out that this budget bill is even going to committee.” The way you’ve structured this motion—and, as my colleague said earlier, there are 29 schedules in this bill; there’s quite a lot here that we could discuss in a lot of different areas, but the deadline to appear before this committee is tomorrow. We’re debating the motion today, and the deadline to appear is tomorrow.

How is anyone who is not a legislator in this building ever supposed to find out in time that this is even an opportunity that they have, and then get their submissions in by tomorrow? And then they’ve only got one day after that to figure out what they want to say to you. You’re only giving them two days at committee. The committee is going to meet Friday and then this coming Monday, and if they don’t have time to get their things in order, appreciating—we’re in a global pandemic, guys. People are working from home. They are exhausted. If you are in Toronto or Peel, you’re in a lockdown.

You’ve got your kids at home. And you’re giving people 24 hours’ notice to get their documentation together to go through a bill with 29 schedules and to develop thoughtful commentary on it to bring to you?

What you’re saying to the public is, “We don’t care what you’re going through. We don’t want to give you an opportunity to come and give input on this bill, and we’re going to make it as hard as possible for you to even know what’s going on in this place,” hoping that you can, what, skate by under the radar so the public won’t know what you’re really doing? I would suggest, through you, Speaker, that that’s exactly what this government is doing. They don’t want the public knowing what they’re doing in this budget bill because it’s shameful.

I want to take the government back a few months earlier in the pandemic to the one time you did spend a moderate amount of time talking to the public. We went through this dog-and-pony show of a select committee on COVID recovery with all the different sectors. We had them with small businesses, the arts and culture sector, developers and municipal partners, things like that. We had all those folks come to this dog-and-pony show of a consultation, and you sat there all rosy-eyed and sympathetic to the public, asking, “What can we do for you, public? What kind of COVID response do you need?”

I think that those stakeholders and the public thought that what they told you in those committee hearings was going to be reflected in this budget bill, and it’s not. Instead, you’ve come back with schedules like

schedule 3, the name change piece. You’re making it harder for married people to assume their spouse’s last name. You are legislating hate through Canada Christian College. Charles McVety, the Premier’s very good, close personal friend, known homophobe, transphobe, Islamophobe: You’re giving him the power to grant university degrees in this province through legislation in this bill, but you didn’t listen to anything that anyone had to say about what they actually need for COVID relief.

So you spent all of those weeks listening to the public. Where’s anything that anyone told you? Where did any of that end up in this bill? Speaker, it didn’t. There’s no commercial rent relief for small businesses, there’s no commercial eviction protection for small businesses. Over and over and over again, we heard small businesses say, “We need help. We cannot go this alone. You are asking us to close our doors to the public to get through a pandemic together, and we need help shouldering that burden.” You have not delivered anything in terms of tangible financial supports or protections for small businesses.

When we look at renters, renters have been saying, “I can’t isolate from a pandemic in my home if I don’t have a home.” Over and over again in those committee hearings, we heard from tenants, tenant activists and legal aid workers, “We need an eviction ban. We need a residential eviction ban. Just put everything on pause and we’ll sort it out afterwards.” What about rent relief for renters, any sort of financial support? None of that is in here. You did not listen.

Speaker, I am not surprised today that this government is trying to fly under the cover of the pandemic and ram their budget bill through, because they know that if the public found out what they were really doing in this bill, they would know just how backwards this government’s priorities are. I think they’re hoping to pull a fast one on the people of Ontario and don’t want to get caught with their priorities completely backwards.

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

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I rise to speak on the time allocation motion on Bill 213.

This time allocation motion—like most time allocation motions, but this one especially—raises some serious questions about the government’s commitment to democratic and citizen engagement. The people of this province need time to comment on this bill—29 schedules, Speaker. If this time allocation motion passes, people have until tomorrow afternoon at 5 p.m. to sign up and speak to committee, and then we only have two days of public hearings. I ask, what message does that send to the people of Ontario about whether their government actually wants to hear from them, wants their input on some really important pieces of this legislation?

Now, I understand why the government might want to really fast-track this through without any public engagement, because

schedule 2 is a

schedule that essentially legislates hate. I’d understand why the government doesn’t want to hear from the Canadian Muslim society, from LGBTQ2+ rights organizations, from Haitian organizations, from many organizations that I’m sure want to speak—even Christian organizations. I mean, Charles McVety was kicked off the Christian Television Network for spewing hate. So I would understand why the government would not want to hear from people around

schedule 2, because I think they’re going to get an earful, because there’s a lot of pain in this province right now, a lot of people feeling pain that Charles McVety would be getting the kind of special treatment that he’s receiving in this legislation, especially when—if the government wants to hide behind this independent PEQAB process, they could put it in a bill after the process takes place. They don’t have to pre-empt the process by having it in a bill. So I understand why they would not want to hear from people on that.

But let’s think about a few other schedules in this bill that I think we really need to hear from the people of Ontario on.

Schedule 3 is about changing your name. I’ve had constituents reach out with concerns around that schedule, and I think they would like to come to committee, and I’d like to hear at committee the concerns that people have. Maybe we need to amend the bill or make some adjustments to the bill to address those concerns, but will people have time, especially given there are 29 schedules?

Schedule 7 talks about the Insurance Act. I know they’re cosmetic changes, but I can tell you that there are so many small businesses in this province right now that are deeply upset about the fact that their insurance companies are not honouring business interruption insurance and, in some cases, aren’t even insuring them. So when we talk about the Insurance Act and have a conversation at committee, I would think there would be a lot of small businesses, especially in a bill that says “smarter for business,” that would like to come to committee and talk about how insurance isn’t working for small businesses, when we talk about

schedule 7.

Schedule 16 makes changes with the Ontario Highway Transport Board Repeal Act. I would think, particularly, rural communities that are underserviced when it comes to intercity bus transportation would like to talk about this. There might be some good and bad things that the government is proposing here. We certainly need to come up with some innovative and smart ways to improve intercity bus transit in this province, but with two days of public hearings, are we go to have the opportunity to really have a fulsome conversation about

schedule 16? Probably not, Speaker.

That’s an important conversation I want to have. I can’t tell you how many people in my region of the province are asking why we don’t have direct intercity bus connections between Guelph and K-W or Guelph and Hamilton etc. I’d love to have the opportunity to talk about it, but it’s going to be hard with two days of public hearings.

Schedule 18—and I’m not going to go through all 29 schedules, but I want to speak a bit about

schedule 18. I want to compliment the government on one part of

schedule 18. I think it’s good that the government is giving municipalities the right to say no to new water-bottling operations. But, First Nations, in their treaty territories, are asking for the same right. Will we have an opportunity to hear from Six Nations, for example, who have raised concerns about their treaty rights to say no to new water-bottling operations? Will we hear from other First Nations who would like to have maybe the same rights that municipalities are going to be granted under

schedule 18?

I can tell you, and this relates specifically to my own municipality, that the riding I represent wants to talk about: What about adjacent municipalities? The proposal may not be specifically in that municipality, but the proposal directly affects the municipality’s water-taking wells. That’s exactly what’s happening in Guelph. Most of our wells are outside the city limits and would be directly impacted by proposals for new water-taking permits, but because it’s not specifically in the municipal boundary, that new right for municipalities won’t be available.

I’d like to hear from municipalities directly affected by this who want to say good things about what the government is doing, but also maybe want to propose some changes to make it available to some others. But, Speaker, we’re probably not going to have time for it because the government is rushing this through. So I’m encouraging all MPPs to vote against this time allocation motion. Let’s give us some time to have a conversation. Let’s give small businesses an opportunity to come and talk about how this pandemic is affecting them, and the supports they need in a bill that says it’s the “smarter for business” act. Let’s give people time to participate in their democracy.

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

Miss Monique Taylor: Here we are once again debating another time allocation motion, and one that strictly affects so many people in our province, unfortunately negatively.

They’re not the bills that the people of Ontario expected to see coming forward during the COVID pandemic, but, unfortunately, the government has found a way to slip poison pills into bills that have great titles, that people are counting on. I mean, when you have a bill named smarter for business and better for people, and then you legislate hate within this same bill, that’s a serious problem.

My colleagues have had the opportunity to lay out exactly how this time allocation motion is written, and the tight deadlines and the lack of ability for people to understand and to know exactly what it is that’s coming forward. They have until I believe it’s tomorrow to be able to request the ability to speak at committee, and then it will go through two days of presentations. But then you have to have your written submissions in by the same—so the public has to have them in by 7 p.m. on Monday, and then we have file our amendments by 5 o’clock on the Tuesday.

It doesn’t give the public, or quite frankly us as legislators, the proper opportunity to listen to all the submissions, read all the written submissions—which we should all be doing—and then have legal counsel prepare amendments to go before.

The other concern that I have is if the amendments have not been moved by 4 p.m. on the Wednesday when they’re doing the clause-by-clause, then they’ll be deemed to have been moved by the Chair and will be voted on without debate. That is a problem, Speaker. That is a problem that we’re seeing time and time again with these time allocation bills that come before us, and this bill is contentious.

