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

November 30, 2020

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2020-Nov-30 (PDF)

L215 - Mon 30 Nov 2020 / Lun 30 nov 2020

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Monday 30 November 2020 Lundi 30 novembre 2020

Private Members’ Public Business

Legal services

Members’ Statements

Protection for workers

Heddle Shipyards

Environmental protection

Small business

Environmental protection

Personnel législatif / Legislative staff

Small business

Small business

Life insurance

Long-term care

Question Period

Long-term care

Employment standards

COVID-19 response

COVID-19 response

Small business

Restaurant industry

Tenant protection

Autism treatment

Environmental protection

COVID-19 response

Small business

COVID-19 response

Long-term care

Small business

Mental health and addiction services

Notice of dissatisfaction

Special report, Chief Electoral Officer

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Social Policy

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

Woman Abuse Prevention Month

Adoption Awareness Month

Woman Abuse Prevention Month / Mois de la prévention de la violence faite aux femmes

Adoption Awareness Month

Woman Abuse Prevention Month

Adoption Awareness Month

Motions

Reappointment of Integrity Commissioner

Reappointment of Ombudsman

Petitions

Emergency services

Heritage conservation

Long-term care

Broadband infrastructure

Multiple sclerosis

Long-term care

Anti-vaping initiatives for youth

Long-term care

LCBO

Documents gouvernementaux

Fish and wildlife management

Optometry services

Orders of the Day

Supporting Local Restaurants Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 visant à soutenir les restaurants locaux

Order of business

Private Members’ Public Business

No Time to Waste Act (Plan for Climate Action and Jobs), 2020 / Loi de 2020 sur la nécessité de ne pas gaspiller de temps (plan en matière d’action pour le climat et l’emploi)

Royal assent / Sanction royale

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Private Members’ Public Business

Legal services

Mrs. Gila Martow: I move that, in the opinion of this House, the government of Ontario should encourage the Attorney General to modernize and digitize our legal system by making temporary emergency measures put in place for COVID-19 for the virtual witnessing of wills and powers of attorney permanent in Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mrs. Martow has moved private members’ notice of motion number 121. I recognize the member for Thornhill. She has 12 minutes for her presentation.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The pandemic has taught us many things, and one of the things that it has taught us is that we can make much better use of technology in everyday lives for the citizens of Ontario. Whether it’s getting government services or doing their planning for their business or their estate planning, whatever it is—even seeing their doctor virtually, sometimes—they want to have that choice.

I think that one of the pillars of Conservative thought is that people should have more choice, that they should have the option to make decisions on their own behalf. What we’re putting forward today is a motion to make the changes that were temporary during the pandemic so that people could use Zoom conferencing or FaceTime with their lawyers and they could sign documents for power of attorney and estate planning virtually without having to go in person to a lawyer’s office.

Nobody is suggesting that they should have to do it virtually; we’re just saying that we agree as a Legislature—I’m hoping for everybody to agree with this—that we should make the choice permanent and have that discussion to take it further. This is not limited to just wills and powers of attorney but any type of legal action. We see it with purchasing real estate, that they have electronic signatures. So can we move toward people having the choice to have a digital identity and to use electronic signatures to do legal work?

I just want to say, for a bit of background, that our government has been working with its justice partners to modernize and digitize the very, very complex and outdated justice system to make it easier, faster and more affordable for people to resolve legal issues. I just want to mention that, a lot of times, estate planning and doing things like wills and power of attorney documents is very uncomfortable for people, so they look for any excuse not to do it.

I’m hoping that we can also use today to tell people that this is something very, very important to discuss with their family members and their immediate family members: what their plans are and what their wishes are in the future, should the inevitable eventually happen, hopefully later rather than sooner.

I just want to remind everybody that the Attorney General worked with partners—the members of the estates bar—about the need to allow the ability to witness the making of the will or the execution of a power of attorney through audiovisual communication technology and the ability to sign identical copies in counterpart in this emergency. In response, of course, the Attorney General made an emergency order to temporarily enable the virtual witnessing of wills and powers of attorney with an Ontario paralegal or lawyer present on the video conferencing.

I want to jump right to what some lawyers have sent me from Thornhill and from Toronto. I spoke to quite a few. Many of them were happy to share their thoughts to me, and I want to read some of it into the record.

Allan Goldstein is a family lawyer in Thornhill. He’s suggesting that: “All documents that are currently required to be signed in the presence of witnesses or a notaries public (including but not necessarily limited to wills, powers of attorney, separation agreements, marriage contracts etc.) will now be legally binding if signed in the presence of a witness or a notary public with the witness or notary public witnessing the signature over video conference instead of by personal attendance.

Should the witness or notary public be required to confirm the identity of the signatory, then such confirmation of identity may be done by the witness or notary public viewing the signatory’s identification documents by way of a video conference.” I want to thank Allan for that information and for his thoughts.

I also spoke to Tilda Roll, another family lawyer in Thornhill. She’s suggesting that we broaden it to include domestic contracts in all types of separation agreements and anything pertaining to the family and the children to create that sort of comfort zone also. I think a lot of times people are very uncomfortable going to lawyers’ offices and places like that, not to mention how expensive it can be just for the parking, and they want that option.

Robert Karol, who has an office on Yonge Street in Toronto, said that he’s pleased to know, and he joins with others in the legal community—he wants to applaud our efforts here in the Legislature to modernize Ontario’s legal system: “Clients across Ontario have truly benefited from the Ontario government’s recent authorization of the virtual witnessing of wills and powers of attorney during these challenging COVID-19 times. This important move by the Ontario government is one which should be extended indefinitely in order to serve the needs of Ontarians through updated, responsive, and modernized legal systems.

“We thank you for your important work that supports the best of modern technologies and updated legal systems.”

Then I have Alan Silverstein—we have a bit of a discussion in Thornhill sometimes: Is it “Silverstine” or “Silversteen”? I hope I’m saying it correctly—“The original March 2020 emergency order regarding the virtual execution of wills and powers of attorney was changed as of April 22, 2020. According to the amended order, wills and powers of attorney can be validly signed and witnessed virtually ... on separate documents, in counterpart.

“However, the lawyers with whom I have spoken still find the amended process cumbersome for several reasons.” And these are three of the reasons he gives:

“—A valid will and power of attorney would consist of two separate documents, and could consist of three separate documents, which together comprise the one valid will or power of attorney.

“—If (

a) the two witnesses (one of whom must be a lawyer or paralegal) are together, or (

b) the testator and one of the two witnesses are together, the video conference will take place at two different places. Otherwise, it will be held at three separate places. Not all video conferencing programs can facilitate meetings at multiple locations.

“—Clients experiencing ‘cabin fever’ are often looking for an excuse to leave their homes. Signing legal documents is as valid a reason as any.”

So he’s suggesting that people should have the choice. “Therefore, many wills and powers of attorney are still being signed and witnessed face to face ... at a spaced-out distance.” He’s held driveway meetings, “where the parties sit in their cars, and we communicate either directly or by cell phone.” That is very interesting to consider as well, Madam Speaker. “Meetings have also been held on picnic tables and at food courts (when permitted).” So there’s “no lack of creativity.”

I’m very pleased when I hear of our legal profession and our medical profession thinking outside the box and sharing with the public their ideas to have safe distancing. I think that going into the future we’re going to realize, even when COVID-19 is hopefully some day a distant memory, we’re still going to have to be a lot more cautious about infectious diseases.

Now I have from Klein and Associates—Matthew Klein put this together for us. I’m going to try to fit it all in. He says:

“Under Ontario regulation 129/20 under the Reopening Ontario (A Flexible Response to COVID-19) Act, 2020 ... licensees within the meaning of the Law Society Act have been permitted to have wills and powers of attorney witnessed and executed through the aid of audiovisual technology.

“This method of witnessing and executing wills and powers of attorney is novel, supplementing the standard practice before COVID-19 of requiring licensees to witness and execute wills and powers of attorney in person.

“It is obvious why this change was necessary during this pandemic. Those most vulnerable to becoming severely ill by COVID-19 are likely the same people who are seeking the services of licensees to prepare wills to manage their estates. Taking reasonable steps to relax formal requirements of execution where strict adherence poses a significant risk to the health of these vulnerable peoples was the right decision.

“The question is whether this policy should be lifted as the pandemic is brought under control. Arguments in favour of lifting the policy stem from protecting the integrity of the original formalities. There is a public interest in ensuring documents like wills and powers of attorney are signed by testators demonstrating a clear intention without any duress. Conventional wisdom is that the formalities of signing ensure that this public interest is protected.

“I submit that video conferences are a perfectly adequate alternative to such in-person meetings for protecting the aforementioned public interest. There is a tendency to resist change. Law has been practiced a particular way for many years. Why implement such a change and risk unsettling established legal norms?

“This concern is addressed in the May 1, 2020, decision of Justice Myers, Arconti et al v. Smith et al.... Here, the plaintiffs objected to examinations for discovery being performed over Zoom, a video-conferencing software which has been widely adopted by the legal profession during the COVID-19 pandemic. The plaintiffs were concerned that, compared to an in-person hearing, a video conference would be much less capable of providing accurate assessment of witness demeanour, protecting the process against sleight of hand by the defendants, and would be unable to create a morally persuasive environment for elucidating truthful statements.

“In considering these arguments, Myers stated that, ‘It’s 2020. We no longer record evidence using quill and ink. In fact, we apparently do not even teach children to use cursive writing in all schools anymore. We now have the technological ability to communicate remotely effectively. Using it is more efficient and far less costly than personal attendance. We should not be going back.’”

I’m continuing with Klein and Associates, Matthew Klein specifically, when he says, “I agree with the perspective expressed by the honourable justice in this instance. When the pandemic ends, that does not mean the utility of executing wills and powers of attorney via video conference ends. Vulnerable people will still be at risk of serious illness from seasonal flus and they will still quite often suffer from mobility issues as they always have, even before COVID-19.

“There is no evidence-backed reason to suggest that documents executed remotely with the aid of audiovisual technology are any less legitimate than those executed in person. The implementation of audiovisual technology into the law of estates has reduced risk, increased efficiency, and improved access to legal services for vulnerable members of our community. We should not be going back.”

Of course, I support these wonderful words and I thank all of the legal profession for all that they’ve done to embrace the changes that our government has put forth, supported by the opposition, in terms of ensuring that we have safety for the clients, safety for the legal profession, whether it’s lawyers or notary publics or paralegals, and of course safety for their employees. Thank you very, very much, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity. I look forward to what my colleagues on all sides of the House have to say.

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

Mr. Percy Hatfield: Good morning, Speaker. It’s always a pleasure—an honour, really—to stand in this House on behalf of the good people of Windsor–Tecumseh. This legislative chamber is where the laws of Ontario are made.

Now, I’m not a lawyer. I don’t hold myself out as having any great experience in the law. But I can understand most legal terms, provisions, intentions, updates and corrections. When I was a journalist, I was heavily involved with my union and served several times on national bargaining teams and national grievance committees. So while not holding a degree in law, not being a lawyer or pretending to be a lawyer, I am familiar with contracts and enforcement of contract law.

