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

May 7, 2025

44th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2025-May-07 (PDF)

L010 - Wed 7 May 2025 / Mer 7 mai 2025

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Wednesday 7 May 2025 Mercredi 7 mai 2025

Orders of the Day

Safer Municipalities Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 pour des municipalités plus sûres

Members’ Statements

Stratford Lions Club

Closet Share

Lambton Generating Station

Education funding

Emergency Preparedness Week

Events in Mississauga East–Cooksville

Highway safety

Ontario Trillium Foundation grants

Education funding

Wearing of ribbons

Introduction of Visitors

Question Period

Government accountability

Public health

Public health

Public health

Ontario economy

Public health

Public safety

Ontario film and television industry

Mental health and addiction services

Emergency preparedness

Consumer protection / Protection du consommateur

Health care funding

Energy policies

Water quality

Visitor

House sittings

Introduction of Visitors

Introduction of Government Bills

Primary Care Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 sur les soins primaires

Petitions

University funding

Addiction services

Social assistance

Social assistance

Affordable housing

Tenant protection

Taxation

Orders of the Day

Protect Ontario Through Safer Streets and Stronger Communities Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 pour protéger l’Ontario en rendant les rues plus sûres et les collectivités plus fortes

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Good morning, everyone.

Prayers.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): And now, a moment of silence for inner thought and personal reflection.

Orders of the Day

Safer Municipalities Act, 2025 / Loi de 2025 pour des municipalités plus sûres

Resuming the debate adjourned on May 6, 2025, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 6,

An Act to enact the Restricting Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act, 2025 and to amend the Trespass to Property Act respecting sentencing / Projet de loi 6, Loi édictant la Loi de 2025 visant à restreindre la consommation en public de substances illégales et modifiant la

Loi sur l’entrée sans autorisation en ce qui concerne le prononcé des peines.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Mr. Stephen Blais: It’s an honour to rise today to speak to Bill 6, the Safer Municipalities Act, legislation that has sparked strong emotions, conflicting viewpoints and, I believe, an opportunity for us in this chamber to take a more honest and balanced approach to one of the most visible and painful issues facing our communities today.

At its core, Bill 6 is about giving municipalities and law enforcement the tools to manage public drug use and dismantle encampments. These are not abstract concerns; these are daily realities for people across Ontario: parents trying to walk their children to school through a park lined with tents, local businesses seeing customers driven away and communities growing anxious as public spaces feel increasingly unsafe.

Madam Speaker, I want to be clear: I support the objective of this legislation. We must be able to remove encampments that are unsafe, unsanitary and unsustainable. We must be able to intervene when public drug use endangers individuals and communities alike. In fact, when I was a city councillor in Ottawa, I led the way to ban smoking in public parks to ensure families could enjoy these public spaces without being exposed to second-hand smoke, and I hope that we can all agree that hard drug use is many, many, many steps above smoking.

But the legislation does not exist in a vacuum, and it is our job as legislators to consider not just the hammer but the hand behind it. Let’s start with some hard truths: Homeless encampments did not exist on this scale before Doug Ford’s government was elected. Before 2018, the number of visible large-scale encampments across Ontario was negligible. Today, they’re everywhere, from downtown Toronto to Sudbury, from Niagara to the nation’s capital. In 2023 alone, municipalities across Ontario documented over 1,400 separate encampments, a dramatic increase that reflects a deeper, more serious erosion in our social safety net.

And it’s not just anecdotal. According to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, more than 80,000 Ontarians were homeless at some point in 2024, a 25% increase since 2022. In northern and rural Ontario, these rates have exploded, growing by 150% and 200% respectively over the last eight years. And while this government blames municipalities or Ottawa or anyone else within arm’s reach, let’s not forget who cancelled affordable housing projects, who underfunded mental health care, who allowed rent control loopholes and who still, after seven years in office, does not have a coherent provincial homelessness strategy.

Madam Speaker, we cannot talk about enforcement without talking about what happens after. If all this bill does is give police the power to clear tents and confiscate personal belongings but leaves people with nowhere to go, then we haven’t solved the problem. We’ve moved the problem—from one park to another, from one underpass to the next.

Now, this government has touted its recent commitment of $75 million for homelessness and housing supports, but let’s put that in perspective. That’s about $5 per Ontarian. We spend more on highway billboards than we do on shelter beds. But it’s not just about the money; it’s about leadership. Where is the provincial coordination to ensure encampment removals are paired with immediate shelter options? Where are the wraparound mental health and addiction services? Where is the investment in deeply affordable housing, not just attainable homes no one living in poverty can afford?

Now, Bill 6 allows officers to escort people to support services, and that’s great, but it only allows that if it’s enabled by regulation. So let me ask the government, where are those regulations? Where are those services? Don’t tell Ontarians you’re offering help while writing a bill that’s all stick and no carrot.

It is entirely possible—and it’s necessary—to hold two ideas at once: that public spaces must be protected and remain accessible for families, seniors and our communities and that people living in tents are not criminals, that they are often in pain, people in crisis, people who have been failed by the very systems that are supposed to support them. So, yes, we must restore safety to our public spaces and, yes, we must crack down on illegal drug use when it threatens lives, but we also must confront the truth that many of those struggling with addiction are, in fact, self-medicating for trauma, for mental illness and because of despair.

Unfortunately, this government has spent more time vilifying those living in encampments than supporting them, and in doing so it risks making the problem worse, not better.

Now, Madam Speaker, while I have laid plenty of criticism at the feet of the Ford government, let’s also speak honestly about the hypocrisy of the NDP, because time and again, we hear them lecture this House about compassion, about equity, about human dignity, but let me tell you what happens after question period when the cameras are turned off: NDP members of provincial Parliament and city councillors across Ontario vote against new shelters, they oppose infill housing developments and they organize against housing developments in their own backyards. They call for action and then they fight it when it arrives on their doorstep.

While I was on council in Ottawa for a decade, I saw this over and over and over again. I saw this from some of the members who now sit in this Legislature: housing developments along main streets voted against because the brick was the wrong colour or it was one storey too tall, shelter beds that were voted against because shelters are not as good as permanent housing—and I would agree, but shelter beds are a lot better than living in a tent or sleeping on a sidewalk.

For decades, New Democrats in this Legislature and on city councils across the province have stood in the way of incremental progress that has unfortunately helped lead us to the situation we are in today with housing. You cannot claim to care about homelessness while voting against the very solutions that give people somewhere to live. You can’t claim the moral high ground while contributing to the housing gridlock that makes housing more expensive and keeps people on the street—because real leadership means saying yes even when it’s not popular, even when it is hard.

So while I support the intent of Bill 6, I am calling on the government to do four things:

(1) I would like the government to table the accompanying regulations immediately so that people can be escorted to actual services, not just removed from sites.

(2) I would like the government to commit to real funding for municipalities, because municipalities are the ones tasked with enforcing the bill. Otherwise, we risk turning this into yet another unfunded mandate for our cities and our law enforcement agencies.

(3) The government must publish a provincial homelessness strategy. It should have clear goals for housing construction, mental health supports and addiction recovery programs. These things should not be treated in silos; there needs to be horizontal coordination with a comprehensive strategy.

(4) The government must rein in the Ontario Land Tribunal, who keeps overturning municipal efforts to build housing—they keep overturning those proposals in favour of NIMBY appeals.

Madam Speaker, the question about Bill 6 isn’t whether or not it goes too far; the question is whether it goes far enough in the right ways, because I think, honestly, we all want the same thing. We want safe communities for our families, our kids and our neighbours. We want clean public spaces that we pay for with our taxes so that we can enjoy a high quality of life. And we want a society that doesn’t turn its back on those in need.

Bill 6 is a step in restoring order, but if it’s not paired with compassion, if it’s not paired with investment and if it’s not paired with real vision then it’s only a half measure, and half measures are what got us into this mess in the first place.

So, let’s dismantle encampments, yes, but let’s also dismantle the barriers to housing, the barriers to treatment and the barriers to dignity. We can be tough on crime. We can be compassionate. And we can do both of those things at the same time, if we choose to.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I recognize the member from Don Valley East.

Mr. Adil Shamji: Thank you so much, Madam Speaker, and I just want to say how great it is to see you sitting in the chair over there.

I rise today to provide my remarks and feedback on Bill 6, which is presented before the House. I’ll be sharing my perspective on behalf of my constituents in Don Valley East but also reflecting on my experience in a variety of capacities—of course, as a member of provincial Parliament, but also as a family and emergency physician in practice for over 10 years—and also reflecting on my experience providing leadership in over 10 homeless shelters here in the city of Toronto. The reality is that my experiences in all of these capacities all converge on the exact same reservations and concerns.

I want to take some of my time this morning to share some of those real-life experiences and stories, dispel some of the stigma and stereotypes, and illustrate the profound gravity of the crisis that we face right now, because as many people sit in this House and imagine what someone in a shelter or an encampment looks like, I have no doubt that there is an image of a lawless individual under the influence of illicit substances. My own experience says very starkly the opposite: that there are people who are working living in shelters and encampments.

There are health care workers that I have personally treated living in a shelter—a personal support worker in the middle of COVID-19, in the middle of the pandemic, who went and served some of our most vulnerable people in society in long-term-care homes and then went home and resided in a shelter. The people that this legislation seeks to criminalize are people who deserve our compassion and support and, under this government, have not been receiving it.

This bill arrives at a moment of profound crisis in our province. Ontario, we can all agree, is facing a visible and escalating wave of homelessness. As of 2024, in Toronto alone, more than 10,800 people are actively experiencing homelessness on any given night, and we know that across Ontario, that number is well over 14,000. Within that population, we know that thousands—at least 1,900, but I am confident many more than that—are living in public spaces like in encampments, unsheltered, in tents, across parks, ravines, sidewalks and underpasses. That is very difficult for all of us to see.

Cities like Hamilton, Ottawa, London, Thunder Bay and, of course, right here in Toronto are all reporting surges in encampments and emergency shelter overflows. This phenomenon of encampments was nearly unheard of prior to 2018 but has proliferated under the inaction and lack of wisdom of this government.

The government members today, and over the next few days as we debate Bill 6, are going to try and make the people of Ontario believe that this situation exists because of weak laws on crime. They’re going to want the people of Ontario to believe that encampments exist because some of the most vulnerable members in our society—people struggling with mental illness, addictions, individuals who may be under the coercive influence of human traffickers and drug dealers, or people who can’t access health care—are the causes of this problem. They’re not. They are—the members of this government.

I say that because this crisis is not a coincidence; it is a consequence of the decisions made by this Premier. Under this Premier, hundreds of millions of dollars in planned mental health and addictions funding have been cut. Funding for Ontario Works and ODSP have fallen further and further below the poverty line. Rent control protections have been eviscerated, and as a result, now over 290,000 households are on the social housing wait-list, more than 2.5 million people don’t have a family doctor, over 2,500 people died of opioid-related causes in 2023, and encampments have multiplied because there is no alternative.