Yesterday, we debated the opposition day motion to condemn the hate that has been brought forward in this bill with Charles McVety and the repertoire that he has within the province when it comes to Islamophobia and transphobia—just hate speech all the way. We have shown example after example, and the government wasn’t even able to defeat us. They were not able to defeat us because they weren’t able to get enough of their members into the chamber to vote.

That says a lot, when they don’t even have the nerve to come and vote, because they had to vote in the negative as per their House requirement, as per their House leader and their Premier. So they weren’t even able to beat us in that motion. That says a lot. That says that they still have a lot of learning to do, that they need time to be able to get up the nerve to be able to speak against their government, against this hateful legislation.

Due to that, Mr. Speaker, I will take my time and call adjournment of the debate.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Miss Taylor moves the adjournment of the debate. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.

All those in favour of adjourning the debate, please say “aye.”

All those opposed, please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the nays have it.

A recorded vote being required, the bells will ring for 30 minutes. Prepare the lobbies.

The division bells rang from 0948 to 1015.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Pursuant to standing order 49(a), it being 10:15 a.m., I deem the debate on government notice of motion 98 to be adjourned.

Debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Conservation authorities

Mr. Faisal Hassan: I stand today to share my deep concern about the proposed changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and the Planning Act in

schedule 6 of Bill 229. I have heard from many people and neighbourhood organizations in my riding of York South–Weston raising the same alarm that these changes will weaken and reduce the powers of conservation authorities.

Here in York South–Weston, I have been urging all three levels of government for action around the persistent and devastating flooding we have had to endure for years. Last year, during the peak of spring flooding, this government cut funding for flood protection, and now conservation authorities are being sidelined, with the potential result of development on wetlands and flood plains. Residents seeking flood mitigation relief in the Black Creek/Rockcliffe area of York South–Weston are rightfully concerned that those sensitive flood plains and wetlands will not be respected.

Removing the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority from the planning process is a reckless and short-sighted recipe for disaster. Mr. Speaker, I condemn this government’s priorities that, time and again, put developers’ interests over a community’s environmental interests.

Russ and Janet Arthurs

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: It is my pleasure to rise today to recognize two individuals, two small business owners, who have made countless contributions to our community.

Russ and Janet Arthurs have been successful small business owners in Ottawa since 2005. They have been proud owners of a number of Trade Secrets stores, including in my riding, and they recently became partners at a Boston Pizza in Nepean.

Despite getting into the restaurant business right at the start of the COVID pandemic, they have managed to increase sales and have continued to give back to their community. Perhaps most notable are their pizza donations to front-line health care workers at the Queensway Carleton intensive care unit as well as the Revera Longfields Manor long-term-care home.

Their Trade Secrets stores have sponsored numerous events, like the Barrhaven Santa Claus Parade, the run for Roger’s House, and have collected and distributed over 6,000 gently used hair appliances to Ottawa-area women’s shelters under the Eastern Ottawa Resource Centre. Trade Secrets has also sponsored a number of sports teams across Ottawa. Beyond this, the Arthurs family has personally donated fresh farm produce from their farm over the years to numerous food cupboards.

I could go on, Mr. Speaker, for many minutes listing all of their contributions, but all this to say thank you to Russ and Janet Arthurs for everything you do to make Ottawa a better place. I encourage everyone to go out and support local small businesses like these.

Dennis Fairall

Mr. Percy Hatfield: I’m sad to report we just lost a legendary track and field coach. Dennis Fairall was only 67. He was the coach of the track and field teams at the University of Windsor for nearly 30 years. He turned those Windsor Lancers into a track and field powerhouse. They won 25 Canadian championships and 46 Ontario conference titles.

Dennis Fairall was named as either a Canadian or a conference coach of the year 65 times. He was the head coach of Canada’s World University Games in 1989 and was a team coach on four other occasions.

In 2005, Dennis was the head coach of Canada’s Pan American Junior team, and they won the highest medal count in the event’s history.

Twice, he served as the head coach of Canada’s Maccabiah Games team. He has been named to the Tillsonburg sports wall of fame. He’s enshrined in the Windsor/Essex County Sports Hall of Fame, and he has been inducted into the Athletics Ontario Hall of Fame. His nickname was Big Dawg, and he has received a Petro-Canada Coaching Excellence Award and has been awarded the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal. The University of Windsor renamed our indoor sports facility as Fairall Fieldhouse.

Speaker, we once were neighbours. Our kids went to grade school together when the Fairalls moved to Windsor from Tillsonburg. He had suffered with a rare degenerative brain disease for the past several years.

Dennis Fairall was a humble man, despite his many accomplishments, and he certainly left his mark on university athletics in Ontario, Canada and beyond, and our community will miss him greatly.

Volunteers

Ms. Jane McKenna: Volunteers are the heart of our communities. Throughout the global pandemic, volunteers in Burlington and all across Ontario are making a difference by providing support and relief.

There are so many people in Burlington and Halton region who are coming together to do extraordinary things to ensure no one is left behind, like Christen McIntosh, a volunteer with the African Caribbean Council of Halton, and Karen Hill and Cherie Wickens Jones who volunteer with the Compassion Society.

The Joseph Brant Hospital Foundation certainly appreciates the efforts of Ann and Ethan Kurucz and Angelo Paletta.

Using the power of the Internet to bring people together are Rene Schuster who started the Burlington Dads group and Don MacEachern who started Project Kindness.

Bob Morley drives the Food for Life van and Beverly Taylor does so many things at the Burlington Food Bank.

At the Halton Children’s Aid Society, Joan Lewis, Cathy Evans and James Houghton are helping children and youth—just to name a few.

“We make a living by what we get; we make a life by what we give”—from Winston Churchill. Thank you to all the Burlington volunteers who are stepping up and making a difference.

Treaties recognition

Ms. Suze Morrison: I rise today in support of the Haudenosaunee of Six Nations. The Haudenosaunee people of Six Nations live within the Haldimand tract, six miles from either side of the Grand River. This land was granted to them as thanks for siding with the British during the American Revolution. Canada and Ontario would not exist as we are today without the allyship of the Haudenosaunee.

Less than 5% of the Haldimand tract now remains for the use and enjoyment of the Haudenosaunee. Now, as Haudenosaunee land defenders occupy a construction site on their own lands, this government is allowing the OPP to threaten, criminalize and forcibly remove Indigenous people who are simply exerting their treaty rights. Thirty-six people, including journalists, activists, artists and community members, have been arrested in connection to 1492.

The police interventions at 1492 Land Back Lane camp have seen Haudenosaunee people forcibly removed from their homelands, shot with rubber bullets, tasered, criminalized and litigated with civil suits alleging damages of $20 million.

Speaker, these arrests must stop. Criminalizing Indigenous people for this government’s failure to adequately address the long-standing concerns of the Haudenosaunee is not just. In a province and a country that says it is committed to reconciliation, this is shameful.

I echo the calls of the land defenders at the 1492 Land Back Lane camp, the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council and the Six Nations Elected Council for a moratorium on development and an end to police violence to allow for a respectful nation-to-nation approach to resolving this historic land claim.

Hindu Heritage Month

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos: This past weekend, I had the pleasure of joining friends at the Vaishno Devi Temple in my community of Oakville North–Burlington for a celebration of Hindu Heritage Month. With the COVID-19 pandemic, this year, the event was held virtually and included a wonderful performance by dancers as part of our virtual celebration.

In Ontario, Hindu Heritage Month was unanimously passed into law by the Legislature four years ago, and it recognizes the contributions of our Hindu Ontario community. November is also the month in which we celebrate Diwali, the festival celebrating the triumph of good over evil and light over darkness.

Hindu Canadians began to settle in Ontario more than 100 years ago, originating from many countries around the world, and the community is part of the rich tapestry of cultures that make up our great province. They have excelled in every field in our province: science, medicine, business, law, education, politics and so many more. I am also proud to serve with Hindu members of this Legislature, which are part of a diverse government caucus, and others at Queen’s Park.

This month is a time for Hindu Ontarians, and all of us, to remember their culture and traditions and to mark their significant contributions to our province. I’d also like to thank Snehal and Mansi Katarey and all of the volunteers, members and friends who organized this wonderful celebration.

Season’s greetings

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne: This is the last opportunity I’ll have to make a member’s statement before the holiday season and, although it’s early, I want to take a moment to wish the people of Don Valley West and the people of Ontario all the very best in this difficult time.

COVID has changed so much about our lives. It has changed our relationship to each other and to our family members. It has changed our interactions with our communities. It has changed our ability to celebrate, mourn and comfort one another. It continues to challenge us to be patient, to listen to the leaders and experts who are themselves struggling to find the best paths forward.