I am also aware that times are changing. Most of us are becoming more familiar with technology that didn’t exist before. The younger generation especially is much more familiar with the latest in technology and, for the most part, I believe, gets more practical and daily use of communication devices than ever before in our nation’s history.

All of us in this chamber are using programs such as Zoom, Teams, Skype and any number of other similar applications that some of us never used before or even heard of before this COVID-19 pandemic changed the way we go about our business. So this motion, 121, the virtual witnessing of wills and powers of attorney, comes at an appropriate time in Ontario’s ever-evolving history.

It was necessary a few months ago to allow this to happen because we began to be restricted in our movements and in the places we would normally gather and meet to discuss such legal matters. It made sense that we would use the latest in technology to finalize legal transactions that may have been time-sensitive and would otherwise be cumbersome and even downright risky to assemble together to do the paperwork.

The change came with an end date, and this motion seeks to make such usage a permanent factor of life in Ontario. I’m sure there are pros and cons. Some lawyers have jumped in support of it; others, not so much.

But the question remains: If the virtual witnessing of wills and powers of attorney can be done safely, can be done in a way that those taking part are satisfied is a fair and honest transaction, with at least one of the witnesses being an Ontario-licensed lawyer or paralegal, then can audiovisual communication technology be a legal vehicle of the future? The answer seems to be yes.

Normally, Speaker, wills must be signed in the physical presence of two or more witnesses and powers of attorney must be executed in the physical presence of two witnesses. But if by the use of the latest in technology, if that makes it possible for everyone involved to be able to see, hear and communicate with each other in real time, then why not a virtual presence instead of a physical presence?

Obviously, those taking part have to all agree that they know what’s going on and they fully understand the process, are comfortable with it, that the intent of the will is clear, and they have no issue with discussing such personal matters in front of everyone else. If that’s the case, then why not? I mean, sure, the identities of those on the shared screen would have to be validated. Everyone would have to agree that the person making out the will is of sound mind and not being unduly influenced by anyone else in the room.

As a backup, Speaker, recordings, audio or visual, could and perhaps should be taken, especially if a translator is being used for a second opinion or as a technological witness, if you will. It would still be important to determine if this will is a brand new one or replacing one that was filled out sometime prior, and that everyone involved is made aware of that fact. When the virtual signings and the copies are being signed, it would be imperative to have on record the page numbers being attested to. All of the legal people should be taking notes in case of a future challenge.

Motion 121 makes sense in this day and age. I thank my friend from Thornhill for bringing it to our attention this morning. Thank you.

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

In a perfect world, everybody could afford a lawyer and everyone could go to court to solve their problems quickly and painlessly. While we are a good distance from achieving perfect access to justice, there are ways to make improvements to the justice system to deliver good justice for everyone, not perfect justice for a lucky few.

Access to justice can mean many things, such as getting legal assistance when you need it, and having courts that can resolve your problem on time. But in order to achieve this, tools and services need to be available to all. A deficient access to justice reinforces existing inequities. Cost is the most obvious barrier to access to justice and this is why legal aid services were introduced in the mid-1970s. Weakening access to legal aid means failing women, people with disabilities, recent immigrants, members of racialized communities and Indigenous peoples, who are overrepresented at lower income levels.

Delays are creating additional barriers to access to justice. Over the past decades, Ontario courts have fallen behind with an increasing backlog of cases that generate delays equivalent to denial of justice. Having easy access to legal information is also another component of a more efficient justice system.

Nos tribunaux ont tardé à adopter bon nombre des services numériques novateurs qui pourraient contribuer à rendre le système de justice plus efficace et plus accessible. Le fait de se fier encore en grande

partie sur des dossiers papier dans nos tribunaux n’est pas pratique et a un impact évident sur l’environnement. Une transition vers le dépôt électronique présente des avantages attendus tant pour les Ontariens écologistes que pour la justice.

La pandémie COVID-19 a forcé les gouvernements du monde entier à faire preuve de créativité pour continuer à fournir des services gouvernementaux accessibles numériquement. Je reconnais et remercie le procureur général pour son travail visant à permettre davantage de solutions numériques pour répondre aux défis de fonctionnement des tribunaux pendant la pandémie.

While moving to make virtual witnessing of wills and powers of attorney permanent in Ontario is a small step in the right direction, I also encourage the government and the Attorney General to expand this mandate for modernization to include a broader strategy for improving Ontarians’ access to justice. Digital services can certainly be an element of improving case management, but we also need to address the substantial inefficiencies arising from the prevalence of self-represented litigants.

People go to court without a lawyer because they can’t afford it, and they appear insufficiently prepared, which adds significantly to the burden of the judges and to our justice system. We need to fundamentally rethink how we provide and fund legal aid services to improve access to legal representation for the thousands of Ontarians who are forced to navigate our courts without legal representation.

To cut funding for legal aid on one hand, as this government did in 2019, but provide some conveniences through digital services on the other, does not leave our system more just, fair or efficient than it was previously.

Finally, this government should consider that access to justice is also an economic driver. A person who is denied justice is not going to be a positive and productive member of society. Similarly, people in business need to get commercial disputes settled quickly. While large businesses can hire lawyers, small and medium-sized ones may not have that luxury. In some cases, accessible justice can mean the difference between staying in business or filing for bankruptcy. When justice is not accessible there is a real economic cost on top of the social and human costs, and it affects us all.

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

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I am proud to rise to speak in favour of the motion before us, motion 121, from the member from Thornhill. I really commend her for introducing such a motion because it follows suit with a lot of the things that the member is trying to do in terms of the push to bring things to the 21st century, and really thinking outside the box when it comes to legislation. A lot of thought has been put into this motion and it really echoes everything that our government has been trying to do from day one, which is put the people of Ontario first. Everything that we do, we do to put the people of Ontario first, and part of that is also bringing respect to taxpayer dollars.

When you see these types of changes and moving to the 21st century not only are you putting people first, but there is a cost savings involved where you can take those additional funds that had been saved and put them to other digital needs and other services, such as our Attorney General had done when he passed his Smarter and Stronger Justice Act.

Part of those digital efforts was also to give more funding and supports to victim services and those on the front line and, of course, as you saw recently, the investment of $1.3 million in technologies to help courts and tribunals to continue the transition to remote operations. These investments are going to definitely help those on the front lines, especially when it comes to victim services.

When you think about what we’ve seen through COVID-19 and the expediting of digital services, it’s really moving the province and where the country is going in terms of getting with the 21st century. We have a lot of seniors now, but we also have a young population coming up. The way that young population was raised was that they’re online. They do a lot of transactions online. They have a bigger digital footprint than I would say I do, if I compare myself to my brother and my cousin. That’s just what they’re used to. So if we’re making changes today, we have to understand that they are actually going to create a better and formidable society for the future.

A lot of what we’re doing today is to provide, obviously, convenience, and to make these conveniences more permanent for the current population who might be discussing their wills or powers of attorney, but we have to look past that as well to those people that it’s going to affect in the future. It’s just very practical. So it’s no surprise that you’ve got all-party support—to the member for Thornhill—because, again, it’s a very practical, pragmatic solution to everyday issues we interact with. We do our banking online. You can sign up for a course online.

You call and get your doctor to email you a backgrounder online. All these things are already happening, so it makes sense to get the justice system to also be a little more digital and, as the President of the Treasury Board likes to say, get people out of line and online. This is very much with that too, in terms of—we talk about backlogs that may be occurring because of COVID-19.

This also has the potential to allow people to access justice immediately—quicker and much easier—and it does echo many of the changes that have been made. I just want to quote our Attorney General, who has put a lot of thought into how to transform and digitalize the judicial system. He says, “We have heard loud and clear from people across Ontario that the justice system has grown too complex and outdated, and needs to better support the growth of safer communities while standing up for victims of crime and law-abiding citizens.

Our government is proposing smart and sensible reforms that will allow people to spend less time and money resolving their legal matters while strengthening access” and supports to Ontarians in need.

That really shows you what the member is trying to do with her motion, which is strengthening the system for those who may want to access the justice system in a safe manner. COVID-19 has obviously shown us that it’s safer for seniors and individuals to stay at home, so to be able to do such a transaction, which is a very important one for life planning, is very key.

I, for example, take care of my grandfather. If it’s up to him, he prefers to do everything in person. We would literally drive from bank to bank to do all of his banking. But since COVID-19 has happened and we have to change how our family functions a little bit, he has warmed up to the concept of online banking and certainly other things. Unfortunately, his health condition has deteriorated quite significantly, so he is at the point where he is thinking about his will and he’s thinking about what he needs to do and, if something happened to him, who in the family would be power of attorney.

It gives us peace of mind in the family to know that if he decides to make that decision, we’re not putting him at risk by taking him out and exposing him to COVID-19. Instead, we can do it safely for him and we can do that online.

That’s something many families are faced with right now. I gave my family as an example, but there are many people who are in the sandwich generation, where they have young kids they have to take care of all the time but they also have their parents they have to take care of full-time. For them, a lot of time, going to in-person appointments can add a lot more stress on their lives—especially now with COVID-19, additional stresses. So this is also giving that peace of mind to people to know that they can do more of these things and witness these types of transactions online.

Again, it’s very common-sense in terms of who we’re dealing with, in terms of who it’s going to help—the moms and dads of the world, the sandwich generation; also young people, millennials, to get them understanding the importance of doing these types of transactions online. Of course, it has the added benefit, we were saying, of the legal profession—the member for Thornhill quoted many people in the legal profession who are supportive of these changes. It made me think of when we were talking about the Smarter and Stronger Justice Act and the tremendous amount of support we received.

I want to read some quotes. This one is from David Clement of the Consumer Choice Center. He’s the North American affairs manager. He said, “Allowing for virtual commissioning and notarizing is a positive step for those using legal services. Permitting virtual commissioning and notarizing ultimately makes the system more consumer friendly and more responsive. From a consumer standpoint, this is a welcomed change.”

In addition to him, we had others who also spoke in favour of the bill—to just make it practical. I spoke to local lawyers in my riding of Barrie–Innisfil, and they see how this is, as one lawyer told me, a no-brainer. Another one said, “Finally, we’re making progress on this, in addition to some of the CCTV stuff we’re doing in the courtroom, so that people can do things digitally.” It’s a bigger step, because it shows that it’s convenient.

Making the system more digital is not just convenient and adds cost savings, but it also helps with things like not having to retraumatize individuals. It’s not so much pertaining to witness wills and power of attorney, but we see a lot of our children’s aid services, where instead of having the child retell their story, there’s a centre—we have the CAS in Barrie, where they tell their story once. They’re doing it in front of a camera that’s not very visible. There’s a person behind the screen who might be a police officer, a health professional, a social worker.