And it’s not like alternatives don’t exist. Just this week, we learned in Toronto that a modular housing project at 175 Cummer Avenue will finally be allowed to proceed after years of delays, after years of this government stonewalling the project. I have long been critical of this government’s abuse of minister’s zoning orders, usually because they seem to support their friends. But when the city of Toronto asked for a minister’s zoning order to this supportive housing project, which would clear 60 people from encampments, this government said no, and now, the courts have proven them wrong.

So, presented with the opportunity to do something meaningful to address our housing and encampment crisis, this government said no, and now it’s choosing to criminalize the people who are asking for help and aren’t receiving it from this government.

Bill 6 has two parts. The first

schedule creates a law which would allow search, seizure and arrest without a warrant of individuals who are showing signs of struggling with addiction. It would fine people up to $10,000, which, of course, they don’t have, or imprison for them six months, which, of course, our system does not have.

The second

schedule amends the Trespass to Property Act to increase sentencing if someone returns to a location after being asked to leave or if the court simply believes they might return again in the future. But of course, they have nowhere else to go. They could have had 175 Cummer Avenue several years ago. This government decided to stop that.

Let’s not sugar-coat this: This bill targets people who are visibly unhoused, mentally ill or addicted. Instead of offering care, it offers cuffs. It tries to make it look like this government is doing something about encampments even though they do worse than nothing: They actively make the situation worse. Madam Speaker, you can put lipstick on a pig, but a pig still rolls in the mud.

The Premier wants us to believe that this is a law-and-order bill, but that framing is wrong, and it is dangerous. This legislation paints poverty, addiction and mental illness as criminal issues. It pretends that people are living in encampments because they’re lawless, not because they’ve been left behind. If these people were criminals, they wouldn’t be sleeping in tents. They are there because they have nowhere else to go: no affordable housing, no access to detox, no mental health beds, no income support, no doctors.

To criminalize people for surviving, or trying to survive, in public is to ignore the public policy failures that drove them there. That is not justice; it is merely stigma, stereotype and abandonment.

Now, I speak this not just as a member of provincial Parliament but as an emergency physician. During the pandemic, I served as medical director in 11 homeless shelters across Toronto. These sites provided beds, but critically, they delivered wraparound supports: primary care, mental health and psychiatric care, addiction support, food, a warm bed, housing help and much more. And here is what happened: People were lining up to get in. We didn’t have to coerce people to come out of encampments. They were clamouring to come out of encampments.

We saw that with the right supports, people could stabilize. First, I usually saw their addictions challenge treated and stabilized. And with that, an underlying psychiatric diagnosis was oftentimes revealed for the first time—a psychiatric diagnosis that was being self-medicated with illicit substances, which oftentimes provide euphoria and an escape from reality, because those individuals could not get psychiatric care.

With those pieces in place, once the mental illness was stabilized, people could access physical care, reconnect with family and even—with my own eyes, I’ve seen it—find housing and work and reintegrate as productive, independent members in society. The people that this government seeks to criminalize and villainize are people who, with the right help, can thrive, and when given the chance, I’ve seen them do it. This wasn’t theory; it was practice.

But instead of scaling that success, what we see is a government reaching for handcuffs. Madam Speaker, this is the reality: People experiencing homelessness need health care, not handcuffs. They need housing, not handcuffs. They need hope, not handcuffs.

Can there be criminality amongst people living in encampments? I will say categorically that there can be, but not in the way that you think. I have personally tried to help homeless individuals struggling with addiction who want my help, are asking for my help and who are getting my help. But then, they leave my clinic and return to their tent or their shelter space, and predatory drug dealers go in and beat them senseless if they don’t keep purchasing their drugs. What is this government doing to address that? Nothing. So I acknowledge that criminality may exist, but not in the way this bill portrays and not in the way this bill does nothing to prevent.

I would also like to point out that there may even be criminality in this House. As we speak, the Premier of this province is facing an RCMP criminal investigation into greenbelt corruption and racketeering. But I wouldn’t accuse every member here of being a criminal because that investigation is taking place. So why are we condemning every person living in a tent? This bill treats an entire population as criminals based upon their hardship, not upon their actions.

Let’s talk about what this bill actually does and what it doesn’t do. It sends people to jail, but our jails are full. Correctional staff are overwhelmed. The remand population is growing. There are no beds in our correctional facilities for the people this bill targets.

It allows police to divert people to social or health services instead of jail, which at face value is a good thing; I will acknowledge that. But where are those services? There are no detox beds that are available on demand. Mental health clinics are understaffed and overwhelmed. Addiction treatment programs have wait-lists stretching weeks or months, and HART hubs, like the one in Thunder Bay, have been rushed out, poorly coordinated and aren’t reducing overdoses. In fact, in many cases, overdoses are increasing because HART hubs are in disarray.

Some people may say, “Fine. Pass this bill for the elements of it that address criminality, and we’ll push for the compassion separately.” But, Madam Speaker, the compassion isn’t coming. This government has shown no interest in mental health funding, supportive housing or community-based care. To vote for this bill is not to vote for both sides of the equation. It is to vote for one side: only enforcement. The other side is a mirage, and the public isn’t buying it.

Data from Abacus polling reveals that Ontarians, when asked what they think is the best approach for addressing homeless encampments in Ontario, 80% of respondents say their preferred approach is to prioritize providing housing and mental health and addiction services to help individuals transition out of homelessness and find long-term stability. And when you poll the Premier’s supporters, even there, 65% of his supporters would agree that that is their preferred approach. So with overwhelming public opinion calling for these things, that’s not what they’re getting with this bill.

Supporting this bill while calling for compassion is like ordering a steak and getting a salad: You don’t just eat it anyway; you send it back.

Let’s also not forget the fact that this legislation in all likelihood won’t survive court challenges. In Victoria, a similar law was struck down as unconstitutional. In Waterloo, the Superior Court ruled encampment evictions were illegal unless real shelter alternatives were offered, but this government consistently works against delivering shelter alternatives, and that’s why there aren’t any. The Premier has a pattern of writing bad laws and losing in court, and this will be no different.

Madam Speaker, Bill 6 is a political stunt masquerading as a solution. It does not make our city safer. It doesn’t reduce drug use. It doesn’t address housing. It simply pushes vulnerable people further to the margins. It punishes desperation. It targets the visible symptoms of policy failure, and it abandons compassion. Our vulnerable deserve more than this, and Ontarians are demanding better than this.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Ms. Laura Smith: I want to thank the member opposite—or both of them—for their contributions and their service.

I listened to both members’ statements, and they talked about—I felt like it was a moralization. It’s astonishing, because a park is not a home. Quite simply, an encampment is not a long-term answer to homelessness, and these sites are not a suitable place for a person to call home. I say this as a mother that takes their kids to the park on a regular basis.

I’m asking the members opposite that—we’ve heard a lot about this kind of moralization. Communities are sounding off an alarm at an escalating rate, and we’re hearing them. We’re hearing that at the door. We heard them just recently, a couple of months ago, when we knocked on their doors.

Will the member finally put public safety first, put the needs of the families and the communities first, or will they keep voting against supports that help people leave these dangerous conditions in the parks behind?

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I recognize the member from Orléans.

Mr. Stephen Blais: I do truly appreciate the question, which I suspect was pre-written by a member of the government’s caucus bureau, because clearly the member didn’t actually listen to what was said.

I believe—I think we all believe—that parks are a place for families, for members of the community to enjoy: to play with your kids, for a couple to walk together after a night out on the town, to throw the frisbee with your dog. They are not a place where people should be living—100%.

The question is, what is the government doing to provide the answer? You have not provided mental health supports. You have not provided more affordable housing. You have taken steps, in many cases with your partners in the NDP, to make housing more expensive for people and made those options harder for people to achieve. And your bill does not provide the cities any financial supports for the police to actually go in and undertake this work.

So you are proposing making it more difficult to actually address the homelessness in the parks.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

MPP Wayne Gates: It’s a little concerning that the Liberals are attacking the NDP, when they were in power for 15 years and the PCs have been in power for seven years. And today we still haven’t doubled ODSP or OW. That is the solution to this.

You’re forcing people into homelessness because of job loss, and with the tariffs that are going on, we’re seeing the unemployment rate at 7.3%. More people are going to be homeless. Why is that going to be? Because they can’t afford their rents. The 2019—we should have rent controls on new builds.

My question to you is a pretty good one: Do you believe that the resources required to enforce this act could be more effectively used in expanding access to mental health services, addiction treatment and affordable housing?

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I recognize the member for Etobicoke–Lakeshore.

Ms. Lee Fairclough: Thank you, Speaker, for the opportunity to speak, and for the question.

In my debate yesterday, I certainly made the same cry for the same kinds of resources, and I couldn’t underscore more strongly that we need more mental health supports. My colleagues have also articulated this morning how critical that will be and that that’s where we should ultimately be focusing our efforts.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question? I recognize the member from—

Interjection: Vanier.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Ottawa–Vanier.

M me Lucille Collard: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I know it’s challenging to be in that chair some days and especially remembering the names of all the ridings.

I would like to direct my question back to the member for Etobicoke–Lakeshore. I was here yesterday when she presented her perspective on the bill, and she talked about the impacts on our society at different levels. Being a health care professional, I know that she understands that reality, but I would like to hear more from her—she alluded to it briefly: What is going to be the impact of that legislation on our hospitals?

Ms. Lee Fairclough: Thank you for the question about our hospitals. Again, we’re talking about health care and, in particular, our hospitals, where emergency departments are already overwhelmed. We already have more patients in hallways than we’ve ever seen before.

In this legislation, there is the option to bring people to hospital, but I have to tell you how many people are staying with us in hospital that we would like to be discharging but we have no place to discharge them but back to the streets, back to that tent.

Again, I made a plea yesterday that it will be a success if we actually never need to use this law; that we need to actually find a way to be sure that, as people are being discharged back to the streets, they aren’t falling prey to the same dealers who are helping to support a substance use challenge that they may be experiencing. Lastly, I—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Response?

Ms. Lee Fairclough: Thank you.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Robert Bailey: I’ve listened to both opposition parties here—the official opposition and the third party opposition—and it seems to me they’re ignoring the fact that we’ve created, and some are in the formation of being created and under way, the 22 HART hubs, which are going to do a great deal to relieve people, get them off the street. I know in Sarnia–Lambton, we have one that’s under way right now. I’m waiting for the final analysis of that and see it take place.

So if one of the Liberal colleagues who should be answering the questions, if it’s their turn, if one of them would care to respond to that.

Mr. Adil Shamji: You don’t have to look very far to see that the HART hubs are really struggling. They’re underfunded. They’re not able to scale up to the capacity that is required in this province. You need look no further than Thunder Bay, where the current HART hub is operating out of temporary facilities and struggling to keep up. Here in Toronto, one of the consumption sites that was shut down has seen a rise in overdoses. I was speaking to someone who told me that the rise in overdoses has been something on the order of 450%.

I think these examples and many others I’d be happy to walk across and share with the member illustrate that the half-hearted, lukewarm, superficial policies that have been implemented by this government are doing nothing but leaving Ontarians and our most vulnerable people in this province abandoned.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: My question will be to the member from Orléans.