What COVID has not changed is our need for light in darkness. In fact, it has heightened our need to find rays of hope and optimism on an otherwise pretty bleak horizon.

The stories behind Kwanza, Hanukkah, Diwali and Christmas are all celebrations of victory, thanksgiving harvest and literally the birth of hope in the form of a baby. We celebrate these milestones at the darkest time of our year, in the cold, when we’re most in need of warmth. This time of year, more than any other, we crave cozy moments and the people we love. We try to reach out to people in need at a time when loneliness and need are an even greater burden. And, this year, we have to find ways to do all of that and be separate from one another.

We can put this in context and we can remember that, in comparison with so many others in the world, we’re blessed to live in this country—and that context is important, but it can’t completely take away the sadness of missing our family and friends. Loving each other this year is different, and still, I wish each and every one of you all the warmth and joy that you can find.

Retirement homes

Mrs. Daisy Wai: My mother-in-law was admitted into a retirement home last April. My husband took early retirement to take care of her, visiting her every day, until COVID hit. We cannot visit her, which is challenging for us, but we understand. We cannot spread the virus to anyone in the building. The nurses, caregivers and PSWs are very patient and caring to all the seniors, and they arrange Skype calls for us to meet with our mother virtually. They also arranged window visits and even organized a special birthday celebration for us to surprise her.

Recently, they have arranged weekly, on-site COVID tests and full-gear PPE for us to visit her in person. I cannot thank enough each of the front-line workers, admin staff, PSWs and the hospital team for taking such great care of our seniors. The retirement home she is staying in is very proud to announce their home is COVID-free. In fact, many retirement homes are like this one, clean and well-managed.

Let’s encourage them and show our appreciation while working on others that need support. Let’s continue to be careful and keep COVID out of our long-term-care homes.

Tenant protection

Ms. Doly Begum: Back in March, I joined tenants who were struggling to pay their rent, calling on this government for rent relief. I joined small landlords who were struggling with their mortgages, asking this Premier for support. But, instead, this government rammed through a harmful piece of legislation, Bill 184, which not only ignored the plea from tenants and small landlords, but rather made it easier for big, corporate landlords to evict people out of their homes.

Throughout the months, we saw as the Premier stood in front of cameras and told people to just stay home, yet did nothing to support people who lost their income and were falling behind on their rent. Residents in apartment buildings like Teesdale and Barnhill apartments in my riding of Scarborough Southwest have been fighting for their homes for months. Now, after nine months—almost a year, really—we’re in the middle of yet another lockdown in Ontario with Ontarians who have lost their income and are on the brink of losing their home, and this Premier, once again, stood in front of cameras and told people to just stay home.

Yesterday at Dentonia Park, I stood with residents who are facing the threat of eviction, calling on this government to end this cruelty. We’re watching the very heart of this province, its people and businesses, perish during the course of a pandemic because this government felt it was more important to protect the interests of big corporate landlords than to prevent mass homelessness.

The Ford government needs to act right now. Their lack of action in the beginning of the pandemic has put people in a desperate state, but it’s never too late to do the right thing. I’m begging this government to step up and provide relief for the people who desperately need it.

Diabetes

Miss Christina Maria Mitas: November is Diabetes Awareness Month. Over 1.5 million people here in Ontario are living with diabetes, a number that is fully expected to continue to rise. A 20-year-old in Canada now has a 50% chance of being diagnosed with diabetes in their lifetime. People living with diabetes must make changes every day in order to manage their condition. They must do things like watching what they eat, monitoring their blood sugar, pricking their fingers and taking insulin injections. Luckily, over the years, research and technology has made their lives a little bit easier.

Last year, Ontario started providing a flash glucose monitoring system, FreeStyle Libre, for insulin-using patients. This system is a game-changer. It allows patients to scan their glucose levels with a swipe of their phone rather than a finger prick. Its ease of use has many benefits for both patients and our health care system. Easier and more frequent testing enables better self-management, improved quality of life, reduced hospitalizations and fewer health complications overall.

Speaker, there will always be more we can do to bolster better patient outcomes, particularly as more Ontarians are diagnosed with diabetes, but today I stand in this House proud of the important investments our government has made in order to help patients better manage their condition.

Ontario has proven to be a leader in diabetes care in Canada. Next year marks the 100th anniversary of the discovery of insulin by Sir Frederick Banting right here in Ontario. Last year, our government supported flash glucose monitoring systems in order to make life easier for Ontarians with diabetes. And this year, during the very challenging times that COVID-19 has brought us, access to these monitoring systems has proven to be critical as it has enabled virtual care for those living with diabetes. Research and technology in Ontario has always been on the cutting edge.

For Diabetes Awareness Month, let’s celebrate these breakthroughs and continue supporting everyone in Ontario living with diabetes.

Question Period

COVID-19 response

Ms. Sara Singh: My first question is for the Premier. Yesterday, the Premier insisted that his government should not be criticized for their underfunded, inadequate COVID-19 response because other jurisdictions have it worse, yet there are neighbourhoods in Brampton that have a COVID-19 positivity rate of nearly 20%. One doctor describes this as a “staggering number [that] suggests that there is a huge problem.”

There are now 165 patients in the ICU. That is one out of every 10 ICU beds in this province. When is the Premier going to stop justifying his inaction and start supporting people living in these hard-hit communities and the hospitals that serve them?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Deputy Premier and Minister of Health.

Hon. Christine Elliott: In fact, we are supporting Peel and the entire area since they have, unfortunately, needed to go into lockdown, as with the city of Toronto. We recognize that they need additional supports in order to deal with the rapidly increasing number of cases they’re seeing.

What we have done is sent more case and contact managers into the area to assist with helping to identify people who have COVID-19 and their contacts. We’re also expanding the hospital facilities for people who need to be in the hospital, and we’re making sure that we have received help from some of the other public health units that don’t have as high a number of cases in order to help by telephone support with case and contact management.

We recognize that Peel is going through a very difficult time. We want to help Peel get out of the lockdown as soon as possible, and we are providing the necessary resources in order to help Peel to get there.

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

Ms. Sara Singh: Every day, the Ford government downplays the impact of this pandemic. Peel Public Health data shows that essential workers on the front lines in manufacturing, transportation and health care have been exponentially more likely to be infected. They are not doing well, as the Premier likes to pretend. These people are facing a crisis, and facing it without help from this government.

When will this government stop trying to protect itself and its bottom line and start taking real action to protect and support the people in this province who need it most?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Just to indicate the support that we are providing to Peel, we have established three new community-based testing centres, we have implemented mobile testing sites, we are opening limited walk-in availability at assessment centres for those people who are not able to either book online or make telephone appointments and we are implementing up to seven pharmacies as specimen collection centres in the next several weeks.

We also have invested $42 million for up to 234 new beds at three hospitals, including alternate health facilities, in Peel region to support hospital capacity pressures and the continuation of surgeries and procedures. So we are providing both health supports, in terms of hospital beds and supports, as well as contact managing, testing and tracing.

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

Ms. Sara Singh: Speaker, through you to the minister: Help in a few weeks is not going to help us today. Working people in these communities hit hardest by COVID-19 don’t need the Premier to continue to tell them that the pandemic could be worse. They need this government to actually step up with dedicated resources for testing and contact tracing through this pandemic, culturally specific COVID-19 outreach, urgent and direct support for small businesses and direct support for those people who work with them, starting with a guarantee that they can leave work when sick without losing a day’s pay. When will we see any of this?

Hon. Christine Elliott: The supports have been provided in the health care field, as well as in the economic field; I believe that is what you are also referring to. We’re doubling the amount of emergency management assistance that we’re providing, from $300 million to $600 million, recognizing that there are many economic disadvantages that come from a lockdown in both Peel and Toronto.

But from the health side, we’re also adding to the number of beds. William Osler Health System is receiving up to 87 total beds: 41 beds at Brampton Civic and 46 beds at Etobicoke General. Trillium Health Partners will be receiving up to 141 total new beds: 99 beds at Mississauga Hospital, 23 acute beds—70 beds as part of the pandemic response unit, and the list goes on.

We are dealing with both the economic as well as the health effects, recognizing that Peel is in a difficult situation right now, and we will be there to assist them.

Long-term care

Ms. Sara Singh: My question, again, is to the Premier. Yesterday, another nine residents died from COVID-19 in Ontario’s long-term-care homes. For months, the Ford government has insisted that the growing spread of COVID-19 in long-term care was not a cause for concern. But Dr. Amit Arya, director of the Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians, disagreed yesterday, saying, “We had months in the summer to prepare for this.... So as cases and mortality start to accelerate in long-term care, it’s absolutely devastating.”

Why does the Ford government continue to deny the reality of our long-term-care homes?

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

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you for the question. Our government has acted swiftly and decisively since the beginning. I reject the premise of that question regarding the seriousness with which our government has taken the concerns of COVID-19 in long-term-care homes. It has been absolutely consistent that our number one concern is the residents and staff safety in long-term-care homes. They are our priority, and there is no doubt.