It allows that child to only tell their story once. You’ve seen how much it makes an impact. So you have that set up for that case. Again, when you’re talking about making things digital and transcending it to other parts of our transactions, this one is so important.

We know we have an aging society. We know how important things like powers of attorney and wills will be as people’s health conditions and circumstances and lives change. We need to think of those individuals and how we make this safer and easier for them. Safety, as we’ve seen with COVID-19, has been paramount. The member for Thornhill mentioned the amount of individuals who have said that this is the paramount of safety as well—not just that this was put in place for COVID-19 and we’re looking to make it safer, but just easy access.

For some individuals to be able to actually leave their home, it’s quite the endeavour—just being able to put on those easier pair of shoes. I see this with my grandpa all the time. We have to get him a specific pair of shoes that are much easier to put on. He used to be able to use that spoon thing to get shoes on, but now it’s much harder. For him to get dressed, get on his shoes, it’s frustrating for him. He’s frustrated that he can’t be like he was in his twenties and do these things very easily. It’s not easy.

So if you can make life a little bit easier for those individuals, they’ll certainly sign up for it. You have to explain a lot of it at first, as to how this is going to be done digitally and his safety is protected etc., but at the end of the day, it’s great. Now he has more time to do the things he likes, more time to read, more time to enjoy life. These things can be done virtually, in the comfort of one’s home, not having to face the—we’re going into the winter season. The majority of our weather, especially where I am—I might not be the buckle of the belt, but I’m part of the snowbelt.

It allows us to make sure that we’re safely inside and, again, doing these transactions online for seniors and preventing them from things like slips and falls, as well.

So it might seem like a small measure, but it does go a long way—both addressing our aging population, who have done a lot to build the country we live in today, and our upcoming young generation of individuals.

I fully support this bill. I applaud the member for addressing all age groups and how this is going to be helping them move forward with life.

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

Mr. Ian Arthur: It’s a pleasure to rise today and contribute to this debate. I thank the member from Thornhill for introducing it. Certainly we do support this move, and I think it’s good that she’s pushing the government to make this change permanent. It certainly does shift how things are done, and has the potential to expedite some of the proceedings that go through the court with the witnessing of wills and such.

I have a very brief amount of time, so I want to be very careful, though, because one of the things that we’re supposed to do with legislation is to look at unintended consequences. The member—what’s your riding?

Mr. Percy Hatfield: Windsor–Tecumseh.

Mr. Ian Arthur: Windsor–Tecumseh. Sorry. It’s early in the morning, Speaker.

The member for Windsor–Tecumseh mentioned how young people are often more adept at using some of the technologies out there, and it immediately made me think of the sort of fraud concerns that a number of people have raised with this. It would be really great if the government could elaborate on how they’re protecting people from fraud as they transition to this new system.

I think about all the fraud schemes that are targeted at seniors across this province and across the country. It is rampant. Seniors fraud is a huge problem. We all know that to be true. We all get the phone calls. The scammers have a lot more success with certain age demographics.

I just want to draw attention to one thing: We’re all very used to the ability to add in fun Zoom backgrounds around us on a video, but it’s actually not particularly hard to reverse that, to keep the background of your room and actually flip the person who is appearing on Zoom. We’ve seen the deepfakes that have been made of presidential candidates, for instance, and other ones, but that technology is actually readily available at home. As a joke for one of my friends, we created a video where he was singing 1990s gangsta rap, and it was totally convincing. It was my friend’s face and the voice of the artist, and you really couldn’t tell the difference.

And so I would hope that the government has considered these advancements, because as we improve communications technology, the ability to have Zoom meetings—we’re not doing it here, but Parliament is meeting over Zoom, and there are a series of safeguards put in place.

I know having a paralegal is part of it, but it’s not that much of a leap to think about a very computer-savvy young person posing as a senior, being able to insert a video feed if they have pictures that they received from the Internet—I can actually very easily go and build a digital version of that person using a couple of different photos that I found of them on the Internet, and then I’m able to manufacture a fake version of that person and present it as myself.

That is readily available technology. It really doesn’t even cost anything; it’s free on the Internet. Mostly it’s used for fun, but it’s not that hard, as I said, to think about how this could then be taken and used for nefarious reasons, to target our seniors, who perhaps don’t understand the technology as well. I’m really wary of that side of it, and I do hope that the member from Thornhill is able to come back with some of the precautions that the government will take, to ensure that this isn’t where this goes, that this is prevented from happening ever, that we don’t wait until after it has happened once and somebody has been taken advantage of for it to come back.

That’s about all my time. That’s the major concern I have with this. We’ll certainly be supporting the legislation. I’m just trying to provide feedback in a meaningful way that could actually make this stronger and make sure that we’re thinking of all possible angles on this. Thank you to the member for Thornhill, and I look forward to supporting this motion.

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

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I want to thank the member from Thornhill for motion 121. This is what we’ve been talking about at the Treasury Board: making things online, to make it much easier and much better even for our environment, to reduce our carbon footprint from travelling from place to place.

Look at the cost of parking in Toronto. Here, when I come to work, is one thing, but when I have to go see my lawyer, I have to spend $20 or $30 for parking. If I can do this online, it’s much better.

Last night was a prime example. I realized I hadn’t renewed my stickers on my vehicle, so right away I went online and I renewed all the stickers for my car. Doing this for our wills and our powers of attorney, I think, is moving forward in the 21st century.

My in-laws are in Montreal, and I remember last year we had to go five hours to Montreal to be a witness there for their wills and for their power of attorney. Like I said, doing this with Zoom or with Teams would make it much, much easier for everyone, especially instead of travelling all that distance and time, and a chance of you getting into an accident travelling as well.

I want to commend you very much on this. I think this is a great idea and I hope that we can move this forward in other areas, as well, to make it much more efficient for the people of Ontario.

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

Miss Monique Taylor: I’m pleased to have the opportunity to rise to speak to this motion today, which would allow for virtual witnessing of wills and powers of attorney. During the pandemic, we know that many of us were not able to leave our homes and be able to get the services we need, and they were important legal services. What we’re seeing today is that for Ontario to maintain this physical distancing, it’s important to find accommodations for legal services that require group settings.

In Ontario, for a will to be legally valid, it requires two witnesses to be present in person and to sign off on it. For the power of attorney, there was also the need for two witnesses. During the COVID-19 pandemic, these in-person witness rules were suspended under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act. That act allowed for the witnessing via teleconferencing and signing on separate documents if those documents were identical. These were good accommodations, given the emergency that we found ourselves in, and I have spoken on this, in this House, at length, about the access to justice in Ontario.

While this motion might seem on the surface like it removes barriers for legal procedures around wills or powers of attorney, it’s not 100% clear that it does. Has this government done the work to ensure that it doesn’t open the door to fraud and abuse, as we have heard very clearly and quite eloquently from the member from Kingston and the Islands? Wills and powers of attorney have a big impact on people’s lives or the lives of their beneficiaries. That being said, if this government puts in place some checks to ensure that the virtual process is fair, that would be best.

I want to be clear about the fact that I’m not against virtual services. We have all gone virtual in the past year. I use Zoom for everything. My staff are all working remotely and use it, too. Virtual meetings have the power of reducing barriers and cost. With a virtual meeting, you can meet anyone, anywhere, regardless of their ability to travel to your location. If being allowed to virtually witness wills and powers of attorney removes barriers for people with disabilities or for seniors and brings down the cost of these proceedings, then it’s a good change that serves the greater goal of improving access to justice. Perhaps it should remain an option if in-person meetings are impossible.

I know there’s very little time, but again, pressing on access to justice: People being able to access the legal system needs to be a key issue. This is a good motion. It will serve its purpose. I hope that the government and the member are looking at the fraudulent aspects of this. We know that at the punch of a button and the click of a finger, people can see anything they want, so let’s make sure what they’re seeing is actually the truth.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): The time provided for private members’ public business has expired. Ms. Martow has moved private member’s notice of motion—

Interjection.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Apologies. We’re just cutting to the chase. I recognize the member for Thornhill with her two-minute wrap-up.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Of course, today we’re talking about virtual witnessing of wills and power of attorney being a choice that’s made permanent. I want to thank, of course, the members for Windsor–Tecumseh, Ottawa–Vanier, Barrie–Innisfil, Kingston and the Islands, Mississauga–Lakeshore and Hamilton Mountain for their very thoughtful comments this Monday morning.

I just have a comment from Robert Karrass, another lawyer from Thornhill, who wants us to know that he thinks that video conferencing is a very useful tool when used responsibly by lawyers following all legal protocols, including capacity assessments and client identification and verification.

Of course, we’re hearing concerns about fraud, and that’s an ongoing concern in terms of wills and powers of attorney. We hear of mortgages being put on properties. Our elderly are very vulnerable. Sometimes we imagine that it’s strangers who come in and do this; unfortunately, Madam Speaker, all too often it’s their own family members. It’s very difficult for the lawyers. They’re dealing with the family members, and they have to try to get inside peoples’ heads and try to figure out the motivation, try to figure out if other family members are aware of what’s taking place.

You know, we heard the line from our President of the Treasury Board, through the member for Barrie–Innisfil, that we want to get people out of line and we want to get people online, and one thing that this pandemic certainly showed me is how many seniors are capable of doing Zoom, because I’ve seen them, in their nineties, through Zoom.

I think it has almost doubled how many of our seniors in Ontario are using online banking, and they’re using it safely. It’s a problem for seniors going to those bank machines. It’s something that I think we’re all worried about, if some vulnerable senior is seen taking cash out of a bank machine and somebody is right over their shoulder watching them and can assault them for the money.

It’s certainly far safer for our seniors to do some of their services, some of the legal services, banking services and medical services—not all, Madam Speaker; we know that there is no replacement for actual in-person visits sometimes. But if they have the choice, if they have the ability—just like we now have the ability to use technology, to read from it in the House. We didn’t when I was first elected. It’s a huge advantage. It doesn’t mean we can’t have paper, but it gives us that choice.

I want to thank all my colleagues here in the House for their support.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Thank you. We’re doing it for real this time: The time provided for private members’ public business has expired.

Mrs. Martow has moved private members’ notice of motion number 121. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? That is carried.

Motion agreed to.

Orders of the day? The member for Barrie–Innisfil.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: No further business.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): There being no further business, this House stands recessed until 10:15.

The House recessed from 0947 to 1015.

Members’ Statements

Protection for workers

Mr. Jamie West: Ontario was a world leader when we created our first comprehensive no-fault workers’ compensation system, Speaker. However, under WSIB, Ontario covers fewer workplaces than any other province in Canada. Employees who work in group homes, banking and insurance, health care and social assistance, as well as professional, scientific and technical services, are not covered by WSIB. This leaves over one million workers in Ontario with no WSIB protection in the event of a workplace illness or injury. It’s disproportionately impacting women, racialized or marginalized workers.