Obviously, there are some very large concerns with Bill 6 and the criminalization of people who are already marginalized, pushing them yet further into the margins. But recently, we’ve seen Prime Minister-elect Mark Carney has quoted the official opposition in saying that we need a wartime effort to build the housing that Canadians and Ontarians need. Recently, we’ve brought forward legislation with Homes Ontario to do this very thing.

My question is, will the third-party Liberals support our official opposition push to get the government back into the business of building housing, or will they once again sit on their hands?

Mr. Stephen Blais: Only New Democrats would think that creating a massive government bureaucracy is how you win a war. That will not build a single new home. In fact, today—today—New Democrats in Ottawa are fighting against housing expansion. New Democrats in Ottawa are fighting against housing expansion that would build thousands of new residences—New Democrats that are supported by members over there. New Democrats—they used to work for the New Democratic Party—they are fighting against housing developments in Ottawa today.

If New Democrats actually want to solve the problem, you have to build houses. Not just affordable housing, not just shelters—you have to build the entire spectrum of housing. And if you don’t support building houses in the suburbs and you don’t support infill development downtown and you don’t support building shelters to get people off the streets, what the heck do you support?

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Hon. Andrea Khanjin: My question to the members opposite is, would they legalize

schedule 1 substances?

Mr. Stephen Blais: I’m sorry, I didn’t entirely hear—“legalize” something—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): It is now time to end debate. Further debate?

Ms. Laura Smith: It’s a great pleasure to rise today in firm support of the Safer Municipalities Act. It’s an important and timely piece of legislation that addresses a deeply troubling and growing challenge in communities across Ontario, including my community of Thornhill.

Let’s be very honest and direct about the core issue at hand: A park is not a home. An encampment is not a long-term answer to homelessness and these sites are not suitable. It’s not a suitable place for a person to call a home. They pose serious safety risks and diminish the quality of life for everyone around them. And let us be very frank, they’re a safety hazard.

Our public parks should be a place of peace and enjoyment, not areas people cross the street to avoid out of fear and frustration. Parks should be places where families get together, where children can play, where communities connect.

Safety matters, and yet too many of our public spaces are becoming something very different. No one should find used needles scattered on the ground in a community green space. Nobody should feel fear or anxiety as they walk towards their neighbourhood park. That’s not the Ontario we know, and as a mother, it’s certainly not the Ontario we want to leave behind for the next generation.

Ontarians have made themselves very clear: Enough is enough. Across our cities, towns and rural communities, public parks and recreational areas are more than just a green space; they are common ground. They are where communities gather, where seniors walk, where children play and where generations make memories. We owe it to the people of this province to protect those spaces not only from deterioration but from becoming the front lines of a housing and mental health crisis that cannot be solved by turning a blind eye.

Let me be clear: This government will not pretend that encampments are a solution. No one in this chamber believes that people end up in encampments by choice, but no one benefits when laws go unenforced, when public parks and shared spaces become unusable, or when municipal officials are left without the tools they need to respond to persistent, unlawful trespassing that disrupts communities and undermines trust in the rule of law. Our government is taking action not because it’s simple but because ignoring this problem is no longer an option.

Encampments are a growing number, and they’re complex. Tents and makeshift shelters appear under overpasses, in wooded ravines, near schools and in city parks. In many cases, these sites are unsafe, unsanitary and marked by serious risks to public health and safety, including open drug use, fire hazards and criminal activity. What was once sporadic is now entrenched in many communities.

Despite the tireless work of outreach workers, police, municipal leaders and bylaw enforcement, the situation continues to escalate, and many encampments defy removal efforts. Residents refuse to leave even when shelter options are offered, and the cycle repeats.

We must act, and we must do it in a manner that is lawful, measured and just. It’s balanced.

The Trespass to Property Act has long served as Ontario’s legal framework for addressing unauthorized presence on private and public lands. It applies to homes, businesses, schools, vacant properties and public parks. It lays out when an individual is unlawfully present, what kind of notice is required and what penalties may apply.

But that act was not designed to deal with the scale, the persistence or the complexity of encampments today. Its language lacks the clarity needed for modern enforcement, its deterrent effect is weak and at the sentencing stage, its scope is simply too limited to deal with repeat or prolonged trespassers who ignore lawful orders.

That is why we are introducing these thoughtful and targeted amendments, not to criminalize poverty, but to provide municipalities, courts and enforcement officials with the clarity and the discretion they need to protect the safety and uphold the law.

Let me be very clear: These amendments do not create any new offences. They do not introduce any new class of individuals subject to penalties. What they do is improve how courts may consider certain repeat behaviours at the sentencing stage.

Specifically, we are introducing two new statutory aggravating factors under the Trespass to Property Act. The first is continuing trespass. This is when an individual has been lawfully told to vacate a property by a specific and specified time and remains, in defiance of that order. The second is likelihood to reoffend, where there is evidence suggesting that the person in question is likely to trespass again. In both of these cases, courts will retain full discretion, but under our amendments, they will be required to consider these factors when determining whether a higher fine, up to the existing $10,000 maximum—they will decide if that is appropriate.

Why does this matter? Because without statutory aggravating factors, there is no meaningful way to distinguish between a first-time accidental trespass and a repeat encampment that defies lawful direction over and over again. These changes recognize what Ontarians already understand instinctively: context matters. Speaker, we are reinforcing the principle that laws must mean something and that orders issued under them are not optional. Let me emphasize again, judicial discretion remains fully intact.

Courts will continue to assess each case based on the individual circumstances, their conduct and their ability to pay. We are not removing compassion from the process. We are injecting fairness, clarity and proportionality into a system that has, until now, lacked the tools to deal with prolonged, unlawful occupation of shared space. Please always remember, we are talking about shared community space.

These kinds of aggravating factors are standard practice in sentencing law. They are not mandates for harsher penalties; they are guideposts for discretion in cases where public safety or public order are seriously at risk. And, very importantly, Ontario’s courts retain the ability under the Provincial Offences Act to extend payment deadlines, order instalment plans and reduce fines based on financial hardship. No one will be bankrupt for trespassing. But repeat defiance of lawful authority must have consequences that reflect its seriousness.

These changes are not arbitrary. They are grounded in extensive consultation with municipalities across this province. From large cities to rural towns, we’ve heard the same message over and over again: “We don’t have the tools.” Local governments are being asked to manage a crisis in public space without the legal clarity. They don’t have the clarity, the enforcement, the capacity or provincial backing that they need. They’re walking a legal tightrope, trying to uphold individual rights while also protecting community safety. We’re giving them what they’ve asked for. We’re restoring balance to the law.

When we first introduced this legislation last December, municipalities were very quick to express their support. I have a few quotes.

Oakville mayor Rob Burton said, “The actions in this legislation are what we” have “asked for. It feels great to work with a government that listens. We are united to support our most vulnerable and create safer environments for everyone.”

Windsor mayor Drew Dilkens said the tools we are proposing would “help make a positive difference in communities across Ontario.”

Sudbury mayor Paul Lefebvre said our approach “prioritizes the dignity and well-being of individuals in need, while balancing other residents’ right to feel safe in public spaces.”

These are not isolated voices. Just last month, Ontario’s Big City Mayors issued a joint letter urging this Legislature to move quickly, citing the growing strain on local services and the need for provincial leadership. That is why, when this legislative session resumed, we introduced the Safer Municipalities Act right away, and that is why we are reaffirming our commitment to it in the speech from the throne, because the support from municipalities across this province has been unwavering. We promised to give them the tools to clear encampments safely, lawfully and compassionately, and we are delivering on that promise.

Speaker, let me be just as clear on this point: Legislation alone is not the solution. A legal framework is only part of the response. That framework must be matched by real, ongoing investment in housing, mental health care and addiction services, and this government has made those investments.

Since 2020, we have allocated over $4 billion to supportive and affordable housing. We’ve increased funding to municipal service managers, expanded rent supplements, accelerated the construction of deeply affordable units, and we’ve added mobile crisis response teams. We funded new addiction treatment beds and opened mental health hubs across the province. And we’ve launched flexible programs like the Homelessness Prevention Program, which gives municipalities the resources they need to respond directly and effectively to local needs, including outreach to encampments.

This is a whole-of-government response. It reflects the complexity of the crisis and the urgency of coordinated action. We’re not treating homelessness as a crime. We are treating it as a challenge that demands compassion, courage and sustained commitment.

Speaker, a credible enforcement regime also depends on a justice system that can respond in a timely and fair manner, and that is why we are investing heavily in the capacity of Ontario’s courts. Since 2023, we’ve appointed more than 45 new justices of the peace. We’ve increased the number of provincial judges and streamlined the appointments process so that qualified candidates can fill those vacancies faster. We’re staffing up our courthouses, adding full-time court and client representatives, improving compensation and accelerating hiring timelines.

As a side note, in my previous life, I worked under the child protection act. I worked within the courts, and I watched that revolution, that change in the courts, happen. We went from paper documents to filing things online and it was incredible to watch. It’s helped in reducing the backlogs with digital tools and modernizing court processes so judicial resources can be focused where they are most needed, because a law that cannot be enforced fairly is a law in name only.

Speaker, at the heart of this legislation, there’s a fundamental question: What is public space for? We believe that public space belongs to everyone: to families, to children, to seniors, to newcomers, and yes, to even those without a home. But shared space must be managed in a way that balances access with safety, compassion with community needs. Encampments that persist, despite outreach, despite shelter offers, despite lawful notices, do not reflect that balance. They strain infrastructure. They reduce safety, and far too often, they subject those very people living in them to violence, to theft and to exploitation. This is not compassion; it is a failure.

The Safer Municipalities Act is not about punishment. It’s about protection: protection of the vulnerable, protecting our parks and protecting the public good. This legislation says to municipalities, “We’ve heard you. You have our support, and you now have the tools to use them wisely and in good faith.”

Speaker, this bill does not pretend that the housing crisis can be legislated away, but it does affirm that public safety matters, that laws must be enforceable, and that persistent defiance of lawful authority is not harmless; it’s harmful.

Think about that: Persistent defiance of lawful authority is not harmless; it’s harmful.

We are proposing a balanced, humane and practical reform that strengthens enforcement tools for municipalities, provides courts with clear sentencing guidance, respects individual rights and supports front-line workers and police, who have been working so hard across this province on this issue. It reaffirms our collective commitment to safe, inclusive public spaces.

This government will continue to invest in what works: housing, treatment and justice. And, yes, we will also ensure that the laws of this province are fair, clear and enforceable. This is a balance. Because when public space becomes no one’s responsibility, it becomes no one’s refuge. And when law becomes merely suggestive, justice becomes elusive. It’s time to restore that balance between safety and compassion, between the rights and responsibilities, between disorder and dignity.

I want to thank everyone in the House. Thank you.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Ms. Chandra Pasma: I listened carefully to the member’s remarks this morning, and I have to admit that I was pretty disturbed to hear the member describe the government’s approach as compassionate. We have an affordable housing crisis in the province. In Ottawa alone, there are 10,000 people on the wait-list for affordable housing. There are 3,000 people who do not have a home of any kind. Provincially, we have 40,000 people on the wait-list for supportive housing.