We have taken measures all along: the $243 million put up immediately to support our staffing in our long-term-care homes; $405 million to support more staffing supports, just a few weeks ago; $61.4 million to help our homes with repairs and renovations that would better prepare them for COVID-19 and to deal with it; $30 million for more infection prevention and control; $10 million for training; $26.3 million for future support for PSWs; $14 million for PSW training—and the list goes on and on. We have never stopped and we will continue—

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

The supplementary question.

Ms. Sara Singh: The Canadian Association of Retired Persons has joined the chorus of voices expressing their concern about the government’s failure to address the crisis in long-term care:

“We can’t afford to wait any longer in protecting vulnerable residents in Ontario’s outbreak-stricken long-term-care homes.

“The time for change is now, and it starts at the top.

“Remove the Ontario Minister of Long-Term Care so that we, as a province, have a fighting chance to fix the system before we suffer another uncontrollable wave of deaths.”

Will the Premier listen to the growing concerns of people demanding urgent action and do that?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: I recognize the challenges faced by countries around the world pushing back against COVID-19. Ontario has consistently worked with its medical experts, as the science evolved on COVID-19, to add more layers. The whole world was affected by wave 1. Lessons have been learned from wave 1, and we’re using the expertise through our medical experts, our public health tables—hundreds of experts who are providing support and information. This has never stopped. It’s ongoing.

The rapid testing that we’ll be able to get out to our homes soon—again, many reasons why that has not been able to be more expedient, and we work with our federal partners to be able to have access to those rapid tests.

The world has been affected by COVID-19; Ontario has not been alone in that. We are continuing to make sure that our homes have all the PPE and the staffing that is necessary. There’s no home right now with a critical shortage of staff or PPE. Our homes are doing much better. Some 92% of our homes—

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

The final supplementary.

Ms. Sara Singh: After the first wave of the pandemic, the Ford government promised residents in long-term-care homes and their families that lessons had been learned and change was coming. They are now watching in horror as the virus once again spreads through facilities that are understaffed, underprepared and unchanged.

Instead of taking action to protect our seniors from COVID-19, this government decided to protect long-term-care operators from legal liability.

Why is the Premier protecting his minister instead of protecting vulnerable seniors?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The parliamentary assistant and member for Durham.

Ms. Lindsey Park: Let me be absolutely clear. Individuals and organizations that ignore public health guidance and act with gross negligence or intentional misconduct will not be protected by our legislation. The narrow, targeted civil liability protection in this legislation has only to do with the inadvertent transmission of COVID-19 and nothing else. This legislation does not protect any other type of negligence that we hear from the opposition in this House or that we heard at committee, like if a resident is not given proper medication or a long-term-care home fails to properly communicate with families or patients.

Ontarians will continue to be able to file claims and seek justice for all these claims, including any criminal charges under any circumstance.

Government accountability

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is to the Premier. With parts of the GTA now in lockdown and potentially more regions to follow, businesses are sounding the alarm over this government’s refusal to provide clear direction over who can and can’t stay open. Ontarians are used to a lack of clarity from this government, but even still, we are very concerned about the Premier’s decision that small mom-and-pop shops will close down—all the while telling folks that it’s A-okay to still shop till you drop at big box stores like Walmart and Costco.

So we looked a little closer and—surprise, surprise—guess who’s currently registered to lobby the Premier on Walmart’s behalf? Why, it’s Melissa Lantsman, the Premier’s former war room director. Now this all makes sense.

Why is the Premier willing to let small main street businesses go under just because they couldn’t afford to hire his friends?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: We are doing everything we possibly can, and have been since the onset of this pandemic, to make sure that we focus on the health and safety of the people of the province of Ontario. As the minister for small business mentioned just yesterday, these are very difficult and challenging decisions that we are making in co-operation with not only the Chief Medical Officer of Health but with the medical officers of health in the regions across the province of Ontario.

There are a significant number of resources in place for small businesses to assist them during this very, very difficult and challenging time, but as we’ve said from the beginning, as the Premier has clearly stated, it is our objective to make sure that, first and foremost, the health and safety of the people of the province of Ontario is assured, and that will lead to a strong, vibrant economic recovery.

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

Ms. Catherine Fife: The Premier has said before no one can influence him or his decision-making, but it turns out that there actually are a few people who the Premier does listen to. They just all happen to be former PC Party staffers currently registered as lobbyists.

Along with Ms. Lantsman, Walmart has also hired David Tarrant, the Premier’s former executive director of strategic communications, to lobby on their behalf. Together, these two PC Party insiders set up a meeting with the Premier and the Walmart CEO where the CEO convinced the Premier that they had no choice but to stay open, even though their small competitors, their small main street competitors, all had to shut down.

What does the Premier have to say to the small businesses that can’t afford to hire PC insiders to arrange meetings with the Premier of Ontario?

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, come to order.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing will come to order. Maybe you didn’t hear me.

Government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: I mean, truly that is—what a remarkable question to be asking. I need to remind the members of the opposition that these are the same orders that were put in place back in March, orders that were unanimously supported by members of this Legislature—unanimously supported by the members opposite, by the independents. These are the same orders that were put in place to fight the pandemic in the early stages and these are the orders that have been asked for by not only the Chief Medical Officer of Health but by the medical officers of health in the two regions that are unfortunately on lockdown.

If the members opposite are suggesting that we forget about the health and safety of the people of the province of Ontario and put our focus somewhere else, I can assure the member opposite that, on this side of the House, that’s just not going to happen. We know full well that the sooner we can flatten this curve, the sooner we’ll have a more robust economic recovery, and that’s exactly what we’re going to do, despite the opposition from the NDP.

Small business

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: My question is for the minister responsible for small business and red tape reduction.

Small businesses have always been at the heart of Ontario’s economy in Niagara West and across the province. They represent jobs, hope and opportunity for the people of this province. Due to the pandemic, thousands of small businesses across the province had to close their doors to help contain the spread of COVID-19. I know this has been exceptionally difficult. Unfortunately, many small businesses in Ontario do not have an online presence, which makes it hard for them to deal with the loss of physical sales.

I’m wondering if the minister could please tell the House what the government’s response has been to helping small businesses adapt to the digital marketplace in Niagara West and across the province.

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: Thank you to the member for Niagara West for that question. There’s no sugar-coating it, as we said yesterday. These are difficult times unlike anything we have ever seen before in this province, and our government understands that small businesses have been forced to adapt very quickly. That’s why we responded through the $57-million commitment to Digital Main Street, the largest investment by any government in the history of this country to help businesses go digital.

Growing a business online and expanding into e-commerce has become a huge priority for many business owners. Through our investment, small businesses can now receive grants of up to $2,500 to help launch their business online. The program is going to help up to almost 23,000 businesses create and enhance their online presence and generate jobs for more than 1,400 students across the program. Thanks to this program, main street businesses will be able to expand their offerings and seize opportunities online.

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

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: My thanks to the minister for this response. I know that this investment is incredibly important for many small business owners in my community and right across Ontario.

When the pandemic began, many small businesses and businesses across the province were preparing to shut down, but supports like these have helped to bolster many of these businesses.

Speaker, could the minister please update the House on the result of the Digital Main Street grant program over the last few months?

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: Thank you to the member for that question. I would be happy to update the House on the progress of the Digital Main Street program.

Over the first five months, we received 7,900 applications and businesses that signed up for the Digital Main Street shopHERE program, and almost 2,500 just in the last month. I am proud to say that approximately 45% of these businesses are from outside the GTA, while 45% of the applications identify as female entrepreneurs.

We have also established 79 digital service squads across Ontario to provide support for website set-up, marketing strategies and point-of-sale software to more than 13,500 businesses. Some 131 municipalities across Ontario now have access to a Digital Main Street squad.

Digital Main Street has been vital to many businesses and this has helped increase consumer confidence and make things easier for business owners.

College standards and accreditation

Ms. Jill Andrew: My question today is for the Premier. Yesterday, this Legislature passed a motion condemning the extreme and hateful invective of Charles McVety and to oppose any efforts to make Canada Christian College into an accredited university. The Legislature has spoken. Even the Premier’s own MPPs can’t defend this decision.

Will the government listen to the will of the Legislature, stop defending the indefensible and pull the bill rewarding Charles McVety today, yes or no?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To respond, the Minister of Colleges and Universities.

Hon. Ross Romano: As I spoke about in this House on a number of occasions—and I will continue to stand and rise in this House and defend the process that our government has, a government process that is important. It’s accountable, it’s transparent and it is what we are called upon as legislators to do. So I will continue to speak about the process, Mr. Speaker.

The process is this: There is an independent PEQAB process. A party can apply directly to an independent body; that is PEQAB. There is absolutely no way to stop that process from occurring, Mr. Speaker, and no way to interfere with that process from happening. That independent body will review the particular application. They will report back to the ministry, and subject to results of that PEQAB review, the legislation would then be proclaimed into force.