Recently, I spoke with Jacqueline Haynes, who has been ringing the bell on this issue for years. Specifically, Jacqueline is fighting for WSIB coverage for developmental service workers. Jacqueline has worked as a DSW for over 23 years. DSWs work with vulnerable individuals who have developmental, physical or mental health challenges. It’s an extremely important job. Although the job can be satisfying, it comes with a high risk of injury, including repetitive strain injuries and injuries caused by violence.

The WSIB operational review report recommends that WSIB and the Conservative government extend mandatory coverage to developmental support workers and those working in residential care facilities. This recommendation should be implemented, and, Speaker, it shouldn’t stop there. All workers in Ontario deserve the right to what is fair: 100% of Ontario’s workers deserve no-fault compensation for workplace injuries, illnesses and disease.

Heddle Shipyards

Ms. Donna Skelly: I rise this morning to congratulate Heddle Shipyards in my hometown of Hamilton on signing a long-term contract with Vancouver-based Seaspan to manufacture ship components. Over the next decade, Heddle will be Seaspan’s main supplier for ladders, gratings and handrails for two navy joint support ships. All of the ship components will bear the Ontario-made label.

The work will create high-skilled, well-paying, year-round jobs for Hamilton, St. Catharines and Thunder Bay’s facilities, and it will generate tens of millions of dollars in economic activity. This contract, Mr. Speaker, will create jobs across Ontario’s advanced manufacturing supply chain and generate the potential for additional opportunities at Heddle for supplying larger ship modules in the future.

This investment is a tremendous opportunity for workers, and it will help revitalize the province’s shipbuilding industry. It means that Ontario’s shipyards will play an increasingly significant role in the National Shipbuilding Strategy.

Mr. Speaker, our Premier has written a letter to the Prime Minister supporting Heddle and Seaspan’s bid to build the polar icebreaker, the next flagship for the Canadian Coast Guard.

The Heddle Shipyards contract reinforces Hamilton’s position as a critical transportation hub sitting at the crossroads of trade and commerce for the province and for the country. It confirms that Ontario has one of the best advanced manufacturing sectors in the world, and it proves that the steps our government has taken to make the province more attractive to business and manufacturers like Heddle Shipyards is creating an environment for investment, job creation and economic recovery.

Environmental protection

Ms. Jennifer K. French: I stood in this House not long ago to stand up for provincially significant wetlands and for Duffins Creek, a beautiful but, more importantly, a vital and necessary wetland in the Durham region. Again, I’m asking this ambitious Premier to stop wrecking the environment. Knock it off with the MZOs, which allow the minister to override local planning rules and run roughshod over environmental protections. Stop weakening conservation authorities. This government has been inundated with calls to stop their attacks on conservation authorities, an attack they snuck into the budget bill, Bill 229, in

schedule 6.

The province’s Greenbelt Council has asked this government to stop moving on MZOs and to remove

schedule 6. The Canadian Environmental Law Association recommends that

schedule 6 be withdrawn and instead recommends that the government support conservation authorities.

From a November letter to the Premier sent by the Chiefs of Ontario, Ontario Regional Chief RoseAnne Archibald writes, “We are all treaty people. Duffins Creek protected wetlands, which has been granted a minister’s zoning order (to fast-track development), happens to be located within the traditional and treaty lands of the Williams and pre-Confederation treaties.”

“Granting an MZO to bypass public participation and due process to rezone the Duffins Creek wetland complex would be incredibly short-sighted, undemocratic, and an infringement of

section 35 and treaty rights.”

“The increased use of MZOs by this government is a disturbing abuse of power, especially when applied to override environmental protections.”

Speaker, voices from across the province are loudly telling this government to stop attacking the lands, the green space, the wetlands and the water. We will never be able to undo the terrible damage this government is hell-bent on doing, and their private-interest priorities are destroying our province.

Small business

Mr. Lorne Coe: Late last week, the government announced that it is providing over $2 million to support Ontario’s 47 small business enterprise centres, led by the Business Advisory Centre Durham, located in Whitby, to create a new Small Business COVID-19 Recovery Network. This network, Speaker, will enhance the capacity of all SBECs across the province to expand their services, supporting businesses throughout Ontario.

Led by Whitby’s Teresa Shaver, the executive director of the Business Advisory Centre Durham, the network will be one central portal where businesses can access digital tools and training, connect with mentors and industry experts, and get information on government programs to help them navigate COVID-19 and beyond. Through this network, up to approximately 100,000 small businesses in Ontario can be reached.

Speaker, as you know, small businesses are the backbone of Ontario’s economy, and they’re making extraordinary sacrifices to keep their employees safe, their customers confident and their communities strong, like Whitby, during this tough time. This new program, located in Whitby, builds on the government’s commitment to be in the corner of small businesses and on previous actions, including our main street recovery plan.

Environmental protection

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: Today I’d like to speak about

schedule 6 of Bill 229, the Conservative government’s budget bill. Many of my constituents have contacted me and government members to express their serious concerns with

schedule 6, which is the latest effort by the Ford government to undermine environmental protections in Ontario by weakening the power of conservation authorities to protect our communities from issues like flooding, while favouring private developers. It will narrow the powers of conservation authorities and will allow developers to bypass them by going straight to the ministry for approvals to build on a flood plain or pave over a wetland.

This is a huge concern for the Windsor-Essex region in particular. Last year, Premier Ford chose to revoke the provincially significant wetlands status of the South Cameron woodlot in my riding in Windsor. Revoking this status opens the door for potential development of 50 acres of the woodlot, a wetland that is critical to flood mitigation.

This is despite the fact that, before this Premier shuttered the office of the Environmental Commissioner, the commissioner reported, “Even a wetland as small as 2 hectares can retain water runoff from an area 70 times its size, buffering against flooding.” In a region where we have seen devastating flooding numerous times in the last few years, this news came as a shock, and raised serious concerns about the disappearance of natural habitats and endangered species.

It is this disregard for our environment that my constituents and I are incredibly concerned about and that we fear will increase with

schedule 6. I am asking this Conservative government to, for once, put aside their deep-pocket private developer friends whose only care is to make billions, to stand with the families in their communities and mine, who cannot afford to lose their homes and belongings to devastating floods—sometimes numerous times. Stand up for endangered species and the natural habitats that are so crucial to the environment and strike out

schedule 6 from Bill 229.

Personnel législatif / Legislative staff

M lle Amanda Simard: Monsieur le Président, puisque c’est l’une de mes dernières déclarations avant qu’on se laisse pour les fêtes, je tenais à sincèrement remercier chacun et chacune ici dans cette Chambre, dans cet édifice, et tous ceux et celles qui nous appuient dans nos travaux parlementaires de la maison.

Ce n’est vraiment pas évident, considérant la nature de notre travail, le fait qu’on doit effectivement être ici en personne, faire le voyagement comté-Toronto, gérer notre personnel, aider nos commettants etc.

Malgré ce stress, cette anxiété et cet ajout de travail, je crois qu’on a travaillé de façon constructive, en réelle collaboration, puisque dans l’espace de seulement trois mois, deux de mes propositions ont été adoptées par le gouvernement. Alors, ceci démontre qu’on peut, et doit, continuer de proposer, débattre et travailler ensemble. Les Ontariens comptent sur nous, maintenant plus que jamais.

Mr. Speaker, we’re so focused on helping people outside this building, our constituents, that we often forget that it’s the people working in this building that essentially make it all happen. And so I want to thank every single person in this chamber: members, House Clerks, interpreters—my most important—security, administration, political staff. The work you do is indispensable at the best of times, and now, during these extremely challenging times, I truly have no words for how grateful I am, so thank you.

Small business

Mr. Stephen Crawford: It’s an honour to rise today to discuss the importance of shopping local. As Christmas and the holiday season approaches and we’re looking for the perfect gift, shopping local has never been more important than this year.

In every part of Ontario, our small businesses have been hit hard by COVID-19, and we need to give back to them since they have given so much to our communities. In Oakville, we have tremendous BIAs and local businesses who need our support.

Recently, Lakeshore Road in downtown Oakville has been reopened and rejuvenated by the Oakville town council with street construction and a streetscape project. Walking through the downtown Oakville BIA, you can find great businesses, like COBS Bread, Seasons Oakville and Barrington’s.

My constituency office is located right in the heart of the Kerr Village and I frequent many businesses within that community. In this area, there is Sandwich Society, Justino’s Wood Oven Pizza and the Wool Bin. Additionally, on December 4, the Kerr Street BIA will be hosting a virtual tree-lighting ceremony, which I encourage everyone to attend.

My riding is also proud to have the Bronte BIA. In the Bronte BIA, we have great shops and restaurants such as Lakeside Livin’, Plank Restobar and El Spero.

These are just a few of the select amazing local businesses that will welcome you in Oakville. Whether you’re looking for a great meal or the perfect gift, my riding of Oakville has everything. Small local businesses are often family-owned. They are the backbone of our communities and they need our support this year more than ever.

Small business

Mr. Chris Glover: I’ve been speaking with dozens of business owners over the past couple of weeks and they are wondering why small business owners are bearing the economic brunt of the pandemic. They need more relief measures.

Arturo, who owns the Milagro restaurant, and Zeeshan, who owns Naan and Chai restaurant, are incredibly successful entrepreneurs in Toronto’s very tough restaurant business, but they are struggling.

Aaron Binder, who owns a tour company in the Distillery District, and Louie Cristello, who owns the Banknote restaurants, say that Digital Main Street and the $1,000 PPE are not enough and deferring taxes is not helping; it’s creating a mountain of debt that business owners can’t pay off. They also talked about the unfairness towards small business owners.

JM Ghent, the fourth-generation owner of Curry’s art supplies, has a 10,000-square-foot store, and he’s asking why the government is allowing big box stores to open and he can’t even have three customers in his massive store.

Tonny Louie, the president of the Chinatown BIA, says, “They let the big box stores open and make billions of dollars. Meanwhile the main street businesses can’t survive.”

One business owner says, “The Conservative government is forcing the little people out of the game, then the big corporations can have more.”

It’s not only unfair that this government is not providing the supports that these businesses need to survive, but if this government continues to let them collapse, we will all suffer because it will take years for our economy to recover. To the government: Please listen to these business owners. Don’t just provide some support. Provide them with what they need to survive the pandemic.

Life insurance

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: A month ago, my private member’s bill, the Life Settlements and Loans Act, passed second reading.

For almost a century now, Ontario seniors have been blocked from accessing the fair market value of their life insurance policies. If passed, Bill 219 would modernize Ontario’s Insurance Act and give our seniors the same options seniors have had for decades in Quebec, Europe, the UK, US and Japan.

I want to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has called or written to express their support over the last month. This includes Professor Steve Pulver of York University; Peter Martin, a fellow at the Canadian Institute of Actuaries; and even Michael Strain, the CEO of a life insurance company, the Grand Orange Lodge of British America. He has seen many policy holders become stressed financially, and the cash surrender value just isn’t enough to really help them.

Based on his experience, being able to access the equity in their life insurance policies that is built up over many decades of premium payments through a well-run secondary market would be one of the most consumer-friendly options available. On the other hand, to continue to deny consumers access to the valuable asset they funded for years at a time when many of them desperately need it is simply not appropriate.