Salus, which operates in Ottawa, has said if the funding was there, they could start building 250 supportive housing units immediately and could quickly scale that up to 500—if the money was there.

Given the government’s failure to invest in affordable housing and supportive housing, how can the member possibly claim that it is compassionate to charge people $10,000 or put them in jail for not having a home in Ontario?

Ms. Laura Smith: Thank you for the question. I’m going to go back in time a bit, and this is even before we brought in the HART hubs. Our government has provided over $400 million in homelessness prevention, and that was before the HART hubs came into place. The government recognizes that individuals affected by this legislation are vulnerable. We are committed to ensuring that any penalties imposed are fair and take into account the circumstances of each individual.

It really takes into consideration that the primary intent of this legislation is not to burden individuals with fines, but help a broader issue, which is public safety and the challenges that encampments present to communities for those who are experiencing homelessness, and these are shelter spaces and HART hubs. We are proactively taking a very balanced approach to this issue.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

M me Lucille Collard: Looking at that bill, it doesn’t matter how many times I read it and try to give it a different

interpretation, it’s pretty clear that the government believes that removing people who consume illegal substances in encampments that are located in parks will resolve the issue of encampments.

I would like to know what evidence the government based itself on to justify this course of action. Is there evidence that the majority of people in encampments are drug users? I would like to hear it, if there is such evidence.

Ms. Laura Smith: Thank you for the question. Speaker, this government is fully aware of the intersection between homelessness, mental health and addictions. We’re committed to addressing these challenges in a very holistic way and a supportive way. Our approach is designed to provide individuals with the resources and supports that they need to stabilize their lives, regain independence and move towards long-term housing solutions. Once again, it gets back to the balance that we talked about.

We’re investing over $550 million in the creation of 28 homelessness and addiction recovery treatment centres, known as HART hubs. Ontario is an example of how we are addressing these issues directly. These hubs will provide comprehensive wraparound services that include addiction recovery programs, mental health care and employment supports. Importantly, these HART hubs will also provide housing, allowing individuals to transition from temporary shelters to more permanent supportive housing options that meet their unique needs.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Ms. Aislinn Clancy: I want to ask the member opposite—in my riding there are not enough shelter beds. I am grateful for the HART hub money; there are shelter beds on the way. But I have one of the most infamous encampments in my riding. The question I continue to ask—yes, we spend money; yes, we build these things. But at this present time, in my community, there are not enough shelter beds. So where is that person supposed to go?

Ms. Laura Smith: Thank you to the member for the question. Our government recognizes that the root cause of homelessness is largely tied to lack of affordable housing, and that’s why we’re addressing this issue. That’s the core of why people are probably in the situations that they are. That’s the core of our efforts: focus not on criminalizing homelessness but creating real solutions, including investments in housing.

The $75.5-million investment announced by our government is part of a broader commitment on tackling this housing crisis. The investment will create over 1,200 new affordable and supportive housing units across Ontario, addressing the severe shortage of housing that is exacerbating homelessness. In addition, we’re expanding shelter capacity by nearly 1,000 spaces and investing in temporary accommodation options, such as modular housing units, to provide people in encampments with immediate alternative accommodation.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): Question?

Mr. Robert Bailey: I enjoyed the debate this morning. I’d like the member from Thornhill to further expand. As I understand it, there are over 1,440-some homeless encampments at last count in Ontario. I was wondering if she could explain the ramifications and the harm that these encampments do to the local communities where they’re based.

Ms. Laura Smith: Thank you to the member for his question. I think he, like anybody else in this room, is a parent. They love their family. They love their communities. I want to thank him for his advocacy on behalf of all of those families across Ontario. Our government is relentlessly focused on protecting communities while supporting those experiencing the risk of homelessness with safe, secure and appropriate alternatives to encampments.

I think we all understand what these parks were and what they’ve become. As a mother, I find it very challenging to look through one of these parks that has now become an encampment and wonder if my son can walk through the field. Is there a needle on the ground? We have to take a holistic approach and we’re doing this in a very compassionate way by expanding spaces and introducing temporary accommodations that will allow these individuals to get a hand up.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I recognize the member from Toronto–Danforth.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I appreciate the speech by the member this morning. Your government has been in power since 2018. The encampment problem has been growing for years. You say you’re going to deal with it now. Why weren’t you dealing with it before? Why is it that more people are having to sleep out on the ground because they don’t have a home? Why is it, as you were saying, that people are feeling unsafe because they go into parks that have been turned into homeless encampments? Where have you been for the last six years and more on this issue? Why did you let it get to this point? Why did you neglect the people of Ontario?

Ms. Laura Smith: We’ve actually taken very proactive measures, as I discussed earlier, in the amount of money that’s been put into mental health and addictions, the money that’s been put into homelessness and addictions. These are very important issues that we’ve actually taken a proactive approach to for a while. I think we’ve invested, just in this alone, $75.5 million.

And Ontario announced nearly $550 million to create 28 new HART hubs. We are taking action. And nine more—these are nine more HART hubs than were originally planned, which speaks to the growing need. These hubs are a game-changer approach, and they bring services under one roof, from addiction recovery to mental health treatments.

So we are moving in the right direction.

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I recognize the member from Orléans.

Mr. Stephen Blais: You mentioned in one of your responses the recent investment of, I think, $75 million that’s going to create 1,200 spaces. There are, of course, some 80,000 homeless people in Ontario, over 1,400 encampments—$75 million is roughly $5 for every Ontarian, and it’s less money, I believe, than we spend on highway billboards every year.

So I’m wondering if you believe that the encampment problem, which is prolific and which has only grown under the watch of your government, is deserving of a greater investment than highway billboards.

Ms. Laura Smith: I think our government is showing its value in what we’re doing. This is a balanced approach.

I would say that investing the nearly $550 million to create 28 new HART hubs, nine more than originally planned, speaks to the work that we’re doing. Each hub will also provide access to highly supportive housing and recovery beds, allowing individuals to—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): I recognize the member from London West.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: It is an honour to rise today to participate in this debate, on behalf of the people I represent in London West.

I have to say, having listened to the debate that started yesterday and has continued this morning, this is one of those issues where there is almost complete agreement on what the problem is. I think that many of the members who have spoken to this bill have articulated what we are seeing in this province: an explosion of encampments across every community in Ontario. We have seen alarmingly rising rates of opioid addictions, substance use problems, drug users consuming drugs in public, and we all agree that this is not the Ontario that we want for ourselves, for our families, for the people who live in this province.

However, what we do not agree on—what we could not be further apart on, in fact—are the solutions that are presented in this bill, because the measures that are included won’t do anything to solve the problem. They won’t do anything to get people who use illegal drugs into the treatment programs, the recovery programs, the harm reduction programs that they need. The bill won’t do anything to get people who are chronically unhoused, who are living in encampments, into the stable, long-term, supportive housing that they need to be able to move forward with their lives.

In fact, the measures proposed in this bill will do the exact opposite. They will make the problems worse. They will do nothing to deal with the underlying issues that have risen astronomically under this government’s watch.

We heard in a report from AMO just earlier this year that there has been a 25% increase in the number of homeless people in Ontario. We now have more than 80,000 Ontarians who are unhoused. That is the legacy of this government. Encampments are the legacy of this government.

The other concern about this bill is that it is completely performative. It ignores the reality that police do not need new powers to deal with the consumption of illegal drugs in public. They already have that ability under the Criminal Code. The Criminal Code states that police can prosecute the possession and use of prohibited drugs in places such as public parks or areas nearby such as schools and daycares.

There are no changes to provincial laws necessary, and the changes that this bill introduces to allow police to fine up to $10,000 and judges to convict with a prison sentence of up to six months—that is not going to do anything to address the issues. It is simply going to criminalize people who have been unable to find a place to live or who have been forced to live in encampments.

The other thing I wanted to say is that we have a dire shortage of people who are waiting for supportive housing in Ontario. We know supportive housing is a big part of the solution to both of the issues that this bill addresses, that of opioid addiction and substance use and also people who are unhoused. But this government has done virtually nothing to increase the supply of affordable housing in Ontario. Their HART hub announcement comes with 540 new supportive housing units.

However, experts have told us that in Ontario, we need as little as 30,000 new supportive housing units to as much as 90,000 supportive housing units to address the scale of the problem that we are facing. In the city of London, we need a minimum of 600 units just in our city alone over the next three years, and that is only to deal with the most chronic of the problems.

We see also that this government has ignored advice from their own consultants, from the experts that they have consulted about what it would take to move forward with a meaningful plan to increase the supply of supportive housing. They engaged KPMG, before the 2022 election, to do a review of the cost of supportive housing and the benefits to the province—the costs that are avoided because of getting people into appropriate supportive housing units.

KPMG submitted a report to the government, as I said, before the election, and they reported clearly that three out of four case studies of supportive housing projects demonstrated a positive cost offset. The costs avoided were greater than the cost to serve each client each year.

That, Speaker, makes a lot of sense. We know that when people are in supportive housing, we save money in the health care system, in particular. We save money in hospitalizations and emergency department visits. We save money in the justice system. We generate money in our economy because when people are getting the supports that they need in a stable housing environment, they are more likely to be able to enter the labour market and generate income, perhaps seek further education. It is good for the person who has moved into supportive housing, and it is good for the province as a whole.

KPMG found an average return on investment of between $1.60 and $2 for every $1 spent on supportive housing. So there’s a lot of rationale for the government to move forward with a supportive housing plan to support people—

The Acting Speaker (MPP Andrea Hazell): We’ll now move on to members’ statements.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Stratford Lions Club

Mr. Matthew Rae: I rise today to recognize and congratulate the Stratford Lions Club on their 100th charter anniversary. This past weekend, I had the opportunity to join them to celebrate this momentous milestone.

For a century, the Stratford Lions Club has not just served, they have built. From the Stratford Lions Pool and the Lions Dufferin Arena to the Lions bandshell and Romeo Court, their contributions to Stratford’s infrastructure are undeniable. They’ve also played a pivotal role in supporting major capital initiatives at Stratford General Hospital.

But their impact goes beyond bricks and mortar, Speaker. The Stratford Lions have remained steadfast in their commitment to community service. Through projects like eyeglass recycling and, more recently, vital support for our local food banks, they have shown what it truly means to serve with compassion and purpose.

For the past 100 years, the Stratford Lions Club has been there consistently, quietly and powerfully, supporting our communities. Their motto is “We Serve,” and they have lived up to it every single day and year.

To the Lions past and present, thank you. Stratford is a more strong and caring city because of you.

Closet Share

MPP Jamie West: Today, I want to talk about Closet Share. This is an organization that started when Melissa and Drew Porter began collected clothing for a family after a house fire. Sudbury is a community that cares, and helping people feels good, so they just kept at it.

What started in their garage has now grown into a non-profit organization called Closet Share. With a small warehouse of donated items, Closet Share diverts textile waste from the landfill and ensures that clothing is accessible and affordable to anyone. Not just that, every item is cleaned, repaired and posted online so you can thrift from your phone, and most of these items are free.