The opposition continues to play politics with this issue. They continue to play politics—for whatever reason they wish to play politics, Mr. Speaker—but we will defend our democracy as we have continued to do.

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

Ms. Jill Andrew: Speaker, I reject the premise of that answer.

Again, to the Premier: With each passing day it gets harder and harder for the government to defend the Premier’s decision to reward his friend and close ally—an unapologetic homophobe and a bigot, Charles McVety—with the right to grant university degrees at his Canada Christian College.

Yesterday, sir, the vast majority of PC members decided not to. But even while the Legislature says “Stop,” the Premier has decided to rush this bill forward with almost no opportunity for public scrutiny. How can this government justify plowing ahead with a reward to Charles McVety—the racist, the Islamophobe, the homophobe, the transphobe—when even their own MPPs are too ashamed to defend it?

Hon. Ross Romano: Once again: We have a process we’ve created, as I have referred to in this House many, many, many times.

There is equality in this world, Mr. Speaker. There is equality within our Constitution. There is not only equality in our Constitution, there are fundamental freedoms that we must defend, and these are about procedural safeguards in our laws that must exist.

I have spoken about this many, many times, and I will continue to speak about it because procedural safeguards are what make us a free and democratic society. They are guaranteed under our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and they must be upheld. While I would not ask anybody to agree with any views of any party that they do not agree with—by no means at all do I accept that. By no means at all would we ever suggest that you should accept—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Opposition, come to order.

Hon. Ross Romano: But what you must respect is that there must be process, and that’s what matters.

Mr. Speaker, I will end, though, with some basic mathematics. There was not a single member on this side of the House that voted in favour of the opposition motion, because the opposition motion is not proper.

COVID-19 response in Indigenous and remote communities

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne: My question is for the Minister of Health. Speaker, the leadership of Nishnawbe Aski Nation is working hard to keep the 49 communities in its territory informed of COVID progress and to keep them safe. They’re providing access to COVID resources and information in Oji-Cree, Ojibwa and Cree, and posting case numbers and data on their website so that their member communities can be informed. The federal Minister of Health is in regular conversation with the Grand Chief of NAN as they work to ensure a coherent response on- and off-reserve. But the same is not happening with the provincial Minister of Health.

The fight against COVID has to be an all-government effort. There really is no room for jurisdictional wrangling. NAN Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler has been attempting to secure a three-way meeting with the federal and provincial Ministers of Health, and the federal Minister of Health, Patty Hajdu, has agreed and is open to setting up a meeting. Will the Minister of Health for Ontario commit to a meeting with the Grand Chief and the federal minister to better coordinate the COVID response?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Yes, of course I would be. Of course I would be, and I have been in regular contact with First Nation leaders, Indigenous leaders throughout this—before the pandemic on a regular basis and through the pandemic on a regular basis. I’ve had a number of conversations already, and I would be more than happy to be involved in a meeting of the three groups, absolutely.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Kathleen O. Wynne: That’s good news, Mr. Speaker. I spoke with both Grand Chief Fiddler and federal Minister Hajdu yesterday, and that’s great news that you are now willing to have a meeting, because they need that three-way meeting.

The nature of a government-to-government relationship between the Ontario government and Indigenous governments requires respect and open and ongoing communication. Advancing the process of reconciliation as envisioned by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission requires an ongoing, concerted, practical effort in all areas of government, including child welfare, language, culture, education, justice and, indeed, health. It’s broader than one ministry, one issue, and it requires that federal, provincial and Indigenous governments work together collaboratively.

The response to COVID requires that co-operation consistently, so will the Minister of Health—the minister has already said that she is having ongoing conversations with First Nations. Mr. Speaker, I just want to make sure the minister will commit to a collaborative problem-solving effort with Indigenous and federal governments throughout this pandemic, because the needs are very different depending on whether you are in a dense Thunder Bay urban setting or on-reserve.

Hon. Christine Elliott: I absolutely agree with everything that the member has just said. That does need to be an open and collaborative relationship. I have been involved in teleconferences with a group of chiefs led by Regional Chief RoseAnne Archibald, and I remain more than willing to engage in future consultations because I do recognize that there are difference, whether people are living in urban areas or if they’re living in fly-in communities.

I know that there have been many inequities over the years that we are seeking to address, so I would be more than happy to engage in whatever meetings would be requested of me in this respect.

Animal protection

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: A little over a year ago, the government introduced the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act. My question is to the Solicitor General. On January 1 of this year, the new provincially run model came into force. Speaker, the world has changed significantly since the rollout of this new animal welfare legislation, with our collective attention focusing on the many challenges that COVID-19 has been presenting. However, critical front-line public safety services, including animal welfare investigation and enforcement, must continue to operate. It’s nothing less than Ontarians expect and Ontarians deserve.

My question is, could the government provide an update on whether Ontario’s new provincial animal welfare system is working to ensure that animals are being kept safe?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Etobicoke–Lakeshore and the parliamentary assistant.

Ms. Christine Hogarth: I am very proud to answer this question on behalf of the government. Since establishing Ontario’s provincial animal welfare system in January of this year, our dedicated team of animal welfare inspectors has been working tirelessly on the front lines while taking appropriate precautions to protect themselves from COVID-19.

Our government set a goal for this year of having 100 animal welfare inspectors across all corners of the province, and I am proud to share that we have made incredible progress on that front. This includes dedicated inspectors with sector-specific knowledge of agriculture and equine. I’m also pleased to report, and I know my friend Lynn Perrier, who is a dedicated animal advocate out there, will be very pleased to hear, that in the first half of the year Ontario animal welfare inspectors have conducted over 14,000 investigations and laid over 100 charges. Speaker, that’s a record, and I know we can all be proud of that.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: Speaker, through you, my thanks to the parliamentary assistant for the response on behalf of the government. It’s reassuring to hear that Ontario’s animal welfare system has been off to a strong start.

I understand that the government recently announced the formation of an advisory table to help inform these strengthened animal protection standards of care and other key regulations under the new PAWS Act. I know that Ontario is full of dedicated and knowledgeable advocates for our animals, including the Lincoln County Humane Society in my riding of Niagara West. As such, could the government please explain how exactly they intend to leverage the knowledge and skills as well as the expertise of these on-the-ground experts that they bring to the table?

Ms. Christine Hogarth: I want to thank the member from Niagara West for this great question. I completely agree with the member that leveraging extensive knowledge of Ontario’s animal experts is critical in advancing animal welfare across this province. This is a key area that I have been advocating for since before my time in the Ministry of the Solicitor General.

This multi-disciplinary table brings together organizations, including advocates, sheltering agencies, veterinarians, agriculture and industry partners, as well as law enforcement. These leading experts will help inform the work as we move forward in strengthening a wide variety of regulations, most notably the standards of care for our animals. And, Speaker, they’ve already started working. They held their first meeting last week.

I once again want to remind all Ontarians, particularly as we start in the colder weather as it approaches us, if you see an animal in distress, please call 1-833-9-ANIMAL.

Front-line workers

Mr. Jeff Burch: Speaker, my question, through you, to the Minister of Health: Health care heroes working in hospitals in Niagara have been reaching out to my office in droves regarding an urgent situation. Under this government’s supervision, as the second wave is upon us, the Ministry of Health has issued a directive to hospitals across Ontario to stop paying front-line hospital workers who self-report when they are exposed to COVID-19 and are forced to go into isolation.

This government talks about the hard work done by nurses, doctors, personal support workers and other front-line health care workers, correctly calling them heroes. Yet the actions of this government put them in an impossible situation, having to choose between reporting an exposure and feeding their family.

We are well into the second wave. Will this minister investigate, reverse this disgraceful directive and ensure that front-line health care workers in Ontario’s hospitals receive their full pay when they are mandated by the employer to self-isolate due to COVID-19?

Hon. Christine Elliott: I can agree with the member opposite on one part of his question, but not on the second part. First, we do value the incredible contributions being made by our front-line health care workers, who go to work each and every day despite the rising numbers, despite some of the fears that some people have.

Interjection.

Hon. Christine Elliott: We have supplied them with the PPE—I heard that in the background—and they are there to serve. In some situations, though, they become ill or they are exposed to someone with COVID and they have to go into quarantine for 14 days.

What actually happened there was Ontario Health issued a recommendation to hospitals that employees in self-isolation for a possible exposure to COVID-19 continue to be paid. That recommendation was made by Ontario Health only to be implemented if the hospital believed it was necessary. I have certainly heard from others, including the Ontario Nurses’ Association, that this is happening, that this is a concern of theirs because their employees aren’t being paid for the time that they’re being left away, so we are—

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

The supplementary question.

Mr. Jeff Burch: They were paid in the first wave; they’re not being paid now. Those are the facts.