Speaker, I couldn’t agree more, and I’m looking forward to public hearings on this bill in the early new year.

Long-term care

Mr. Mike Harris: Two weeks ago, I had the opportunity to share some exciting news with the seniors in my riding, especially those in Wilmot township. Our government is moving forward with an expansion of the Nithview Community, a long-term care home in New Hamburg operated by Tri-County Mennonite Homes. This expansion will include 95 new beds and will modernize 97 beds, creating a 192-bed home on the existing campus of care.

Speaker, we know that the previous government neglected long-term care. In 10 years, they only built—get this—611 new beds across the entire province, meaning seniors in my riding have been left to languish on growing wait-lists.

Getting more long-term-care beds in Waterloo region is one of my top priorities, and our government has been making progress. In addition to the expansion of the Nithview Community, alongside the member for Kitchener South–Hespeler, I announced an additional $41 million for three projects in Waterloo region.

Our government’s new funding model, which will get beds built faster, is benefiting Schlegel Villages Winston Park, peopleCare AR Goudie and Cambridge Country Manor. All together, these four projects will bring almost 600 new and upgraded beds to the region of Waterloo.

I’d like to thank our Minister of Long-Term Care for her commitment to ensuring our seniors can get the high quality care that they deserve closer to their families and loved ones, by building 30,000 new long-term-care beds over the next 10 years. I hope to have the opportunity to share more good news with my constituents very soon.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): That concludes our member statements.

The member for Glengarry–Prescott–Russell has informed me she has a point of order she would like to raise at this time.

M lle Amanda Simard: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m seeking unanimous consent that orders for the second and third reading of Bill 236,

An Act in respect of food and beverage delivery fees, be immediately called and the questions be now put without debate and amendment so that there are no further delays and small businesses can get immediate relief from price gouging on delivery fees.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: On that point of order—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Yes. The member for Timmins wishes to speak to the point of order.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Mr. Speaker, we would be glad to have a very quick debate at second reading, just to put it on the record—five minutes for each party—in order to get this into committee and to make sure that this bill actually applies to all businesses in Ontario. If she could amend it that way, we would be amenable.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Glengarry–Prescott–Russell is seeking unanimous consent of the House that orders for second and third reading of Bill 236,

An Act in respect of food and beverage delivery fees, be immediately called and the questions be now put without debate and amendment. Agreed? I heard a no.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The House has made its decision on that point of order.

It is now time for oral questions.

Question Period

Long-term care

Mr. John Vanthof: My question is to the Premier. Over the weekend, 12 more families learned that their loved ones had died in Ontario long-term-care homes. The Premier promised that he would leave no stone unturned in the search for answers in the problems of fixing Ontario’s long-term-care system.

If that’s the case, why, as reported in QP Briefing, is he currently impeding the efforts of his own commission on long-term care to get information?

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

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: First of all, my heart goes out to everyone who has been affected by this. Looking at the recent numbers, there are ongoing issues in some of the homes, and we are taking every measure and every tool to address those. We have a much better responsive system that has evolved over the current process of this pandemic.

I want to emphasize that Ontario is not alone in its challenges with COVID. We are taking every measure, every tool, as I said, including the rapid tests, including making sure that we’re doing more frequent testing in our homes. This is an invisible intruder that we will continue to put every resource into.

Looking at other provinces that are being affected in this wave 2—this is an invisible intruder, and our measures are ongoing. We will continue to learn about what further we can do and continue to address the concerns in these homes and get them the support that they need.

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

Mr. John Vanthof: I guess I’ll try the question again—the same question in another tack. In the summer, the Premier blocked the full public judicial inquiry, but he insisted that the truth would come out: “I want to get down to the bottom of this. I need answers, I want answers.”

A government that truly understands the sense of urgency in long-term care shouldn’t work this hard to hide the facts. Will the Premier or the Minister of Long-Term Care release all documents to the commission today and start publicly reporting on what documents have been requested by the commission and which ones have actually been provided?

Interjections.

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

Ms. Peggy Sattler: Open and transparent—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Minister of Long-Term Care to respond.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: I reject the characterization of your question, to the member opposite. We have been absolutely transparent—this is an independent commission; it was designed to be transparent, and we have been providing all the information that a variety of groups are asking for. This has required thousands of hours of staff time, and we are getting this information to the commission. Their early guidance has been very well-received. We appreciate everything that they are doing on this.

We want to be transparent; we are being transparent. We are getting them their information, along with other groups who are asking for it. So I want to thank the commissioners; they are highly respected and eminent in their fields, and our government is doing everything it can to get them the information that they are requesting in a timely way while dealing with many other requests as well. We are being transparent, and I reject the characterization of your question.

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

Mr. John Vanthof: It might be costing the government thousands of hours of staff time, but it’s also costing thousands of lives.

For families worried about loved ones in long-term care, the lack of urgency and pattern of secrecy from the Premier and the Minister of Long-Term Care is frightening. Families after the first wave were promised this would never happen again. They were promised protection. They were promised answers. Will the Premier and the Minister of Long-Term Care stop blocking the efforts to actually get those answers?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Once again, I absolutely reject the characterization of that question. There is no question about the transparency of this government’s efforts to provide the information in a timely way. We are dealing with many stresses, as you can imagine, making sure that our homes are the focus of our energy, making sure that they are getting the support that they need in an integrated effort with Ontario Health, Public Health Ontario, our hospitals, which I am so thankful for their integration and their assistance, and taking the medical and scientific advice as it evolves.

We are being transparent, we will continue to be transparent and we will provide the commission with the information that they are requesting, in a timely way, as we deal with pandemic effects in our long-term-care homes, on our staff and on the residents there. I reject the premise of your question.

Employment standards

Ms. Sara Singh: This weekend, families saw COVID-19 case counts continue to climb, despite this government’s claim that the curve was flattening. That’s especially frightening for people who have been deemed essential workers and don’t have the option of working from home.

On Friday, Ontario’s big-city mayors joined the call for paid sick days so that working people don’t have to choose between a day’s pay and staying safe. After so many months, why is this government still resisting this common-sense public health measure? Is it at the advice of the chief medical officer?

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

Hon. Monte McNaughton: I thank the member opposite for this question, Mr. Speaker. We’ll continue to stand behind the workers in this province every single step of the way during COVID-19. In fact, as the member opposite knows, the very first measure we brought in was a passing of Bill 186, which told any worker across the province that if they are impacted by COVID-19, they can’t be fired for that. If they’re staying home to look after a son or daughter, for example, or if they are in isolation or in quarantine, they won’t be fired for that. And sick notes are no longer required.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to give credit to the Premier for leading the charge across the country to bring in over $1 billion of paid sick leave for people in Ontario.

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

Ms. Sara Singh: COVID-19 has hit Brampton and Scarborough especially hard. These are communities full of essential workers who do not have the privilege of staying and working from home. They are going to work and keeping our supply chain moving so that other people can stay safe. But these workers need to know that if they do fall ill, they can stay home and isolate without fear of lost wages or work.

On Friday, the chief medical officer said what New Democrats have been saying for months: This government should be ensuring that all workers have paid sick days. Will the government follow that advice and table legislation to provide all workers with paid sick days today?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: Mr. Speaker, nobody should have to choose between their job and their health. That’s why we passed the most progressive legislation in North America to protect jobs during COVID-19. It was literally on day one. We were all here in the Legislature to pass Bill 186, which told every single worker in this province that if they’re in isolation, if they’re in quarantine, if they have to stay home and look after a son or a daughter because of the disruptions in the education system in those early days, they can’t be fired for that. Furthermore, sick notes are no longer required while COVID-19 is here in the province of Ontario.

But Mr. Speaker, on July 16, the Premier of Ontario led the charge to sign an agreement with the federal government to bring in over $1 billion of paid sick days for workers in this province. That’s 10 paid sick days. I’m proud of our Premier for leading the charge and standing behind every single worker in this province.

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

Ms. Sara Singh: Speaker, just to be clear, that’s a federal program that most workers aren’t able to access.

Brampton is now a hot spot for COVID-19, with cases spiking across our city. We know everyone in the community is doing all that they can, but they need help from this government.

The chief medical officer, Dr. Williams, confirmed on Friday what health experts, workers’ advocates and New Democrats have been saying for months: Paid sick days will help stop the spread of COVID-19 in cities like Brampton or Scarborough. Why is the government ignoring this advice?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by saying to all of those workers who have worked every single day, those millions of workers across the province—those front-line health care heroes, those truck drivers, those grocery store clerks, and the more than half a million people who have been working every single day in the construction industry to build those hospitals and those testing assessment centres for COVID. We’re standing behind those workers every single day. As I said, we passed Bill 186, which ensured that no worker could be fired because of COVID-19.

The Premier signed an agreement on July 16; he led the charge. He brought all the territorial and provincial leaders together to sign an historic agreement between the federal government and all the provinces and territories to provide, in Ontario alone, $1.1 billion. Those applications opened on September 27. I commend the federal government, and we’re going to continue working as a government with every level of government.

COVID-19 response

Ms. Marit Stiles: This question is for the Premier. In August, the member from Nickel Belt and I wrote to the Chief Medical Officer of Health to ask about a province-wide school surveillance plan for testing, early detection and contact tracing. It never happened. Now, four months later, nearly halfway through the school year and well into a devastating second wave, the government has finally announced a voluntary testing program for some schools in some regions. Over the weekend, that testing uncovered at least 19 more cases among students at Thorncliffe public school, with more positive cases expected.

Mr. Speaker, 670 schools have reported cases in this province, but we simply don’t have the data to know what the real number is. Why did the government wait so long to start testing in our schools?

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

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The commitment of this government and Premier is to ensure that we keep kids and staff safe in Ontario. It is why we have ensured every layer of prevention is in place according to the public health advice, including the Chief Medical Officer of Health’s, who has endorsed our plan.

The member opposite spoke about the number of cases in schools. There are 86% of schools in this province that have no active case at all. In the context of asymptomatic testing, yes, indeed, we did expand, working with the Ministry of Health, into the highest-risk regions with high rates of community transmission to ensure, as was done in the case of Thorncliffe, that cases are ultimately identified and isolated from the school to prevent, to mitigate further spread.

We’re grateful for the work of public health and the collaboration on the ground. We will continue, as the Premier has made clear, to do whatever it takes to overcome the challenge of COVID-19.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: We know from the auditor’s report that the testing system failed because this government put saving money ahead of protecting people in this province.

When it comes to our schools and the safety of our students, we cannot let them do this again. We need a robust, fully staffed in-school testing program. We need supports for families that test positive, including—yes—paid sick days, space to isolate.

Community spread is growing in Brampton, Mississauga, Kitchener-Waterloo, Etobicoke, Humber River, Weston, Black Creek, Scarborough, Windsor. Thursday’s last-minute plan with those remaining federal dollars simply isn’t going to get the job done. It is a matter of equity.