If you have kids graduating this spring, show up in person at the MacKenzie warehouse near the library on May 10, because on Saturday Closet Share is hosting a grad event for grade 8 and grade 12 grads. Every student will receive one full outfit free of charge—that’s suits, ties, dress shoes, gowns and all that stuff.

The event will also have cupcakes, refreshments, fitting rooms and a photo booth. As well, there will also be two volunteer seamstresses on-site for any last-minute alterations. So, thank you, Louise and Stacey.

It’s amazing, and it’s personal to Melissa. When I asked her where she got the idea, Melissa said, “I was once in the system and didn’t have the opportunity to graduate, so providing students with a dignified, joyful, and stress-free graduation experience is deeply personal to me, and central to our mission.”

I’d like to thank everyone at Closet Share, including Melissa and Drew Porter, for their incredible work and dedication to our community.

Lambton Generating Station

Mr. Robert Bailey: It’s an honour to rise in the Legislature and share some important news for the residents of Sarnia–Lambton with the Legislature.

As we know, our province continues to grow at a rapid pace and, as a result, Ontario will soon be facing a surge in electricity demand. Luckily, the Ontario government, under the leadership of Premier Ford and the Minister of Energy, is taking action to ensure we grow that energy supply in our province. One such action involves examining the potential redevelopment of former energy-producing sites like that of the former Lambton Generating Station, owned by Ontario Power Generation, in my riding of Sarnia–Lambton.

The Lambton site was once an energy-producing all-star for the province. With its existing infrastructure, proximity to transmission lines and the local expertise in industrial construction and energy production, the former Lambton generating site represents a promising opportunity for significant future energy development.

Early community engagement is critical for our government’s approach to new energy generation. I’m excited that we will be kicking off conversations with communities close to these potential sites in the very near future. These discussions will help gauge community support and explore potential benefits, including economic opportunities and energy security.

I look forward to learning more from these conversations in Sarnia–Lambton. I believe our government’s plan to generate more energy will help to ensure we keep our energy bills down and the power on for generations to come.

Education funding

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: Ontario’s students face ongoing budget and service cuts to their school and public education. Despite claims of record spending and public investment, when adjusted for inflation, the truth is, under this government, per-student funding is now the lowest in recent history.

Because of Conservative ideology to defund public education, take over school boards and privatize our schools, 41 out of 72 distinct school boards in Ontario are now facing deficits and service cuts this year.

Unlike the provincial government, school boards are not permitted to carry forward deficits. They’ll be forced to balance their budgets by cutting academic and other essential programs.

This is what it looks like in Toronto: The TDSB is facing a $58-million deficit. They’re forced to cut music programs, shut down continuing education and close half of their swimming pools. Over the past week, many parents in Toronto Centre have reached out in anger toward this government. They’re raging mad that their children will lose the opportunity to learn to swim, a life-saving skill.

Last week, I wrote to the Minister of Education and called on him to invest in our province’s future, our future workforce: our children. This all feels even more critical today as we find ourselves in the midst of Education Week.

On behalf of the students and families of Toronto, I challenge this Conservative government to finally put our kids first, fund public education, fix our schools and keep our swimming pools open.

Emergency Preparedness Week

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: This Emergency Preparedness Week, I want to begin by thanking the incredible first responders across Ontario: our firefighters, paramedics, police officers, emergency managers and volunteers. You are on the front lines when disaster strikes. Your work is heroic, and we are deeply grateful.

But gratitude alone is not enough. We need to be better prepared. The reality is, we are not ready. Climate change is wreaking havoc across our province. Wildfires are burning longer. Ice storms and extreme weather events are no longer rare; they are part of the new reality. Yet our emergency management systems are outdated and under-resourced. Municipalities are struggling without clear provincial leadership or long-term investment. Vulnerable communities are being left behind, and people don’t always know where to turn when the worst happens.

Flooding is the number one cause of public emergency in Ontario and is the most common natural disaster in Canada, costing Canadians more than any other climate issue. As public servants, it is our duty to protect and safeguard our residents. We need to prepare Ontarians for the future.

In March 2023, I proposed a bill that would spotlight flooding awareness. There was no downside; it was a win-win. This government did not see the value in it.

Let’s use this week to not just talk about preparedness, but to commit to it. Ontarians can and must do better.

Events in Mississauga East–Cooksville

MPP Silvia Gualtieri: As a new MPP, I am learning just how quickly calendars fill up. In a vibrant riding like Mississauga East–Cooksville, there’s no shortage of meaningful moments. I was proud to attend the Cops for Cancer fundraiser at Il Porcellino, a local gem known not only for its award-winning Italian cuisine but for its big heart.

For 14 years, the Tucci family has partnered with Peel Regional Police to turn Thursday lunches in April into hope, supporting the Canadian Cancer Society. Watching officers trade cruisers for lunch shifts reminded me that this is what community looks like.

That same spirit was present as we raised the freedom flag to mark 50 years since the fall of Saigon. Over 3,500 Vietnamese Canadians call my riding home, many with powerful stories of survival and sacrifice. Canada’s welcome of over 120,000 Vietnamese refugees remains a proud

chapter in our history.

And I was honoured to celebrate the 234th anniversary of Poland’s constitution of May 3, a bold symbol of democracy and resilience. Polish—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): We’re out of time.

Members’ statements?

Highway safety

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Highway safety remains the number one issue in northern Ontario. Access to health care is also a priority, but people in the region cannot access health care if the highways are closed due to yet another catastrophic accident.

The NDP’s northern highway safety plan recommends having all new commercial drivers tested by MTO-certified inspectors. If new drivers can’t pass a legitimate road test, they shouldn’t be on the road. We also recommend clearing snow within eight hours and returning highway maintenance to the MTO. Spending $30 million on an inspection station that is rarely used is bad economics. Qualified local people want to work as enforcement officers at the Shuniah station, yet they can’t get job interviews. What’s up with that? This station should be staffed 24/7, and it’s possible to do it.

Then there’s Driver Inc., where companies force drivers to be self-employed, undercutting companies that offer driver benefits and leaving those under Driver Inc. with nothing if they are in an accident.

These concerns and recommendations are echoed by Truckers for Safer Highways, the Women’s Trucking Federation of Canada, Trucker’s Voice and many other industry professionals.

It’s time the minister stopped ignoring our calls and addressed the urgent safety needs of our northern highways.

Ontario Trillium Foundation grants

Mr. John Jordan: Last month, I was happy to announce funding to two local organizations in Lanark county through the Ontario Trillium Foundation’s Grow grants, which help to expand programs already making a positive impact. Thanks to the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Gaming, Rural FASD and the Carleton Place Canoe Club were two of the successful recipients in Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston.

Rural FASD, or Rural Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, provides essential services to those with FASD and their families. Chair Rob More said the three-year grant “demonstrates Ontario’s commitment to seeing people living with severe disabilities such as FASD no longer live in poverty.” The grant will be used to expand its life skills programs for youth and young adults into a hybrid model, providing both in-person and virtual access.

The Carleton Place Canoe Club will use its three-year grant to expand its adult recreational programming, increase equipment and build community connections. Heidi Lowry says, “As our town and surrounding communities grow, we intend to provide inclusive programs, social connections ... by focusing on our adult and aging population. We are honoured to be a recipient of the” OTF’s Grow grant.

Madam Speaker, our government will continue to support projects that help build healthy and vibrant places to live. Thank you to Rural FASD and the Carleton Place Canoe Club for making such a huge difference in their communities.

Education funding

Mr. Billy Pang: I’m proud to rise in the House today to share some exciting news for our neighbours and friends in Markham–Unionville. Our government is investing nearly $41 million in local education infrastructure through the 2024-25 Capital Priorities Program.

I’m exceptionally thrilled that $12.7 million has been added to Markville Secondary School for its expansion, and $28.1 million goes to the construction of a brand new elementary school on Village Parkway.

These investments will create 409 new spaces at Markville Secondary School and 637 new elementary student spaces at the future Village Parkway school, along with 48 licensed child care spaces to support families with young children.

This funding ensures that children from Markham–Unionville can learn in modern, high-quality classrooms close to home and that families have access to affordable child care in our community. This is a significant investment in our riding, one that will meet the needs of our growing community and help prepare students for success in the years ahead.

I want to thank the York Region District School Board for their leadership and advocacy, and I’m proud that our government and the Ministry of Education is delivering real results for families in Markham–Unionville.

Wearing of ribbons

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Markham–Unionville.

Mr. Billy Pang: The government will be seeking unanimous consent to allow MPPs to wear purple ribbons in recognition of May 10 being Lupus Awareness Day.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): MPP Pang is seeking unanimous consent to wear purple ribbons to recognize Lupus Awareness Day. Agreed? Agreed.

Introduction of Visitors

Ms. Lee Fairclough: I’m delighted to recognize today’s page captain, Emily McLaughlin, from the wonderful riding of Etobicoke–Lakeshore—there she is. Joining her today are her proud parents Katherine DiTomaso and Ed McLaughlin, and her grandparents, the Honourable Guy DiTomaso and Mary DiTomaso.

I also want to take this opportunity to wish Ed a very happy birthday. Welcome to Queen’s Park, and I look forward to hosting them for lunch following this.

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: This morning, on behalf of Minister Lecce, I would like to acknowledge Massimo Capozzi, the page captain for today, and I’d like to welcome his family: Luigi Capozzi, his father; Anna Capozzi, his mother; Lucia Capozzi, his grandmother; and Marcel Gidaro, his grandfather. Welcome to Queen’s Park. Massimo, you’re doing a fantastic job as page captain.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: It’s an honour to welcome Tom McLaughlin of Thomasfield Homes, who’s the vice-chair of the Guelph and District Home Builders’ Association, to Queen’s Park today. Welcome to your House.

Mr. Billy Pang: I would like to welcome Lupus Ontario to Queen’s Park today. Lupus Ontario is the largest organization in the province dedicated to supporting those living with lupus through education, advocacy and research. Their work inspired me to create Bill 112 to proclaim May 10 as Lupus Awareness Day in Ontario to help raise awareness for the one in 1,000 Ontarians living with this disease.

After question period, I would like to invite members to join the Lupus Ontario delegation for a group picture at the grand staircase.

Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Question Period

Government accountability

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is for the Premier. On July 14, 2022, several high-ranking government staff, including staff in the Premier’s office, held a meeting with a developer. In Ryan Amato’s calendar, the meeting was titled, “Winona Lands–East Hamilton–Greenbelt Matters.” These lands were subsequently removed from the greenbelt, until the Premier was forced to change course.

Would the Premier consider a meeting regarding the greenbelt held with a number of government staff and a prominent developer to be government business?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Rob Flack: Our government has made crystal clear the commitment to the people of Ontario to fully restore and protect the greenbelt. This decision was made, and this decision is final. Today, these protections have been enshrined in legislation, and they will stay that way for generations to come.

We have zero tolerance—I repeat, zero tolerance—for any wrongdoing and expect anyone involved in the decision-making about the greenbelt lands to uphold the letter of the law, period. I share the Premier’s expectation that we expect everyone to fully co-operate with the investigation.