I’ve heard from employees who had to juggle their finances to cover mortgage payments because this government refuses to pay health care workers during a global pandemic. I’ve heard from other workers that previous sick pay they received was deemed an overpayment and must be paid back. Local union reps tell me they are seeing a surge in retirements and staff shortages.

Health care workers are risking their safety to care for the people of this province, and it’s absolutely shameful that this government will not even compensate them when they are exposed to COVID-19. Cases are rising and the risk is increasing, yet with holidays around the corner, this government has decided to cut corners on the backs of front-line health care workers.

I ask again, will the minister value health care workers in this province, treat them with the respect they deserve and ensure that when they are exposed to COVID-19 in the community or in the line of duty, they will continue to be paid?

Hon. Christine Elliott: We do value the work that’s performed by our front-line health care workers. As I indicated, this was raised to me quite recently through the Ontario Nurses’ Association, and it’s something that we take very seriously. We want people to be paid for the work that they do, and if they’re not able to work because of an exposure to someone that they are caring for, then that’s a situation that we need to look into.

We are working both with our hospital partners and with our nursing partners to find a solution to this, to make sure that people are going to be receiving the pay that they should be receiving except for the fact that they’ve had this accidental exposure to somebody with COVID-19 and have to be away from work for a period of time.

Government accountability

Mrs. Belinda C. Karahalios: My question is for the Premier. “One hundred per cent, it’s not fair.” That is what the Premier said when asked why big box stores like Walmart are staying open while small, independent businesses are forced to close. The Premier had little to say about health care driving his decision, but he told us about business logistics.

A study just last week from Stanford advised that a possible alternative was capacity limits for small businesses, not an all-or-nothing approach. Instead, the Premier is driving customers into Walmart, where everyone can congregate together in one place. Sounds like a good place to maximize the spread of an airborne virus, if you ask me.

Why is the Premier not treating small businesses fairly and letting them open as he is the big box stores?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Deputy Premier.

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you to the member for the question. This is a serious concern, and this was not a decision that was made lightly by any means, to put both Toronto and Peel region into this lockdown.

I know that there are going to be many people that are going to be badly hurt by this, but that’s what COVID is doing. That is why we have to have these restrictions, hopefully for a short period of time, to start bending this curve so that they can come back, people can go back into business again and be open. But this decision had to be made.

Small businesses, I know, are going to suffer considerably for this. That is why we’re doubling the amount of economic protection we’re bringing in for them from $300 million to $600 million. They can still receive online requests, telephone requests. They can still do business even though their stores are closed.

It’s necessary in order to prevent further community transmission of this virus. It had to be done.

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

Mrs. Belinda C. Karahalios: Speaker, remember when the Premier used to say he was against the elites and for the little guy? Two years later, the elites are running the show as the Premier makes policy based on special advisers and after holding phone calls with the CEO of Walmart, who talked him into letting them open full-service while small business competitors couldn’t even open under reduced capacity conditions.

The other advantage Walmart has over Ontario’s small businesses is they can afford to hire lobbyists like they did in September, with Walmart hiring the Premier’s former executive director David Tarrant and a member of the Premier’s advisory council of lobbyists, Melissa Lantsman.

Can the Premier tell us if registered lobbying from big box stores had any impact on his decision to allow them to run full-service while closing down small businesses?

Hon. Christine Elliott: No, it did not, and I would like to say to the member, through you, Mr. Speaker, that is entirely unfair and entirely not the situation.

The situation is this: Some of those big box stores are staying open because they provide essential services, and that is the reason why. Many of them have pharmacies, many of them have food stores, grocery stores in them, whatever. We want people to be able to receive the essential services and keep the supply chain open. Those big box stores will be restricted. They will be operating at 50% capacity. The number of people within those stores is going to be limited. There’s going to be the distancing outside as necessary, but it’s absolutely essential that they remain open because they have those essential services.

It had nothing to do with anything else. Essential services is what we made those decisions on. Absolutely, those are the facts, and that is how those decisions were made and will continue to be made in the future: on the basis of the best health data that we have available.

Climate change

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: My question is to the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. During these challenging times, it has never been more important to encourage new industries to contribute to Ontario’s economic recovery. Recent analysis shows that by using more domestic hydrogen, we could import less natural gas from countries such as the United States, which would help keep energy dollars in our province and lead to spinoff benefits, such as the creation of more jobs.

I recently brought forward a motion calling for more attention to hydrogen technologies here in the province of Ontario.

It has been two years since the government released its Made-in-Ontario Environment Plan, and since then, new opportunities and challenges have emerged, such as the wide-reaching impacts of COVID-19, as well as new innovations and technologies.

I’m wondering if the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks could tell the House if the government is looking at the clean technology and hydrogen sectors and, if so, how this will aid in Ontario’s economic recovery and addressing climate change.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Barrie–Innisfil and the parliamentary assistant.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I want to thank the member from Niagara West for his advocacy on the hydrogen sector and the motion he introduced.

Hydrogen is an area that we are actively exploring as a way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality, while creating opportunities for industrial growth. I spoke about this very thing at the CUTRIC conference yesterday, the first one ever. Through, of course, our Ontario Jobs and Recovery Committee, the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks has met with many sectors, including the hydrogen sector, to support recovery efforts and develop a plan to stimulate our economy and growth. Our government sees tremendous potential for this new energy source.

From fuelling trucks and ships, low-carbon hydrogen can also be used for industrial processes and energy storage, and it can be blended with the natural gas pipeline to heat and power homes and businesses.

We recently released a discussion paper for consultation about the use of hydrogen and the hydrogen strategy to both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and support the private sector when it comes to innovation in clean technologies across this province.

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

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: My thanks to the parliamentary assistant for that response.

As we strive to fully address the impacts of climate change, it is imperative that we also look at reducing emissions in the transportation sector, which generates about one third of Ontario’s greenhouse gas emissions.

I find it a bit disconcerting that, on the one hand, the NDP like to talk a lot about the importance of addressing climate change and yet they fail to support any proposal that would put these words into action, as we’ve seen when they demonstrably voted against supporting public transit, by opposing the Building Transit Faster Act.

We need a government that is committed to supporting innovation and technology while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Could the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks commit today that this government will work to drive innovative solutions, such as the exploration of options that use low-carbon hydrogen to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Thank you to the member for that question.

Although hydrogen is not a new idea, it has re-emerged as an exciting and potential long-term way to address climate change, air quality, while creating opportunities for industrial growth. Our government envisions a hydrogen economy that can create more local jobs and attract investment, while helping us reduce greenhouse gas emissions using low-carbon hydrogen, especially in the transportation sector.

The discussion paper we released is the first step to begin a province-wide conversation on what Ontario’s hydrogen economy could look like and the considerations we need to make to develop a practical and actionable strategy.

Speaker, Ontario is well positioned to drive economic growth in a low-carbon hydrogen economy. We look forward to building on existing strengths to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, attract investments and create jobs in different sectors and regions of this province.

COVID-19 response

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: My question is to the Premier. Thirty-nine students and staff members at Begley elementary school in Windsor have tested positive for COVID-19, with an additional two probable cases. The school is closed as a result.

This is the largest school outbreak in Ontario. It’s not a distinction that we want. The health and well-being of families and education workers are at risk. This devastating news has disrupted the education of hundreds of students and the livelihoods of their parents, who are now forced to stay home to facilitate their learning. Local teachers report that they are not aware of a single classroom at Begley from grades 4 to 8 that is capped at 15 students. Physical distancing is impossible and cohorting is haphazard.

This Conservative government’s refusal to listen to experts is causing serious harm in our schools and our community. Will the Premier admit his plan is a failure and finally put measures in place to protect families?

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

Hon. Stephen Lecce: To protect our schools, to protect our seniors, to protect our most vulnerable, the Minister of Health and the Premier, just days ago, announced that the province is taking action, moving Toronto and Peel into lockdown-level restrictions, limiting social gatherings, taking action in other regions, moving them to higher levels of restriction.

Why? Why did we do that? We did that to protect what matters most to this province, which are our kids, our seniors and our most vulnerable. We will not apologize for acting in the public interest to limit community transmission, to do everything we possibly can, recognizing, as I think we all honestly appreciate, the risk within our schools is a reflection of the risk within our community.

It is why we are acting province-wide in the context of our plan, fully endorsed by the Chief Medical Officer of Health and fully funded—$1.3 billion, the highest in Canada. It is not a coincidence we have 2,700 more teachers. It’s not a coincidence we have almost 1,200 net new custodians. We’ve put a plan in place. We’ve listened to the science, and we will continue to respond to the risk.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: I just want to point out to the minister that I was talking about Windsor, not Toronto or Peel.

There is also an important equity issue here that the government continues to disregard. Windsor’s medical officer of health, Dr. Ahmed, has rightly noted that this outbreak and school closure places a huge burden on families, many of whom are low-income and can’t afford to miss work, or are newcomers and may not be able to facilitate learning at home.