Why, after all these months, is the government still reacting to this virus instead of listening to the experts, planning ahead and investing the resources necessary to keep our schools open and our students safe?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Mr. Speaker, we absolutely agree that keeping students and staff safe is a priority. When you look at the fact that 99.94% of students in this province do not have active cases and 99.9% of staff do not have active cases, I think it underscores that the plan put in place—fully endorsed by the Chief Medical Officer of Health, fully funded by the Premier—is helping to mitigate the spread of COVID-19.

The member opposite spoke about certain regions of rising numbers of COVID transmission: in Waterloo, in Durham. In Halton and Hamilton last week, the Premier and I announced additional surge funding for those very communities to do more hiring, to ensure that they can combat COVID-19 within schools. Of course, weeks prior, we announced it in Ottawa, in Toronto, in York and in Peel to further ensure that students in Ontario—

Ms. Marit Stiles: Why did you wait four months?

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

Minister of Education, please wind up your response.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: We put these monies in place, part of a $1.3-billion allocation, to ensure that we keep students safe, to ensure that we fundamentally work hard with public health to ensure every student and every staff person is safe in the province. We will continue to do that over the course of the coming weeks as we look forward to 2021.

COVID-19 response

Ms. Donna Skelly: My question is for the Minister of Finance. We know that responding to the COVID-19 health crisis and the economic challenges it poses has necessitated collaboration from all levels of government as we work together to respond. Will the Minister of Finance please share with the House what concrete actions the governments of Ontario and Canada have been able to deliver together for the people of Ontario?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Thank you to the member from Flamborough–Glanbrook—a great representative and does a great job of representing her constituents.

The member is absolutely right: COVID-19 has required all governments and indeed all parties to work together to protect Canadians and Ontarians. At the beginning of this pandemic, Premier Ford made a non-negotiable promise to do what it took to get Ontarians through this pandemic, and that’s exactly what this government has done. Since the onset of this pandemic, we have had historic collaboration with the federal government—the $7 billion secured for Ontario for the Safe Restart Agreement, a very important and historic agreement, part of $19 billion secured by all provinces.

That included $1.5 billion of pandemic pay for our front-line heroes—again, a joint expenditure to support 378,000 front-line workers—and $900 million of urgent relief for our rent relief program.

We look forward to the federal Minister of Finance’s financial statement today and further opportunities to partner with the federal government.

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

Ms. Donna Skelly: I am proud to be part of a government that understands the challenges that families face in Ontario and have been inspired to see our government take the necessary steps, in collaboration with the federal government, to ensure that they are provided the support that they need and the support that they deserve.

Mr. Speaker, will the minister please share with the House what the people of Ontario would like to see in this update?

Hon. Rod Phillips: I thank the member for the question. The theme of Ontario’s budget—protect, support and recover—would also be a good theme for our federal partners. So I might suggest to Minister Freeland some of the areas for her to collaborate would include listening to our provincial Premiers, who have unanimously called for an increase of transfers through the Canada Health Transfer of 35%. That conversation needs to begin to happen.

The Premiers have also unanimously called for $10 billion a year for the next 10 years for vital infrastructure. Again, unanimously, the provinces across the country have said this is important.

And our government has recently, now, raised its commitment to rural broadband to $1 billion. This is the infrastructure of the 21st century. We would also like to see our federal partners lean in to support Ontarians and Canadians.

We look forward to this afternoon’s federal financial statement.

Small business

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is to the Premier. On Friday, despite the lockdown restrictions in place, we saw hundreds of people deep line up outside of big box stores and megamalls across the GTA. But for small, family-owned shops on main street, their doors remained barred and they’re just barely hanging on.

Last week, the Premier told everyone that they need to get out and shop at their local shops and businesses; the problem for those businesses, though, is that the Premier shut all those businesses down, with little financial support. Speaker, if you can buy shoes and books and flowers at Walmart, then you’re creating an unlevel playing field for main street businesses.

So my question, through you to the Premier: If you won’t level the playing field, because clearly you’ve resisted that, will you at the very least provide small businesses with the direct financial support that they deserve to stay open?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Flamborough–Glanbrook.

Ms. Donna Skelly: Our government recognizes that small and main street businesses are the backbone of Ontario’s economy. That is why our main street recovery plan was designed based on over 100 virtual meetings, round tables and discussions with owners, workers and economists. But most importantly, Mr. Speaker, it was also based on the largest-ever stakeholder consultation in the history of this province.

Our plan draws from across government and builds on more than $10 billion in urgent economic relief provided through our COVID-19 action plan. Mr. Speaker, our government recognizes the importance and the role that small business plays in Ontario. That is why we have put in place a plan that will help them rebuild, invest and grow through the COVID-19 crisis and beyond.

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

Ms. Catherine Fife: Well, businesses don’t need more consultation if you don’t listen to what they’re actually saying.

The Premier wants to pretend he’s on the side of small business, but since day one of this crisis, he’s done everything in his power to make things actually harder for them. He ignored their calls for rent relief, waiting for the feds to bail us out instead. He dragged his feet on the evictions ban, as hundreds of small businesses closed their doors forever. And now, during the busiest shopping time of the year, he’s handing out lumps of coal to small businesses across the province.

Speaker, we know that these Conservatives are not tired of their own mixed messages and vague directives and half measures, but businesses in the province of Ontario are exhausted. We need this Premier to level the playing field. So when is he going to step up and ensure that small businesses get the same support this government gives to the big box stores, the big corporations and the Premier’s friends?

Ms. Donna Skelly: Mr. Speaker, I would like to say again that our main street recovery plan was designed based on hundreds—actually, more than that, thousands—of consultations across Ontario with small and medium-sized businesses. The plan draws from across government and builds on, and I have to say this again, more than $10 billion—that’s with a B—in urgent economic relief provided through the COVID-19 action plan.

Our plan includes the Main Street Recovery Act. It’s a plan that will modernize the rules to help small businesses. It includes programs like the $1,000 main street recovery grant to fund PPE. It is a plan that includes the recovery network and our small business recovery web page.

Mr. Speaker, as I’ve said and as we’ve heard so many times in this House, our government recognizes the value of small businesses, and that is why we are working so closely with them to help them rebuild, invest and grow beyond the pandemic.

Restaurant industry

M lle Amanda Simard: Ma question au gouvernement : It took this government over six months to respond to pleas from small business owners, over six months to place a cap on the commission fees charged by food delivery services. I first asked for this in May, both in this chamber and in a letter written to the associate minister. After numerous times asking over the past six months, I was given the standard fluff response that is basically, “Got it, but no.”

Mr. Speaker, how can the minister justify why this simple legislation that the community asked for from the onset of the pandemic took so long to be introduced, when other jurisdictions did so months ago? Why is this government always late to the party, causing even more unnecessary damage to already vulnerable sectors?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Flamborough–Glanbrook again to reply.

Ms. Donna Skelly: Speaker, I want to remind you that our government has, from day one, listened to the voices and the concerns of small business owners right across Ontario. Our government is committed to making Ontario open for business, open for jobs and open for opportunity. It’s something that you heard at the beginning when we were first elected, and it’s a message that we carry through COVID-19.

Everywhere we have gone across Ontario, our job creators told us the same thing: Our regulatory burdens were weighing them down, and that is why, Mr. Speaker, we have worked diligently to get rid of these burdensome regulations. They have had a negative impact on everyday Ontarians, making their interactions with government and access to services unnecessarily difficult. That applies to small businesses and restaurant owners right across Ontario.

Mr. Speaker, I will say again and again and again: That is why our government has put in place a plan that will help businesses, restaurant owners and all small businesses right across our province rebuild, invest and grow, through this pandemic and beyond.

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

M lle Amanda Simard: This legislation, while long overdue, is a welcome beginning of actual support for restaurant owners, but again it falls short in supporting restaurant owners who are able to open but with such reduced capacity that they rely almost entirely on takeout orders and, therefore, delivery companies. Those small business owners are still facing incredible difficulties and they’re not receiving any protection from high commission fees or any support from this government.

Now that we will be debating this legislation and proposing amendments, will the minister even the playing field by placing a cap on commission fees for all restaurants in Ontario for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic and keep this measure in place for at least six months after indoor dining resumes to ensure that restaurants can get back on their feet?

Ms. Donna Skelly: Once again, I want to share all of the things that our government has done to help small business across Ontario—restaurant owners and all small businesses, regardless of where they operate in our fine province. As I said earlier, our government is committed to making Ontario open for business. We have put in place legislation; we have made changes that help businesses right across Ontario.

Everywhere we have gone, Ontario was telling us, “Please get rid of burdensome regulations,” and that is what we are doing through the numerous pieces of legislation we’ve brought forward in this session, and prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Mr. Speaker, we will continue to work with small businesses right across our province to ensure they can keep their doors open through the pandemic and that they can grow and hire more Ontarians once we pass this pandemic.

Tenant protection

Disadvantaged tenants have no access to anyone to help them navigate a complex legal system or to advocate for them when they need it most. Evictions are being rubber-stamped in as little as 60 seconds, while tenants don’t even know what’s going on in these online hearings.

Why is the Premier fast-tracking evictions of thousands of tenants in the middle of a pandemic?

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

Hon. Doug Downey: I appreciate the chance to speak on such an important topic for our government. Throughout COVID-19, you’ve seen, in the emergency recovery, that our government has been focused on keeping Ontarians safe and addressing the impacts of COVID-19 on tenants and landlords. As the threat of the pandemic began to spread, we took action. We’re working with our partners, we’re working with the legal representatives, the clinics to make sure that we have right-sizing for the hearings, to make sure that people do have access to those phone hearings and to Zoom hearings where possible.

Mr. Speaker, we know that it’s important that people have the ability to feel safe and to be safe. We’re taking actions to make sure that the system is running as smoothly as possible. We’ll continue to monitor that situation and work with tribunals, as an independent group, and we’ll make sure that people get their hearings, that they get the ability to be heard, and the protections that the Landlord and Tenant Board offers to the tenants, as well.

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

Ms. Suze Morrison: The Premier, the Attorney General and the minister responsible for municipal affairs and housing have all known about the problems at the Landlord and Tenant Board for months, but instead of fixing those problems, they are proceeding with an eviction blitz. Why would a government undertake mass evictions in the middle of a pandemic? The upcoming release of the Ombudsman’s investigation into the massive backlog at the board might have something to do with it.

Speaker, this government sat on its hands for months and refused to appoint adjudicators to the board, and are now trying to course-correct the backlog that you created by compromising human rights and evicting tenants as fast as you can in the middle of a pandemic. Lives are at stake here. In the United States, researchers found that lifting of state moratoriums on evictions caused over 10,000 deaths from COVID-19—10,000 additional deaths from COVID-19.

Will the Premier immediately reinstate the moratorium on evictions to protect the health and safety of vulnerable and low-income tenants in Ontario?