Ms. Marit Stiles: I’d say the minister has his work cut out for him. Just to be clear, we think that this is government business, and an adjudicator in the office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner agrees with us.

In fact, through our process of untangling the greenbelt scandal, we have FOIed calendars. What we’ve found was that this meeting and dozens more that were marked as private appear to actually be related to government business: meetings about the greenbelt, meetings with developers held by the Premier’s top staff, marked as private.

Why did the staff in the Premier’s office mislabel these greenbelt meetings? Will the Premier admit that his staff were trying to hide the truth?

Hon. Rob Flack: I think we’ve been very clear: Any investigation is to be followed to the letter of the law. The greenbelt is protected. It will be for generations to come.

Any wrongdoing or concerns, I should not be speaking about here, obviously, due to confidentiality matters. But importantly, I share the Premier’s expectation and emphasize that we expect everyone to fully co-operate with whatever investigation is going on, period.

Ms. Marit Stiles: We’re not just talking about one meeting or two meetings, but 34 meetings. Let me be clear: This isn’t the first instance of something like this happening. It’s not even the second instance. Remember, the government was caught just a few months ago using code words like “G*” and altering references to the greenbelt.

It appears a member of the Premier’s staff had a meeting with a greenbelt developer, mislabelled it as “private” to avoid disclosure rules and now an adjudicator is requiring an affidavit to confirm whether these 34 meetings were actually private.

To the Premier: Was anyone directed to deliberately avoid or conceal references to the greenbelt from their calendars or their official communications so they could avoid being captured in freedom-of-information requests?

Hon. Rob Flack: I can repeat and repeat—and I will—that I share the Premier’s expectation that everyone and anyone will fully co-operate with this investigation.

But, importantly, we’re about getting on with the business of Ontario—to protect Ontario, to build more homes faster. This is what we’re focused on. We are letting the investigation take care of itself.

This government, led by this Premier, is going to continue to build our economy with headwinds in our face. We’re worried about Trump tariffs. We’re worried about our economy. We’re protecting our economy, we’re going to continue to do it, and, furthermore, we will win the day when it comes to housing, building more homes faster. It costs too much and it takes too much time to get a house built. That’s what we’re focused on on this side of the House.

Public health

Ms. Marit Stiles: Well, Speaker, no one’s buying what they’re selling. I know we’re not going to get any answers from the government on this, but I’m pretty sure the RCMP will.

I want to go back to the Premier on a different but very important topic, one that is really preoccupying a lot of parents and families out there right now, and that is Ontario’s out-of-control measles outbreak.

Measles cases in Ontario have increased by another 140 this week—just this week alone—and more than 200 the week before for a total of 1,383 cases right now confirmed in the province. This is worse than the case count in the entire United States—just think about that. Why have we not heard anything from this Premier?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Essex.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: Of course, measles is a disease against which we have a vaccine, and that vaccine is very well known. It’s called the MMR vaccine—measles, mumps, rubella vaccine. It’s widely available in the province of Ontario, and it has been available in the province of Ontario for over 50 years. It’s a tried vaccine, it is a tested vaccine, it is a true vaccine, it is an effective vaccine, and people who are vaccinated by this vaccine have a 99% protection rate against measles.

That’s why we encourage everybody in the province of Ontario to avail themselves of the vaccine, which of course is perfectly free and can be administered quite readily and easily throughout the province of Ontario.

It is important to get people vaccinated. Vaccines work, and we want to protect children, especially, against measles. Please get vaccinated.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the leader of the official opposition.

Ms. Marit Stiles: That does not sound like a response from a government that understands we are facing an emergency here.

I asked the Premier to respond; I’m to go back to the Premier again, because cases are increasing, right? Parents are worried about sending their kids to school. We’ve got Mother’s Day coming along this weekend, and families are worried about gathering with their loved ones.

But the government seems to be just totally content with the state of things, like mansplaining this stuff to us here in the Legislature—please. We understand; the people out there don’t. They need to hear from the Premier.

Why have we not heard from the Premier about the direct and urgent action that this government is going to take to address the worst measles outbreak the province has seen in decades?

Mr. Anthony Leardi: The measles vaccination is readily available to everybody in the province of Ontario, and of course there is no cost to get the measles vaccination. In fact, you can get it through your local public health unit, and we are very happy that we have elevated the funding for our local health units by over 20%—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The House will come to order.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: So you can go to your local health unit and get vaccinated.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Minister of Education will come to order.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: I want to particularly single out—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I apologize to the member.

The House will come to order.

Back to the member for a response.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: Thank you, Speaker.

I want to particularly congratulate Erie Shores HealthCare, where they are launching a dedicated measles assessment clinic outside their hospital in a mobile unit. That is just one example of the actions that have been taken by the provincial government to fight measles.

But, of course, everybody needs to get vaccinated. Once again, I remind everybody that the best protection against this disease is to get the vaccination. It is readily available, and it is 99% effective when you get the vaccination.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, this government has no serious response. You heard it right there. Where is the public health promotion? Is it just going to be here? Where is the vaccine education? Communities are looking to their leaders to promote public health—vaccine education; trust in the medical system, my goodness—but they’re only getting silence.

Look, a child died last year from a—yes, preventable—communicable disease. Our numbers in this outbreak exceed what we’re seeing in the United States. There’s a travel advisory in New York state about travelling to Ontario, for goodness’ sake.

We need a plan. I’m going to ask the government and the Premier to please address this. Let’s hold a take-note debate here. Let’s come up with a plan together to actually get out there and show leadership. If this government won’t do it, let’s do it together. Will you call for a take-note debate addressing the measles outbreak?

Mr. Anthony Leardi: The government has launched an information campaign. This was just recently launched in response to the recent events. I want to remind everybody that when you hear the information from the information campaign, the best way to get your immunization is to contact your local health unit. They can set up a vaccination for you.

We’ve increased funding to health units over 20% since this government took office, because it’s very important for people to get their immunizations—especially children. As I look across the PC caucus, I notice members of our caucus who have young children. I encourage them, and everybody who has young children, to get their immunization. It’s 99% effective against the disease. We want to make sure that everybody in the province of Ontario is safe, especially our children and especially our children when they go to school.

Public health

Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Premier. Right now, in Ontario, there are 1,243 cases of the measles, which far outpaces, by the way, all of the United States—all of the United States—and twice as much as Texas, which has twice the population. It’s the worst outbreak in three decades. Maybe the government doesn’t realize it, but it’s a serious situation, and we didn’t have to be here. We’ve got to ask ourselves, how the heck did we get here?

So, to the Premier: Why is the Premier failing to protect Ontario’s children from the measles?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Essex for a response.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: Speaker, of course the measles vaccine is readily available in the province of Ontario. Anybody can get the measles vaccine. It is commonly referred to as the MMR—measles, mumps and rubella—vaccine. It has been around for over 50 years. It is proven and it is effective. We encourage everyone to get the measles vaccine, but especially children, especially young children.

The vaccine is free. You can get it anywhere in the province of Ontario. And it is especially made free because we fund our public health units. We’ve increased funding to the public health units by approximately 20%. That is one of the reasons we promote the vaccine and want to promote the vaccine, especially for children and especially for young children, because we want to protect our children from getting the measles and we want them to be healthy and good.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Supplementary?

Mr. John Fraser: I’m tempted to send that member some iron because that’s the most anemic response I’ve heard to something in this place.

Measles is a childhood disease that has very serious consequences for children. That’s why we worked for decades and decades to get vaccination rates up, and guess what? We eradicated it. Guess what again? It’s back. Right now, just like Nero played the fiddle while Rome was burning, the Premier is playing the fiddle while measles is burning through Ontario.

Speaker, we all knew that childhood vaccinations after the pandemic would be a challenge. My question is, why has the Premier failed to do what he needed to do to protect Ontario’s children from the measles?

Mr. Anthony Leardi: Of course, the funding for the public health units, which has increased by approximately 20%, is specifically made in order to assist for the delivery of such services as the measles vaccine. Of course, unfortunately, the Liberal Party voted against that funding because they voted against the budget that provided that funding. But we believe in providing that funding, as we believe in providing the measles vaccine free for everybody across the province of Ontario.

This is a tried-and-true vaccine. It has been used for over 50 years. It is effective. When children get the vaccine, they are 99% protected against the possibility of contracting this disease. It is very important for people to become vaccinated. We understand that some families fell behind their

schedule as a result of the pandemic, but it is definitely important to catch up and get your vaccine.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Supplementary?

Mr. John Fraser: You cut public health funding by hundreds of millions of dollars and the fact is, right now, you’re not giving families the tools that they need, the information that they need, the help that they need. That’s an embarrassing answer.

We know that three quarters of measles patients are under 17. Most of those children are unvaccinated, the vast majority of them. And we know that any drop in vaccination rates is a risk because measles is so infectious.

So, respectfully to the member across, the current situation was foreseeable and preventable. I’m going to ask you once again, why is the Premier failing to protect Ontario’s children from the measles?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I’ll remind members to direct their questions through the Speaker.

Back to the member for Essex.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: Again, it’s unfortunate that the Liberals voted against the budget which provided the increased funding to public health units because that was an increase of over 20% since this government has taken office. It’s very important to provide this funding so that these public health units can provide the vaccine, which is absolutely free to everybody in the province of Ontario. Anyone who wants to get the vaccine can have the vaccine absolutely free, and that is provided through public health units and various other places where you can get the vaccine.

We encourage everyone in the province of Ontario to get vaccinated, particularly if you have fallen behind the

schedule as a result of the pandemic. Please get your children vaccinated and get yourselves vaccinated if you have not been vaccinated. You can get a vaccine by contacting your local primary health provider, or you can contact your health unit and they will put you in touch with a source.

Public health

Mr. John Fraser: The government’s response so far is, “Hey, guys. Everything’s fine.” I don’t think so.

So I don’t understand why the Premier failed to act to have Ontario have the best, the most robust information and vaccination campaign in the whole world. I don’t why he doesn’t aspire to that.

I’m going to ask again, why is the Premier failing to protect Ontario’s children from the measles?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member from Essex.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: I’m interested that the member has brought up issues related to the pandemic because as we remember, after the Liberals left office and the pandemic struck, when we opened the cupboards, the cupboards were bare. There was no preparation for what happened during the pandemic and so this brand new government had to take over in a situation where there was no official rule book.

I want to say that under the incredible circumstances that occurred during that pandemic, it was really, really, really important that we had the leadership of our present Premier, who steered us through that pandemic with leadership unparalleled by any other Premier.

Getting back to the issue of the vaccinations, just like vaccinations work—the MMR vaccine has been tested for 50 years. It works. People should get vaccinated.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The supplementary.

Mr. John Fraser: Well, when we’re talking about the anti-vax campaign, I would like to remind the member opposite—because he waxed so eloquently the other day about all those countries that have special economic zones—if you take a look at that list, that’s where this information is coming from, is places like Russia. I know the member had a lot to say about Russia last week, so I would just encourage him to think about that.