With the health unit reporting that there have been 10 schools in Windsor-Essex with confirmed cases, I am extremely worried about the implications of further outbreaks for families in our community. Will the Premier finally do what parents, education workers and experts have been pleading for? Will he cap class sizes and implement the screening, testing and tracing needed so that parents can work and children can have a safe learning environment in Windsor and across Ontario?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. I think what should be noted as well, we see increasing rates of community transmission. There has been an incredible resolve and demonstration of collaboration within public health units in Windsor-Essex and the local school boards whom I’ve personally spoken to both in facilitating dialogue with them to ensure we do everything humanly possible to reduce outbreaks and reduce COVID transmission.

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: But you’re not.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Speaker, what I can assure the member opposite is, when you look at the actions being taken at the public health unit—they have immediately communicated with parents and they’ve sent testing into the school to provide that support for the kids and, as per my responsibilities as Minister of Education, those students immediately pivoted to online learning to ensure they continue to learn in a safe environment. We are taking action province-wide to reduce the risk, given that risk is rising in the community.

But within our schools, a data point that I think should provide some element of confidence is that, today, 99.94% of students are COVID-free. We realize the risk is rising. We will continue to be there for our schools to keep them safe.

COVID-19 response

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: My question is for the Premier. In the first wave of COVID-19, health care workers showed up to protect all of us, and they’re still doing that each and every day, taking personal risk as they face the front line. And this was acknowledged with a $4 pandemic pay—a temporary measure. Pandemic pay is long gone, but health care workers are still working diligently on the front lines. Many are exhausted, with the rates of COVID-19 transmission reaching new heights in our province every week, especially in hot spots.

Health care workers haven’t gone through a first or a second wave; they’ve been working non-stop on the front lines since the pandemic began in this province. Instead, the province has insulted nurses and other provincially regulated health care workers by capping pay in increases at 1%, by removing their ability to collectively bargain their contracts.

Speaker, through you to the Premier: Will you show your acknowledgement of the high risks and the value of these exhausted workers who are doing this work in the face of COVID-19 by reintroducing $4 pandemic pay through the end of the pandemic—

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

The response: the member for Willowdale, the parliamentary assistant.

Mr. Stan Cho: We certainly appreciate the hard work of our front-line workers throughout this pandemic. That’s why we introduced measures to enhance pay. The member mentions pandemic pay, but we also need to continue to support those front-line workers who are hard at work out there throughout the second wave. That’s why we are providing reasonable wage increases, while respecting taxpayer dollars, and investing in front-line services for the people of Ontario.

We’re making sure that any future legislation doesn’t impede the collective bargaining process, to make sure fair wages continue for this sector. That’s why we responded with a $45-billion financial package that provided significant support to countless Ontario families and businesses. These supports will continue until COVID-19 is in our rear-view mirror.

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

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: The member opposite knows very well that this budget did not provide any significant and meaningful increases to our health care system.

After the missteps that Ontarians have experienced with this year’s flu vaccine rollout, many will be relieved, seeing the planning that is out of the government’s hands is now being overseen by a competent and decorated general. However, rolling out a vaccine doesn’t just pose logistical challenges; there are social and economic challenges as well. This is particularly true in communities where there is hesitancy to take transit or to take time off work—they have no ability to take time off work with pay—for fear of losing a paycheque or a job that they can ill afford to lose.

Speaker, through you to the Premier: Does the government have a plan to make sure that vulnerable residents are not prevented from taking this vaccine because of the hurdles that they face due to COVID-19, and will you fund public health—

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

The Minister of Health to reply.

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank the member very much for the question. This is an important issue because we’ve been dealing with COVID for months and months now. This is the light at the end of the tunnel, the fact that we do have vaccines coming forward from both Pfizer and Moderna, and now AstraZeneca has one that’s also about to come onto the market.

We need to make sure that we deal with this, dealing with all of the issues that are important here. That is why we have General Hillier. We’re very proud to have him to lead our COVID vaccine task force. Minister Jones and I are going to be the responsible ministers, and we are going to be working with all of the local medical officers of health, working with all of the communities, to understand what the barriers are to people being able to receive the vaccine.

We are going to work out all of those issues so that when the vaccine hits Ontario, we can get it into peoples’ arms as quickly as possible and make all those barriers invisible so that people will be able to have access. Whether it’s transportation, whether it’s hesitation, whatever the issues are, we will work through them.

Long-term care

Ms. Sandy Shaw: My question this morning is for the Premier. There are over 100 outbreaks in long-term-care homes across the province right now. In my riding of Ancaster, an outbreak at Chartwell Willowgrove is continuing to grow. The cases have climbed to 79, and 15 people have tragically died. We share in the tremendous grief that families are feeling right now in Hamilton. We have enormous respect for everyone who has been working around the clock for months, but they can only do so much. They need help now.

Experts warned for months that without urgent action, the second wave of COVID-19 would be disastrous—but this government continues to dither with task forces and studies that you don’t listen to, while the deaths in long-term care are climbing.

Speaker, this is a crisis. Homes have been asking for months for a clear plan from this government. So where is the plan? When will we see the urgent action that this crisis in long-term care demands?

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

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. There is no question that there is a sense of urgency, and there has been a sense of urgency right from the beginning. This is an integrated response by multiple ministries, multiple experts, our scientific and our medical experts.

Specific to Willowgrove, there are currently 15 resident cases there, and it is improving.

I want to correct my record from earlier when I referenced 92%: 92% of our homes have no resident cases. I just hoped to correct that record.

What we know is that we have an invisible invader called COVID-19 that is ravaging the world. Ontario is not unique. We are taking every measure, whether it’s looking at the IPAC, the capacity in our homes, the staffing, the stabilization of our staffing, the ward rooms—all of these measures are ongoing to address, and we have not stopped. We’ve put dollars behind these. Over $1 billion for our long-term-care homes, and we’ll continue to provide the resources that are—

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

And the supplementary question.

Ms. Sandy Shaw: I would like to remind the minister that those 15 people aren’t cases: Those were 15 deaths—deaths of our loved ones, not cases.

It has been eight months, and homes have been asking for months for a plan, but still nothing from this government.

The two hospitals in Hamilton managed to plan and act on the transformation of a hotel in Hamilton into a satellite facility to treat patients during this second wave of COVID-19, and yet still nothing from this government. There is no new money in your recent budget for long-term care, no plan, and certainly no new money to hire additional staff in long-term care.

It didn’t have to be this way. Instead of trying to save money, you could have been saving lives. The Premier’s iron ring never happened; we all know that. Staff are exhausted, families are frightened and our seniors are left vulnerable.

My question: Why is this government unable, or apparently unwilling, to urgently do all it takes to save the lives of our loved ones, seniors and residents in long-term care?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Our hearts go out to everyone who has been impacted. As a physician for almost 30 years, dealing with life and death and grief, I fully understand.

Our government is putting every measure in place, including the $243 million put out to shore up staffing initially, the $405 million to shore up infection prevention and control and staffing supports, the $61.4 million in capital repairs, the $461 million to support our PSWs with improved wages, the $30 million to train and hire IPAC specialists, the $14 million for PSW training funds, the $10.3 million for return of service, the $26.3 million future support for PSWs, and the monumental four hours of direct care, on average, per day per resident.

Our government is the first government to take long-term care seriously and fix a broken system.

COVID-19 response

M me Lucille Collard: My question is for the Minister of Colleges and Universities. Even before the pandemic, more than two thirds of Ontario’s post-secondary students had experienced overwhelming anxiety. Over half of students had difficulty functioning due to depression, and 16% of students had seriously considered suicide.

This pandemic has added to the stress and worry of our students, isolating them from their social circles and putting them in difficult financial situations. Speaker, the mental health of our post-secondary students is in a crisis, and students often have difficulty accessing mental health services, having to wait on average three to four weeks to see a councillor. Our post-secondary students need our help.

What is the government doing now to provide post-secondary students with the mental health services that they desperately need?

Hon. Ross Romano: I’m really happy to be able to respond to that question. Our government obviously recognizes the importance of mental health, and we’ve indicated numerous times that mental health is health. We recognize the importance of so many areas within this, and I am so very terribly concerned when we hear about some of the concerns we see on our campuses. Some of the issues that have arisen over the course of COVID have been really difficult for so many students.

I really want to take an opportunity to say some real positive reinforcement and tip my hat to all of our professors and our faculty across the sector who have done an incredible job. When we first ended up in COVID, so many of them had to work to personalize course content to try to make that easier for students. They had to find ways to connect with students to support mental health.

I want to speak in the supplemental more specifically to some of the initiatives of our government, but I really want to take this opportunity to speak about our faculty and our professors who did an amazing job at the outset in order to connect with their students to try to really support them and their mental health throughout the initial stages of COVID.

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

M me Lucille Collard: Speaker, college and university students have also seen their post-graduation job opportunities diminish or even vanish as a result of this pandemic. The government helped to address this issue earlier this year, implementing a six-month moratorium on student loan repayments to give students more time to find a job post-graduation in this tough economic environment.