Hon. Doug Downey: Again, I’m pleased to rise on behalf of the government and address this very serious issue of people needing the ability to have their hearings. If we don’t have hearings, the NDP are upset that we’re not having hearings and a backlog is being created; if we don’t have enough adjudicators, they say that we’re not doing our job.

We currently have the greatest number of adjudicators it has ever had, permanent and full-time, so that the Landlord and Tenant Board can function appropriately. They complain when we don’t have enough adjudicators. Now they’re complaining we have adjudicators, and now they’re complaining that we’re making adjudicators work. I just don’t know in what direction they want to go, Mr. Speaker, but I can tell you this: They might want to look in the mirror and ask themselves whether it’s appropriate that they show up in Landlord and Tenant Board hearings and give evidence as MPPs.

Autism treatment

Mr. Stephen Blais: My question is for the Premier. In the government’s 2020 budget, it read, “The province doubled funding in the Ontario Autism Program to $600 million annually, beginning in 2019-20.” Mr. Speaker, the former Minister of Children, Community and Social Services told the House seven times that $600 million would be spent on autism services. The current minister has told the House no less than 14 times that autism services would be funded to the tune of $600 million.

Mr. Speaker, can the Premier explain to the House why the official public accounts directly contradict his ministers and his own budget, and show that the government has only spent $434 million in 2019-20?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Associate Minister of Children and Women’s Issues.

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Thank you to the member for the question. The Minister of Children, Community and Social Services, in his recent statement on September 3, announced that our government will be spending a combined $1.2 billion to support children and youth on the autism spectrum over the 2019-20 and 2020-21 fiscal years.

Last December, our government committed to providing interim one-time funding for families who were on the wait-list. Those who were on the wait-list by March 31, 2020, who have submitted their applications for one-time funding have received their payment. We continue to issue payments as families register for the programs and complete their application forms. Many of these payments will not be reported in public accounts until next year as the payments to families are being reported in the year in which they were made.

The past six months dealing with COVID-19 have been difficult for many families, but even more challenging for those families who have been home with no access to their normal supports. That’s why the ministry has ensured that families still have 90 days from the date of their invitation letter to accept the funding.

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

Mr. Stephen Blais: Families with children with autism are being betrayed once again. I’m not sure why we would believe that they’re going to spend more next year when they didn’t spend everything they told us they would spend last year.

The lack of support for these families has compounded the already precarious situation that they find themselves in as a result of COVID-19. Parents in my riding have told me that they find themselves stuck in limbo because of failure to access the supports that they need, because the government isn’t providing the funding for those supports.

Mr. Speaker, to the Premier: Why should parents trust anything this government is telling them about supporting autism, and when will the government stop shortchanging these families and give them the desperate supports that they need?

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Thank you to the member for your supplementary. Mr. Speaker, the member opposite’s plan for the Ontario Autism Program failed to respond to the growing needs for autism services in this province. While the former government was in power and that member sat around the cabinet table, along with Stephen Del Duca, the wait-list for autism services skyrocketed in this province.

According to the Financial Accountability Officer, between 2012 and 2018, the autism wait-list grew by a staggering 47.8% per year. Our government undertook the unprecedented step of doubling the Ontario Autism Program’s funding, and we will be spending a combined $1.2 billion over the 2019-20 and 2020-21 fiscal years, as more than twice as many children are receiving supports as we transition to the new needs-based program designed by the autism community.

Environmental protection

Ms. Donna Skelly: Mr. Speaker, the previous Liberal government had over a decade to help Ontario prepare for the impacts of climate change. Instead, it created a carbon pricing scheme that would have sent almost $500 million—Ontario dollars—to California and Quebec by 2020.

The Liberals’ own environment minister said their 2017 carbon pricing scheme was not a real solution to addressing the country’s emissions. The people of Ontario deserve a government that will ensure these important environmental issues are addressed in a way that considers Ontario’s priorities, regional-based challenges and opportunities in rural and northern communities.

I know the ministry recently celebrated the two-year anniversary of its Made-in-Ontario Environment Plan. Can the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks share with the House how the government, unlike the last Liberal government, is actually protecting air, land and water?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Scarborough–Guildwood will come to order. The member for Orléans will come to order.

The Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks will answer the question.

Hon. Jeff Yurek: I thank the member from Flamborough–Glanbrook for that question. I know it’s really hard for the members of the independent party to understand the truth of what really occurred, but our government is committed to protecting and conserving our environment. We want to ensure that Ontario’s natural beauty can be enjoyed for generations to come. Thanks to our blueprint environment plan and the strength of our relationships with many of our partners, we have made considerable progress over the past two years.

Some of the accomplishments are finalizing Ontario’s emissions performance standards for large industrial emitters, to ensure polluters are accountable; transitioning Ontario’s blue box to a producer responsibility model; and becoming the first province to require fuel suppliers to increase the amount of renewable content in regular-grade gasoline to 15%.

Mr. Speaker, unlike the previous government, we recognize that there’s an important symbiotic relationship between supporting a healthy environment and a healthy economy. Both can be done, and our progress is proof of that.

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

Ms. Donna Skelly: When it comes to the environment, there are no quick fixes. The environment is simply not a static thing. It doesn’t make sense for anyone to advocate for a plan that doesn’t adapt to emerging issues and trends or one that does not address the real-time needs of this province.

Under the previous Liberal government, and backed by the NDP, the people of Ontario watched their hard-earned dollars used on expensive and ineffective policies that did not deliver results. Ontarians expected the previous government would have brought forward environmental policies that were effective; unfortunately, that’s simply not what happened.

Now more than ever—the pressures of COVID-19—it’s important that we have clean air to breathe, safe water to drink and well-protected lands to enjoy. So will the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks commit today that this government will implement effective and affordable solutions so that the environment is protected now and into the future?

Hon. Jeff Yurek: Thanks again for that question. Our government recognizes the importance of adapting our plan to new challenges, as well as new innovations and data and research that emerge so it addresses the priorities of the province.

We know there’s still a lot of work to be done, and that is why we’ve already started to move forward on some of our next steps under our plan, including moving to phase out food and organic waste sent to landfill by 2030; supporting wetland restoration and creation in priority areas in Ontario, in partnership with Ducks Unlimited Canada; continuing initiatives, such as the Ontario’s Living Legacy, which was cancelled by the previous government; and providing young Ontarians with more opportunities to share their insights by establishing a youth climate advisory group.

We’re proud of our accomplishments on this side of the House, especially during these unprecedented and challenging times. We’ll continue to make progress as we work to support a healthy economy and a healthy environment.

COVID-19 response

Ms. Peggy Sattler: My question is to the Premier. My community is experiencing the biggest COVID outbreak of the pandemic at London Health Sciences Centre: 3 new outbreak-linked cases were reported among LHSE staff and patients over the weekend, bringing the total cases to 65. Two patients who acquired COVID in the hospital have died, their families shocked and grieving.

On Friday, the Middlesex-London Health Unit issued a letter to the hospital with 25 instructions on strict measures that must be taken to get the outbreak under control.

Will the Premier commit to providing whatever supports and resources are needed by the hospital to ensure compliance with these critical public health directives?

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

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank the member very much for the question. This is a serious concern, and one that we’re keeping daily contact with Dr. Mackie on, the local medical officer of health for the London area. Dr. Williams does that.

We have been supplying them with whatever assistance they need because we want to make sure that the patients, of course, are kept safe, the staff are kept safe and it’s confined, as much as possible, within the hospital. We don’t want it to continue to spread. So whatever assistance the hospital requires, of course we will be there to help support them to protect lives and to make sure that we contain the spread as much as we can within the hospital.

But part of it’s coming in from the community, as you know. That’s why some of the restrictions have been placed on the London area, but we are continuing to monitor it very closely on a daily basis.

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

Ms. Peggy Sattler: Dr. Mackie has said that, for the past nine days, 50% of the cases in our region have been linked to the LHSE outbreak, with transmission occurring within the hospital. Six hospital wards are now confirmed to have cases, including organ transplants, cardiovascular surgery, palliative and orthopedics. This has once again forced the cancellation of non-urgent surgeries and procedures.

London was already at the bottom of the list for the longest surgical wait times in Ontario, particularly for joint replacements. This cancellation is devastating to those whose surgeries were postponed during wave 1 and to those who are still waiting for their procedures to be booked.

What is this government’s plan to ensure that access to surgeries is restored for Londoners and to prevent any future surgical cancellations at LHSC once this outbreak is under control?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Clearly, in order to be able to proceed with these surgeries and other procedures that had to be postponed during wave 1, it’s going to be very important to get this COVID outbreak under control. That’s why we have been in touch with Dr. Mackie; we will continue to be. We will supply the hospital with whatever other resources they need. If it’s more personal protective equipment, they know that it’s available on a daily basis. That can be ordered. If they need more human resources, if they need more staff, we’ll help supply more staff there. But clearly, we need to get that done in order to be able to proceed with those surgeries.

We know that there’s a backlog. We know that we need to proceed with them. If you lose a loved one to COVID, that’s tragic, but it’s equally tragic if you lose a loved one because they haven’t received their cancer or cardiac surgery on time. That is a key part of our fall preparedness plan, to keep those surgeries going. But we need to deal with the COVID outbreak first, and then we will move as quickly as we can to get back on track in dealing with those backlogs.

Small business

Mr. Mike Schreiner: Good morning, Speaker. My question is for the Premier.

Day after day, the Premier stands in front of the cameras and says that he feels for small business owners. While they likely welcome his sympathy, I’m sure they would prefer strong action from this Premier to help them. At a minimum, small businesses want a level playing field—a chance not to be rolled over by big box stores that can remain open.

Unlike Ontario, Manitoba requires big box stores to cordon off aisles of non-essential goods. Can the Premier explain to small business owners why big box stores can sell books, flowers, electronics, clothes and other non-essential goods when those in lockdown areas cannot?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Finance to respond.

Hon. Rod Phillips: I appreciate the member from Guelph’s question. I am taking from that that he supports the government’s public health measures, understands the importance of them and understands, therefore, the need for us to work within those.

That’s why this government has provided unprecedented support for our small businesses: $600 million. That’s double the original number, and that’s because these measures have been required, again, because of the necessary public health that we have to observe for us to expand that support. My colleague has already talked about our main street support program. I’ll also talk about the $57 million for our Digital Main Street program.

I’d also like to perhaps ask the member back about his support for the vital, vital changes that we’re making in terms of property taxes. I know that his mayor in Guelph supports the idea of the creation of a small business property tax class. I know he supports our cuts to the education property tax and our electricity rate cuts. Mr. Speaker, I would be interested in the member from Guelph—if he supports those further supports today and for the future for small business.

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

Mr. Mike Schreiner: Of course I support supports for small businesses, but I will not take my marching orders from the CEO of Walmart Canada. I will take my marching orders from small business owners across this province.

CFIB CEO Dan Kelly said the Premier—he didn’t say Premier, but I’ll say Premier—“has unfortunately signed the death warrant of thousands and thousands of businesses.” Of course small businesses understand that we have to take public health measures to save lives. But they are asking this government to throw them a lifeline.