Every year, we know that government spends hundreds of millions of dollars on self-serving, taxpayer-funded ads designed to help the government. They spent $60 million two years ago. This year, I’m willing to bet it’s closer to $100 million. That’s a lot of money to pat yourself on the back, and that’s what they do with this money. I just think all of that money would have been way better spent making sure we have the best information and vaccination campaign in the world. Does the Premier agree?

Mr. Anthony Leardi: Speaker, it’s very nice to hear the member endorse our information campaign with regard to informing people about the importance of being vaccinated. That public awareness campaign, of course, has already been launched, so I thank the member for endorsing this government’s action in providing information to the public about getting vaccinated.

It’s important that people receive that information because there are elements out there that will provide contradictory information, and we want to make sure that our youngest individuals in our population are protected. Those are our children. And I want to make sure that all the parents out there understand that we have a vaccine that’s been in place for over 50 years. It’s a commonly used vaccine. It’s been tested over, over and over again. It is a very safe vaccine. It will protect your children against the measles. It is 99% effective against the measles, and we encourage everybody to be vaccinated.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Final supplementary.

Mr. John Fraser: I think the most appropriate thing I can say is something the member has probably heard before, and that is the term “failure to launch.” The Premier and the minister have kept the Chief Medical Officer of Health literally in the basement. Requests for interviews have been repeatedly denied—repeatedly denied—and then we hear the anemic responses that we’re getting from the member and the minister on this measles outbreak. Also, these guys have tons of friendly questions. I have not heard one about the measles. Do you think maybe some of your constituents are concerned? Mine are.

Speaker, other places in this country are actually taking stronger action. Even the anti-vax Premier of Alberta is taking stronger action than we are here in Ontario. They’re stepping up. My question is, why will this Premier not step up for Ontario’s children and prevent the measles?

Mr. Anthony Leardi: I think the words “failure to launch” best describe the Liberal campaign in Mississauga East–Cooksville. By the way, I’d like to congratulate the PC member from Mississauga East–Cooksville for winning that riding.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The government House leader will come to order. The leader of the third party will come to order.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: But I digress. I should talk about immunization, which is very important for our children. Again, I make reference to some members of our own caucus who have young children of their own, and that’s a wonderful, wonderful example that we should probably follow, the example of good immunization practice—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I apologize to the member. The leader of the third party and the government House leader will please come to order.

The member may continue.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: Speaker, I never realized that immunization would cause such a ruckus among the opposition parties. I thought we could all agree that getting immunization is important—important for protecting our children. But I think maybe after a little thought we can all agree on this: It’s important to be immunized, protect our children. It’s a safe vaccine. Please get vaccinated.

Ontario economy

MPP Jamie West: The Premier called an early election to fight Trump’s tariffs, and in January he estimated that tariffs could cost Ontario as many as 500,000 jobs. Four months later, workers are losing their jobs by the thousands, Ontario has the second-highest unemployment rate in the country, and the Financial Accountability Officer is warning that Ontario will face a recession.

In response, the Premier said he would wait and see what happened. What is the Premier waiting for?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development.

Hon. David Piccini: Speaker, I’ll tell you what the Premier has done: He’s stepped up, with a vacuum of national leadership, which got him back in this place—a strong majority government.

Secondly, he announced an investment for tools and machinery with the finance minister that is going to support SME in particular—those supply feeder plants that are supporting our big plants.

Thirdly, he went down to Unifor in Oshawa, toured the plant floor to listen to workers, met with Unifor Local 222 to sit down and talk to them about issues that are affecting them, about additional supports.

Fourth, yesterday at Skills Ontario, he announced another billion dollars in the Skills Development Fund—something unions in that member’s own riding are benefiting from. I met with labour leaders yesterday about the Sudbury project.

Speaker, that member voted against each and every one of those measures, and it’s a real shame.

MPP Jamie West: I don’t know how I voted against the Premier’s tour schedule, but let’s talk about what’s been happening while the Premier has been waiting. Nearly one in three Ontario trucking carriers have already laid off employees. Stellantis announced a temporary layoff of 3,800 in Windsor. Alstom announced nearly 200 layoffs in Thunder Bay. GM announced 750 layoffs in Oshawa. GM announced a fall layoff of almost 500 workers in Ingersoll. Ivaco Rolling Mills announced 30-plus layoffs in L’Orignal.

The Premier spoke about tariff layoffs in January. I appreciate he’s doing a tour of the province, but when will he start protecting jobs?

Hon. David Piccini: What a shame that member voted against the Skills Development Fund, Speaker.

The difference between this party and that party: That party was propping up the previous Liberal government when they were slated for zero EV investments—zero. Say that to the members in Windsor collecting $14 million in payroll. That member couldn’t care less, because we know under their track record we wouldn’t have had—they don’t even dress to play the game, Speaker. That’s the difference between our party and them.

We’re going to continue to attract world-class investments. Without question, there are very real threats posed by the President of the United States, and in response we’re investing in tools and machinery. In response, we’re investing in skills development and training that are elevating people with better training, bigger jobs and bigger paycheques.

That member votes against each and every one of those measures, Speaker, because he doesn’t want those jobs in our communities. He votes against mining, after all.

Public health

Mr. Adil Shamji: For the Premier: I’d like to begin by thanking the Chief Medical Officer of Health for providing a much-needed update this week. He has a difficult job, and I know that parents were relieved to hear from him.

What concerns me is his statement that we should expect another 100 to 125 cases of measles every week until the summer. We already saw more cases than that last week.

The problem here is that this government is trying to condition Ontarians to mediocrity. They want us to accept housing prices that are out of control, accept ER wait times that are through the roof and millions of people without a family doctor.

Well, on behalf of all Ontarians, I’m here to say that we do not accept those things. We are not willing to settle for less, even as this government collects more tax than any other in our province’s history.

This morning the Minister of Health said that her measles response is working. Why does the Premier think it’s okay to be the only jurisdiction in North America and on this continent to have 125 cases of measles every week until the summer?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Essex.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: Of course we’re all very concerned about the health of our children, and particularly myself; I have children. There are members of all parties in this House who have children, and we all share a concern for the protection of our children against any disease, including measles. That’s why we have a great vaccine. It’s a vaccine that has been in place for over 50 years. It is a tried-and-true vaccine. It’s been tested and used over and over and over again.

This vaccine is free. You can get it anywhere in the province of Ontario. You don’t have to pay for it. It would be administered by your primary care provider. And on that topic, we’re expanding the delivery of primary care across the province of Ontario through this government’s programs and through this government’s health budget, which has expanded as well.

We encourage everyone to get the measles vaccine. It will protect your children—99% effectiveness against measles.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Supplementary?

Mr. Adil Shamji: The member across has 3,000 children in his riding that don’t have a family doctor. Even if they saw his riveting performance during question period, they wouldn’t be able to get vaccinated in the first place.

Now, in a shocking update this morning at a press conference, the Minister of Health defended her government’s abysmal response on measles by saying she wrote a letter to public health officers reminding them to vaccinate children. She reminded public health doctors, who have a four-year bachelor’s degree, four-year medical degree and five-year residency training in public health and preventive medicine, that they need to vaccinate children. They didn’t need a reminder; they needed resources and didn’t get it.

We need look no further than Alberta, led by an anti-vax Premier and with a fraction of the cases that we have, to see that they implemented a measles hotline, television ad campaign and public vaccination clinics. Why won’t this government do the same?

Will the Premier stop selling snake oil in a crystal bottle and come clean with Ontarians about what new steps he will implement, now that he’s revealed that the current ones have failed?

Mr. Anthony Leardi: As a medical professional himself, I’m sure that the member who just spoke understands the importance of everybody getting immunized. I’d think that he would promote the government’s plan, which is to inform everybody in the province of Ontario about not only the importance of being immunized, but also the availability of immunization, which is absolutely free and very available throughout the entire province of Ontario.

We do, in fact, encourage everybody to get their children immunized against measles. The common vaccine is referred to as the MMR—measles, mumps and rubella—vaccine. I encourage that member and all members of this House to join the government’s information program and make sure that their constituents are informed that this vaccine is available for free to everyone. They can even call the number 811 if they want to get further information about where they can obtain the vaccine absolutely free in the province of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I want to caution our members when they are asking questions on their choice of words. We don’t want anything inflammatory.

Question?

Public safety

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos: My question is to the Attorney General. Crime today is not just happening on the street; it’s happening online. We’re seeing more cyber attacks, more stolen data and more criminals using new tools to do harm. Even serious crimes like auto theft and gun violence now involve high-tech tools and digital networks. Ontarians are right to be worried.

They want to know that our justice system can keep up. That’s why I’m proud our government is stepping up with real action. We’re cracking down on high-tech crime. We’re standing with police and crown prosecutors, and we’re making sure criminals face justice, no matter how they try to hide.

Speaker, can the Attorney General please explain how Ontario is taking the lead in fighting cybercrime and protecting our communities?

Hon. Doug Downey: I appreciate the question from the member for Oakville North–Burlington. It is true that crime isn’t just happening on our streets anymore. More and more is happening online, and it’s increasing, Madam Speaker. The criminal element is far more sophisticated than it used to be, and they’re using tools that they didn’t have before. Nearly all criminal activity nowadays, from auto theft to guns and gangs, is using technology.

That’s why we created the new and permanent cybercrime and cryptocurrency prosecution team to make sure that police and prosecutors have the technical knowledge that they need to tackle this online scourge. This team is the first of its kind in Canada. It’s very cutting edge.

Although we’ve had police in that space, we didn’t have prosecutors to provide pre-charge advice and to help make sure that we’re putting our best case forward as the charges are laid. The crowns will do the pre-charge advice. They will help assist in the asset recovery and they will prosecute complex and novel cybercrime cases, Madam Speaker. I’ll have more to say in the supplementary.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Oakville North–Burlington.

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos: I’d like to thank the Attorney General for his answer. People in Ontario want to see real action on crime. They want to know that the criminals who commit serious offences like car theft, gun crime and gang violence are being held to account. They want to know that our courts are ready to deal with violent criminals quickly and effectively.

That’s why it’s so important that our government is continuing to put resources in the right places. From new bail teams to auto theft units, we’re making smart investments to support our police and prosecutors. We’re helping our justice system move faster, get tougher and deliver better results.

Speaker, can the Attorney General please explain how these new specialized teams will help keep our streets and communities safe across Ontario?

Hon. Doug Downey: I appreciate the opportunity to respond to the member from Oakville–North Burlington. Our specialized cyber crime and cryptocurrency prosecution team is just the newest addition to our specialized teams.

We have the major auto theft prosecution team, who are specialists, special prosecutors, who will bring the best evidence forward and help in the very complex investigations tackling organized crime. The team provides prosecutors legal supports within the communities, especially in the areas that have the highest rates of auto theft.

We’re expanding the dedicated guns-and-gangs units in targeted regions as well to deal with illegal firearms coming into our country and to deal with organized crime in those areas. The provincial guns-and-gangs support unit is made up of expert prosecutors that work with provincial and municipal police forces, again, to put our best foot forward. I think of them like a SWAT team of prosecutors to make sure that we have the offenders being held responsible. We’ll be announcing more in the days to come.