However, while the pandemic continues to limit job opportunities for new graduates, that moratorium on student loan repayments expired back in September. Last week, I met with student leaders from Ontario’s post-secondary institutions and they are asking that the government give graduates more time to find well-paying employment before requiring them to repay their student loans, as well as more mental health services.

Can the minister explain why the moratorium on student-loan repayments has not been extended to support our graduates as they transition to the workforce?

Hon. Ross Romano: Just to continue on to some of the previous comments I was making, with respect to mental health in our institutions: Our government, as you’re well aware, made a historic investment into mental health of $3.8 billion over the next 10 years. With respect to some of those specific funding amounts as they relate to colleges and universities, we made some direct supports of $19.25 million this past year, which was an increase of $3.25 million over last year.

A program I am really excited about is the Good2Talk texting support program, which is a $5.6-million investment that we provided this year. Good2Talk is one of the most exceptional programs I’ve been able to see, especially as we’ve been relating with COVID. For so many individuals, for so many students out there, it’s so difficult to make that first connection, especially when students weren’t on campuses, and, for a lot, to be able to text for the first time and then get the supports they’re after and be connected with a mental health service provider was so exceptional for students.

I think what we really have to stress is we want students to talk more; we want everybody to talk more about their mental health so we can learn more.

COVID-19 response

Mr. Faisal Hassan: As case counts skyrocket in communities across the province, the need for quick and accurate testing is more important than ever. Unfortunately for the people of Ontario, the minister has chosen not to deploy their rapid tests, instead choosing to sit on them for months. Communities like mine in York South–Weston are desperate for resources like these.

Can the minister tell me how many rapid tests the province has in its possession now and why they have not been deployed?

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank the member very much for the question. You’re absolutely right, the rapid tests are, as the Premier said, a game-changer, because they’re needed in so many different communities and in places like long-term-care homes, in some of the more remote communities in Ontario and in many other locations.

I can advise that we have received 98,000 of the Abbott ID NOW tests, we have 1.2 million of the Panbio tests, and they have been deployed to a number of hospitals, long-term-care homes and other areas of congregate living. They are being deployed now and will be used within the next few days.

I will be having more to say about that at 1 p.m. this afternoon.

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

Mr. Faisal Hassan: It is not acceptable to sit on these tests while people get sick, while communities like mine face devastation. Families, workers and all Ontarians deserve better.

I ask again, Mr. Speaker, why has the government spent one long month sitting on these rapid tests, not using them to identify cases and keep people safe?

Hon. Christine Elliott: I would say to the member opposite, through you, Mr. Speaker, that we have not been sitting on the tests; we have been actively moving them and deploying them to the places where they are needed the most. We know that we are dealing with situations where people want to visit relatives in long-term-care homes and that the staff need to be tested. The Minister of Long-Term Care has indicated that, in areas of the high-risk zones, people are going to be tested weekly. These rapid tests are going to be greatly helpful for that, as well as for the people who are going to be visiting the homes.

We also need them in our hospitals. That’s where they are being deployed right now, and, as soon as we receive more supplies through the federal government, we will be sending them to more hospitals and more long-term-care homes.

The need is urgent, we recognize that, and we are moving these tests very quickly.

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

Mr. John Fraser: Point of order.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Ottawa South has a point of order.

Mr. John Fraser: I’d like to seek unanimous consent to remove

schedule 2 from Bill 213.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Ottawa South is seeking unanimous consent of the House to remove

schedule 2 from Bill 213. Agreed? I heard some noes.

Deferred Votes

Better for People, Smarter for Business Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 pour mieux servir la population et faciliter les affaires

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

Bill 213,

An Act to reduce burdens on people and businesses by enacting, amending and repealing various Acts and revoking a regulation / Projet de loi 213, Loi visant à alléger le fardeau administratif qui pèse sur la population et les entreprises en édictant, modifiant ou abrogeant diverses lois et en abrogeant un règlement.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The bells will now ring for 30 minutes, during which time members may cast their votes. I will ask the Clerks to prepare the lobbies.

The division bells rang from 1137 to 1207.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The vote was held on the motion for second reading of Bill 213,

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

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 56; the nays are 31.

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

Second reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Shall the bill be ordered for third reading?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, referred to the Standing Committee on General Government.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): It’s referred to the Standing Committee on General Government.

There being no further business at this time, this House stands recessed until 3 p.m.

The House recessed from 1207 to 1500.

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Government Agencies

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that today the Clerk received a report on intended appointments dated November 24, 2020, of the Standing Committee on Government Agencies. Pursuant to standing order 111(f)(9), the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.

Report deemed adopted.

Introduction of Bills

62 Grimsby Phantom Squadron Sponsoring Committee Act (Tax Relief), 2020

Mr. Oosterhoff moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr38,

An Act respecting 62 Grimsby Phantom Squadron Sponsoring Committee

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

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Pursuant to standing order 89, this bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Regulations and Private Bills.

2257248 Ontario Inc. Act, 2020

Ms. Triantafilopoulos moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr35,

An Act to revive 2257248 Ontario Inc.

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

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Pursuant to standing order 89, this bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Regulations and Private Bills.

Petitions

Optometry services

Mr. Gilles Bisson: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Ontario government has underfunded optometric eye care for 30 years; and

“Whereas optometrists now subsidize the delivery of OHIP-covered eye care by $173 million a year; and

“Whereas COVID-19 forced optometrists to close their doors, resulting in a 75%-plus drop in revenue; and

“Whereas optometrists will see patient volumes reduced between 40% and 60%, resulting in more than two million comprehensive eye exams being wiped out over the next 12 months; and

“Whereas communities across Ontario are in danger of losing access to optometric care;

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

“To instruct the Ontario government to immediately establish a timetable and a process for renewed negotiations concerning optometry fees.”

I sign the petition and I will give it over to one of the ushers.

Community planning

Mr. Aris Babikian: Before I read the petition, I would like to recognize or thank the 231 residents of Scarborough–Agincourt who signed today’s petition.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Green Bud Inc. has applied to the AGCO to obtain a licence to open a cannabis retail store at 63 Silver Star Boulevard, unit C6;

“Whereas the store mentioned above is located at a close proximity to:

“—Yahu Community Association of Canada (dance programs for youth aged five to 12) 63 Silver Star Boulevard, units E2 and E3;

“—Music of May (music lessons for youth aged five to 12) 63 Silver Star Boulevard, unit D3;

“—Toronto Chinese Christian Short Term Mission Training Centre, 63 Silver Star Boulevard, unit D6;

“—Scarborough Community Alliance Church (youth and seniors programs) 139 Silver Star Boulevard;

“—Scarborough Community Alliance Church (youth and seniors programs) 135 Silver Star Boulevard;

“—Scarborough Chinese Baptist Church (youth and seniors program) 3223 Kennedy Road;

“—Sylvan Learning Centre (children and youth programs ages five to 15) 3320 Midland Avenue, units 201-203;

“—Brainchild Education Centre (children and youth programs ages five to 15) 3320 Midland Avenue, units 205 and 218;

“—Light and Love Home in Toronto (seniors program) 3320 Midland Avenue, units 215-216 and 223-225;

“—Scholars 101 Education Centre (children and youth programs ages five to 15) 3320 Midland Avenue, unit 120;

“—Positive Tutorial School (children and youth programs ages five to 15) 3300 Midland Avenue, unit 211;

“—Iron Tutor (children and youth programs ages five to 15) 3300 Midland Avenue, suites 208 and 218;

“—Tamarack Day Care Centre, 3315 Midland Avenue;

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

“To disallow the opening of Green Bud Inc. at 63 Silver Star Boulevard, unit C6, due to the potential health and safety risk it poses to youth, children, tenants, and seniors. Furthermore, this location is not in the interest of the public.”

I endorse this petition. I will affix my signature to it.

Mental health services

Ms. Jill Andrew: This petition is called “Petition for Eating Disorder Awareness Week in Ontario.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas as of 2016 there are an estimated one million people suffering from” EDs “in Canada;

“Whereas the mental health system in Ontario is fragmented and is failing to provide the necessary supports to those suffering;

“Whereas eating disorders have the highest mortality rates of any mental illness;

“Whereas an estimated 75% of young people suffering from mental illness in Ontario do not receive treatment...;

“Whereas the 2016 Ontario’s Auditor General reported that the past Liberal government spent $10 million sending 127 youth to the United States for services not offered in Ontario...;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to pass Bill 61, Eating Disorders Awareness Week Act, 2018, that would make the week beginning February 1 in each year Eating Disorders Awareness Week....”

Thank you very, very much. I fully, fully agree, and I will affix my signature.

Optometry services

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos: I have a petition to save eye care in Ontario, signed by 200 constituents of mine.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Ontario government has underfunded optometric eye care for 30 years; and

“Whereas optometrists now