Quebec is offering small businesses in lockdown areas grants of up to $15,000 a month to help keep them alive during this pandemic. Speaker, I ask the minister: Will the Ontario government step up with direct financial support, similar to Quebec, to help keep small businesses alive in Ontario?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, this government is providing those direct government supports, direct supports in terms of dollars well beyond those referenced by the member.

I am disappointed. I noted the quote from his mayor, Cam Guthrie, that he disagrees with Mike Schreiner. He supports the idea of property tax relief, unlike the member from Guelph, who apparently does not.

Interjection.

Hon. Rod Phillips: I’m just quoting your mayor.

I should comment that Mr. Guthrie has just completed his term as head of the Big City Mayors. I know that we, on this side, appreciate the hard work that he did in that regard.

But Mr. Speaker, this government has been for small business since it was elected. It will continue to be for small business, providing the supports—not just the immediate relief that we’re providing, but also the ongoing supports. Again, I ask the member to reconsider his lack of support for property tax reductions, for electricity reductions and for payroll tax reductions that will support small businesses today and in the future.

COVID-19 response

M me France Gélinas: Ma question est pour le premier minister.

Last week, the Ontario Nurses’ Association wrote to our Chief Medical Officer of Health; the letter is concerning. It states that Ontario has not updated public health directives to recognize the aerosol risk that COVID presents, although it’s been two months since the Centers for Disease Control did it and one month since public health Canada updated their directive.

Speaker, from the beginning, Ontario has refused to use the precautionary principle, the number one lesson we learned from SARS, and 9,554 health care workers got infected and eight long-term-care workers have died from COVID.

Now, the science is here: The coronavirus transmits through aerosol. That means that all front-line health care workers need access to N95 respirators or better when caring for suspected or infected people.

When is this government going to listen to science, listen to public health experts and update their directive on COVID-19 transmission?

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

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you to the member for the question. If a front-line health care worker is performing an aerosol-generating procedure they, of course, do have access to N95 masks. That’s important for their protection going forward.

But the idea of further generation just through air transmission is another matter. That’s something that is still very controversial. Not all of the experts agree on that. Most of the experts right now believe that it is generated through water droplets and aerosol-generating procedures; however, not everyone believes that. The science is still being developed in that area and we are still awaiting some of the results. Not everyone has come forward, even with some of the Canadian evidence and some of the evidence from the Centers for Disease Control.

We’re continuing to follow it very closely because we are making decisions based on clinical evidence and based on science.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary question? The member for Sudbury.

Mr. Jamie West: Back to the Premier: Ignoring science costs lives. COVID-19 is a clear aerosol risk and Ontario still hasn’t updated public health directives recognizing this.

In my riding of Sudbury, the first wave of COVID-19 caused the loss of a life at St. Joseph’s Continuing Care. The Minister of Long-Term Care continues to state that long-term-care homes have the PPE they require; however, Jo-Anne Palkovits, the CEO of St. Joseph’s complex continuing care hospital and the CEO of two long-term-care homes, has been trying to replenish her stock of N95 masks since June. Count along with me: June, July, August, September, October, November—it will be December tomorrow morning.

Speaker, the Premier needs to listen to science. We need to update the directives and get the badly needed N95s into our province’s long-term-care and retirement homes.

After several months of delay, will the Premier commit to finally getting the N95 masks to St. Joseph’s Continuing Care in Sudbury?

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

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. Let me reiterate that our government’s top priority is the safety and well-being of residents in long-term care, and all Ontarians. This is something that our government has demonstrated not only with its policy; most recently, in October, the $540 million—over half a billion dollars—to go towards efforts to improve IPAC. That included $2.8 million to make sure that our long-term-care homes have the personal protective equipment that they require.

Homes in outbreak do have access to the N95s, and homes can contact the regional tables and make sure that they get the shipments that they need. This is something that we are absolutely committed to, and I’m working with our other ministries to make sure that the availability of PPE is there. That’s the $2.8 million for eight weeks of supply to all of our homes across Ontario, including N95s for those in outbreak.

Long-term care

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: My question is to the Premier. We’ve known for a long time, since the SARS outbreak, that long-term-care homes are vulnerable settings for respiratory disease. Viruses are not a mysterious, invisible intruder; they can be met with proactive and effective IPAC. The government’s own commission investigating “heard that long-term care ... homes were forgotten in the initial provincial plans to control the spread of COVID-19 until residents started dying, and pleas that this not be repeated when this crisis is over.”

We’re now in the throes of the second wave. Tragically, this month alone, over 250 residents in long-term care have sadly died from COVID-19, yet the commission that this government created to report on how COVID-19 is spread in long-term-care settings has reported that the government is withholding the documents it needs to do its work.

Speaker, through you: Why is this government impeding the work of the commission by withholding requested documents? Is it because they are afraid of what they might find?

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks will come to order.

The response? The Minister of Long-Term Care.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. It’s absolutely our commitment as a government to be transparent. That’s why we created the process by which the independent commissioners will report. It is absolutely essential that we get to the bottom of what happened, and we’ve been consistently transparent. We’ve provided almost 48,000 records to the commission, and we have conducted over a dozen briefings—17, to be exact—to the commissioners. They have a publicly posted site, where they can provide communication to the public, where people can submit their stories and their concerns. They have issued interim recommendations.

And I will repeat: We are in a battle of our lifetimes against COVID-19, all around this world. And if the member opposite does not understand that a virus is invisible, then I would hope that you would educate yourself. Please, please inform yourself. It’s absolutely critical that you understand the science and the nature of COVID-19 and how it spreads.

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

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: This minister—one of the things that I’ve been listening to you—because I was the one who asked in March, on March 11, about long-term care—no word from this government on what you’re going to do to protect those residents.

Over 2,300 people in long-term care are now dead as a result of your government’s refusal to act. Now, in your own appointed commission—this commission was appointed by you to give answers to people who have lost their loved ones, like in my riding, in Extendicare Guildwood and in Seven Oaks. They deserve to know what went wrong.

No one needs your lecture. That’s not what we’re here to do. What we’re here to do is to answer the questions that the people of Ontario are asking you. Why are you withholding these documents? It is the commission that says that—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. Again, I’ll remind members to make their comments through the Chair.

Minister of Long-Term Care to reply.

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Again, I will reiterate that we created an independent commission to provide guidance and get to the bottom of this. Nothing matters more than understanding what else can be done as the world struggles with COVID-19. Across Canada, they are struggling with COVID-19. COVID-19 is an invisible intruder that gets into our homes. One case can be devastating.

And the commissioners—I appreciate their expertise. I have a great deal of respect for their credentials, and they are eminently respected. We are making sure that this process is transparent. We are allowing the commissioners to gather this information, to hear from residents in a very public way, and staff and their families. This matters a great deal.

I have been a family doctor for 30 years. I’ve been understanding the science of this since the earliest days. I will continue to take every measure and every tool possible.

Small business

Mr. Wayne Gates: My question is to the Premier. It has been two weeks since I told the Premier that Niagara’s chief medical officer of health instituted an additional regulation to try to stop the spread of COVID-19 which has put restaurants and bars, the tourist sector, operators and the wineries in a very tough spot financially. Now we see the Premier is offering money to restaurants and bars elsewhere in Ontario, but not Niagara.

You can’t punish our local businesses because the chief medical officer acted proactively in a way he believed he had to. The regional chair of Niagara has asked the Premier for support. The Lord Mayor of Niagara-on-the-Lake has also asked for financial support. Speaker, will the Premier tell the businesses of Niagara today that help is on the way and they’ll be giving them the financial support they should have given them two weeks ago?

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

Hon. Rod Phillips: I appreciate the opportunity to clarify the many programs that are available for businesses, and I think it’s an important opportunity for this Legislature to as well be clear to our constituents. There is an exceptional support that this government is providing, in partnership with the federal government. Specifically, this government is providing $600 million for businesses in red control zones and in the gray lockdown zones. That support will be for all the businesses that are affected in those areas by the public health measures.

For the broader areas where there are also needs for support, we’ve provided programs like my colleague spoke about earlier: $60 million for $1,000 of personal protective equipment, $57 million to help businesses get online—that program has already helped 23,000 businesses—and through this budget that I know the member is considering right now, direct support which will support the businesses in his riding. Property tax reductions, significant; electricity reductions, significant; and payroll cost reductions, significant.

I hope that the member will consider that as he looks at the budget that will come before—

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

Mr. Wayne Gates: Back to the Premier. I don’t need an education from the finance minister, telling me what programs are available to Niagara. I’ve talked to you guys for the last two weeks. Niagara should be entitled to the $600 million that is out there, because the chief medical doctor put us in a

section 22 and it’s killing our businesses. So I understand the program; I’m saying to you we should qualify for that program.

The regulations passed in Niagara means you can only dine with three other people and they must be from your household. Our chief medical officer of health implemented this additional regulation because he felt he needed it in order to halt the spread of COVID-19 in Niagara. You can’t tell people they must listen to public health experts and follow the regulations, and then let their businesses fail when they don’t follow the rules.

Niagara restaurants, the bars, the wineries, the tourist operators and other small businesses need the Premier to help today, or they’ll lose everything. Will the Premier listen to the appeals from me, from the community mayors, from the Niagara region, and immediately approve emergency financial funding for our small businesses?

Hon. Rod Phillips: I appreciate and I believe what the member is saying is, it’s important for businesses to support the public health requirements that are being put in place. We absolutely respect the role of local public health officials in terms of providing that support, but when it comes to the $600-million program that the member speaks to, that program is specifically targeted at the red control zones, as I said before, and at the gray lockdown zones. These are areas where business is restricted in a significant fashion.

As well, the member will know the other supports available through this government. I already mentioned the $60 million for the PPE, the $57 million for the online support, Mr. Speaker; and I’m sure the member is also aware of the federal rental supports and the wage supports where we’ve worked in partnership with the federal government to provide coverage for the fixed costs of businesses, so we can see small businesses through the pandemic.

Mental health and addiction services

Ms. Donna Skelly: My question is for the Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions. Minister, as you are likely well aware, there have been notable concerns in my constituency around police interactions with individuals who may be in crisis or living with a mental health and addiction challenge. I know this is not only an issue affecting my riding, but it can be seen in communities right across Ontario.

Minister, across Canada and even around the world, both advocates and researchers alike have been calling for innovative ways to ensure police have the necessary tools and resources to safely handle calls for service involving someone experiencing a mental health crisis. Minister, can you explain how our government is helping our brave front-line officers in handling mental health cases?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: I’d like to thank the member from Flamborough–Glanbrook for the question. The member is absolutely correct, Mr. Speaker. From the GTA to remote rural and northern communities, we know there’s been a significant demand for innovative services to assist our police in handling mental health cases.

That’s why, just a couple of weeks ago, I stood with Premier Ford, our Deputy Premier and our Solicitor General to announce