Ontario film and television industry

Ms. Sandy Shaw: Premier, as you well know, the US president is threatening to impose—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Through the Speaker.

Ms. Sandy Shaw: —a 100% tariff on foreign-produced films. Our homegrown film and television industry is vital. The Leader of the Opposition asked the Premier for details on how he plans to defend it. Unfortunately, we didn’t get any reassuring answers. The Premier has even been quoted as saying, “Let’s wait and see.”

So again, to the Premier, in the face of these threats, what new and what specific actions is the government going to take to defend the film and television industry here in Ontario?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Response? I recognize the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Gaming.

Hon. Stan Cho: Yesterday, we talked about the importance of the creative industries in the province of Ontario. I reiterate that here this morning. What the member asks, though, is for new measures on a hypothetical when we said we must stand and protect and continue to support this industry, as we have done since 2018.

In that member’s own riding, let’s talk about the shows that have been filmed there: The Umbrella Academy, The Handmaid’s Tale, Children Ruin Everything, Murdoch Mysteries. What about movies? Four Brothers, Cinderella Man, The Incredible Hulk. These are iconic films that have provided huge economic opportunity on both sides of the camera as well as billions of dollars in economic spending.

Now, what did we do to help that production happen? Since 2018, we’ve introduced the Ontario Film and Television Tax Credit, the Ontario Production Services Tax Credit, the Ontario Computer Animation and Special Effects Tax Credit, the Ontario Interactive Digital Media Tax Credit, the Ontario Book Publishing Tax Credit—all resulting in billions in economic activity here. What does that have in common with that member? She voted against every single one.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Supplementary?

Ms. Sandy Shaw: So again, from the minister, more “wait and see.” You’re talking about what has been done in the past, but the industry is currently in a crisis, and we’re talking about “wait and see.”

As you will know, Speaker, Hamilton is one of the busiest cities in Ontario for film and television production. We know what we do in Hamilton. We know the well-known films include the new Reacher film, The Handmaid’s Tale and Brilliant Minds.

There were 139 productions in Hamilton last year driven by the city of Hamilton’s office for film production. It brought in revenue of $60 million to the city.

There are 10,000 film and television cultural workers in Hamilton alone and they want answers. They’re looking for more than a promise to retrain them if the bottom drops out.

So again, what action is the government taking now to counter the threat coming from the US and to protect our film and television industry in Hamilton and in Ontario?

Hon. Stan Cho: More words from the NDP saying they care about this industry, Speaker. Where were they in 2018? Where were they in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024? This year, when we said that we are going to protect this industry—they’ve been in opposition, screaming at the top of their lungs to help this industry, but every time they’ve had an opportunity to vote in favour of those industries, they said no. Not only did they say no to the television tax credit, they said no to the Ontario Arts Council for grants for TV and film and television.

Speaker, what has that meant in Hamilton? Well, let’s talk about that: Hamilton Music Collective, $200,000; the Interval House of Hamilton, $150,000; McMaster Museum of Art, $50,000; Dundas historical society museum, $32,000—totalling, since 2018, an investment of $4.7 million.

That member and those members voted against it. They continue to vote against the industry. We are here to protect creative industries in Ontario for good.

Mental health and addiction services

Ms. Lee Fairclough: This week is Mental Health Week, and sadly, my inbox continues to fill with stories of people unable to access the care they desperately need. I met with mental health service organizations in my community, and they’ve not seen a base pay increase for their staff in the last seven years, making it difficult to hold on to the very people that we need most to deliver care.

To the Minister of Health: When will we get serious about funding basic community mental health care services in this province?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions.

Hon. Vijay Thanigasalam: Madam Speaker, through you to the member opposite, thank you for that question. Too many Ontarians know the pain of mental health and addictions. These individuals who are suffering, they are our brothers, sisters, fathers, children. That’s why this government, under the leadership of Premier Ford, we have launched the Roadmap to Wellness, investing $3.8 billion.

Since the implementing of that plan, we have increased the funding for mental health and addictions by $500 million every year. Just recently, we are establishing 28 new homelessness and addiction recovery treatment beds, offering net new mental health, addiction and social services, and also expanding the importance of supportive housing units to make sure we provide high-quality addiction and mental health care to Ontarians of all ages, where and when they need it.

Ms. Lee Fairclough: I thought that’s what we might hear, but unfortunately, the HART hubs aren’t designed to realize an increase in the volume of services. They are a screen for this government to dismantle services that the government doesn’t like. We need to add, not subtract, mental health and addiction services, and we need to fund increased access to actual care, period. What is your plan, your real plan, to do that?

Hon. Vijay Thanigasalam: We believe that addiction should not be a dead end, and recovery is real. That’s why we are investing $550 million to establish these HART hubs.

My team heard from an individual at the northwest HART hub in Thunder Bay, who was so grateful for the support he received, from a simple cup of coffee to clothing, hygiene necessities, a warm meal, access to the Internet, and so much more. He said he felt understood and genuinely cared for, and that is what HART hubs are all about.

We want to break the cycle of addiction, give them a hand up, make sure they reclaim their life and have the dignity of being with family and community.

Emergency preparedness

Ms. Laurie Scott: My question is to the Minister of Emergency Preparedness and Response. When disaster strikes, people expect help to come fast. They want to know someone is ready and able to respond. We’ve seen fires, floods and, most recently, the devastating ice storm that hit not only my riding of Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock, but also the minister’s riding and other parts of Ontario.

The risks of extreme weather and natural disasters are growing. That’s why our government is showing leadership and making emergency preparedness a priority. Families want to know that Ontario is ready. They want to see quick actions and real plans when times get tough.

Can the minister explain how this ministry will help our province prepare for future emergencies and make sure help gets to those who need it the most?

Hon. Jill Dunlop: I’d like to thank the member for her advocacy and response during the recent ice storm in her region as well.

Speaker, as the new Minister of Emergency Preparedness and Response, I want to reassure Ontarians that their safety, security and well-being will always be our government’s top priority. Our ministry is committed to ensuring that our province is as resilient, ready and strong as ever in the face of emergencies such as the recent ice storm.

When the ice storm hit Ontario, my riding was directly impacted. I witnessed first-hand how quickly my ministry was able to deploy Ontario Corps partners to the areas hit hardest. As a result of their work, over 4,000 wellness checks were conducted in person and on the phone; more than 2,500 personal hygiene items were distributed; over 1,000 blankets, pillows and towels distributed; and more than 3,700 meals and food hampers were provided.

When it comes to emergency management, our government is doing everything possible to ensure that Ontario is prepared and protected.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock.

Ms. Laurie Scott: I want to thank the minister for the response, and her and the Premier for coming up to Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock to see first-hand the damage that occurred and meet the incredible people of the emergency response personnel and the volunteers that helped us get through this.

People across Ontario want to feel safe in their homes and communities. When disaster hits, local teams are often the first to respond. They need clear plans, the right tools and strong support from the province to do their jobs well.

People want to know their towns and their cities are ready. They also want to know that their government is working behind the scenes to support them with technology and training they need for any crisis. That kind of work can save lives and protect our communities.

Speaker, can the minister explain how our government is supporting local responders with the tools they need to act fast and protect the people of Ontario when emergencies strike?

Hon. Jill Dunlop: We now require every municipality in Ontario to have an emergency management program, including response plans. To build out our province’s emergency management capacity, our government is investing a historic $110 million to support the emergency response sector.

My ministry supports our key emergency partners by using enhanced digital tools, including AI, for situational awareness and rapid incident assessments across the province so we know ahead of time when and where people will need support.

To plan for future emergencies, we released the Provincial Emergency Management Strategy and Action Plan, the first made-in-Ontario plan to ensure communities and people are safe, practised and prepared before, during and after emergencies. I want to remind all members to pick up their educational resource packages in the lobbies as it is Emergency Preparedness Week.

Speaker, I am proud of the work we are doing and the work of our volunteers and emergency responders. Under the leadership of Premier Ford, our government will continue to invest and support our emergency response sector to ensure every person in Ontario is protected.

Consumer protection / Protection du consommateur

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: Last month, Public Health Ontario reported that in my riding, families spent up to $300 more on groceries every month than the Ontario average. It’s even worse in communities along the James Bay coast. We put forward a motion that would have stopped price gouging and helped bring everyday costs down, but the government voted against it.

My question is for the Premier. At a time where northerners are looking for real relief, why did the government vote against our motion?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Public and Business Service Delivery and Procurement.

Hon. Stephen Crawford: To the member opposite, thank you for the question.

There’s a reason that in this House today there are twice as many members sitting on this side of the House than there is with the Liberals and NDP combined. The reason for that is, on February 27, the people of Ontario spoke, and they supported a Premier—Premier Doug Ford—who’s leading Ontario and protecting Ontario.

There is nobody that is leading this province, protecting the people of this province, protecting the small businesses of this province, protecting the consumers of this province more than Premier Doug Ford.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Supplementary?

M. Guy Bourgouin: As-tu écouté la question que je t’ai posée? Je parle de l’insécurité alimentaire. Tu me réponds avec une réponse comme tu viens de me donner, là. C’est clair que vous n’avez aucune idée comment les gens ont besoin d’aide dans le Nord. C’est clair que votre gouvernement ne veut pas s’occuper sérieusement de développer le Nord, ni aider à répondre à l’insécurité alimentaire.

Alors, je vais te donner une autre opportunité de répondre. Encore au premier ministre : pourquoi est-ce que le gouvernement a voté contre notre motion qui apportait du soulagement immédiat pour les familles en besoin de Mushkegowuk–Baie James?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Agribusiness.

Hon. Trevor Jones: Thank you for the question, from my friend in the north, but coming from a party who supported the regime that called your north and my north “no man’s land”—I don’t understand how you don’t understand that things like the carbon tax and food prices are directly related to one another. The longer food has to travel, the more expensive food is.

But this Premier and this side of the House and that side of the House voted to rail against the carbon tax that made food prices more expensive in your community and my community.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Through the Speaker.

Hon. Trevor Jones: But, Madam Speaker, the member opposite has a good question. We’re working very hard to support the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund, which invested $62 million to your communities that attracted private sector investment to increase that to $95 million for 489 projects, over 500 jobs to make food access more inexpensive—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Question?

Health care funding

MPP Tyler Watt: As a front-line nurse, I’ve seen first-hand what’s going on in our hospitals. I’ve worked for years at the Queensway Carleton Hospital in my community that serves over 50% of the city of Ottawa and surrounding areas. Unfortunately, this hospital has one of the longest emergency room wait times in the province. It isn’t uncommon that we’re operating well over 100% capacity. That’s on top of being short-staffed pretty much every single day.

Our health care system is in crisis, a crisis that has been manufactured by this government. My colleagues on the front lines are tired. They’re burnt-out and demanding better from this government.

Speaker, through you to the Minister of Health, will this government commit to funding and expanding the Queensway Carleton’s emergency room capacity?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: While the member opposite will talk down the