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

November 3, 2020

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2020-Nov-03 vol. A (PDF)

L204A - Tue 3 Nov 2020 / Mar 3 nov 2020

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 3 November 2020 Mardi 3 novembre 2020

Orders of the Day

Soldiers’ Aid Commission Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 sur la Commission d’aide aux anciens combattants

Members’ Statements

Domenico Paniccia

Education funding

Sikh genocide

Veterans

Treaties recognition

Food for Life

The Hospice Face to Face campaign

Mental health services

Canadian soldiers

Events in Barrie–Innisfil

Question Period

Long-term care

COVID-19 response

College standards and accreditation

Long-term care

Indigenous affairs

College standards and accreditation

Long-term care

Affordable housing

Opioid abuse

Electricity restructuring

Flu immunization

Public health

Hospital services

Education funding

Small business

Notice of dissatisfaction

Introduction of Bills

Broadband is an Essential Service Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 déclarant que le service à large bande est un service essentiel

Petitions

Northern Health Travel Grant

Infrastructure funding

Treaties recognition

Access to personal health records

Conservation authorities

Fish and wildlife management

Long-term care

Family law

Multiple sclerosis

Small business

Orders of the Day

Soldiers’ Aid Commission Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 sur la Commission d’aide aux anciens combattants

Moving Ontario Family Law Forward Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 faisant avancer le droit de la famille en Ontario

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Soldiers’ Aid Commission Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 sur la Commission d’aide aux anciens combattants

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 2, 2020, on the motion for third reading of the following bill:

Bill 202,

An Act to continue the Soldiers’ Aid Commission / Projet de loi 202, Loi prorogeant la Commission d’aide aux anciens combattants.

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

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I’m pleased to rise to speak on third reading of Bill 202, the Soldiers’ Aid Commission Act. Speaker, I support this bill because it is far past time to update the act, which has remained unchanged since the 1970s—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I have to interrupt the member for Guelph and inquire how much time he plans to use for his remarks.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: Three minutes, Speaker. Thank you.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We’ll give you three minutes. Thank you.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: For far too long, veterans groups have advocated for improvements to the commission in the financial support available to veterans under the program. We have seen reports that over 60% of the commission’s budget has gone unspent in some years due to the lack of applicants who qualified for the program. Many of these supposedly “unqualified” applicants were just younger veterans who served more recently than the Korean War, so tragically, money went unspent while young veterans continued to face significant challenges.

The expansion of the eligibility criteria to include veterans of all ages and their families is long overdue. These changes will allow for many more people who have courageously served our country to receive the support they need and they deserve.

I’m also happy to see the program’s budget increase to $1.3 million. These are desperately needed funds, and I know these changes will have a positive impact on people’s lives. But we know that this isn’t enough. We cannot stop with this piece of legislation. We know that more needs to be done to provide mental health supports for veterans, and we know that more needs to be done to provide housing for veterans.

I was so sad to learn that in a survey in 2018, the city of Toronto said that 11% of the city’s homeless population had reported having served in our military. It’s unacceptable to have anyone in our society without a roof over their head, but it’s especially unacceptable for women and men who have served our country and made sacrifices in serving our country to not have an affordable place to call home.

So it’s our responsibility, Speaker, to honour our veterans’ sacrifice and service, to ensure that they are enabled—and able—to live a dignified life after serving our country. With Remembrance Day coming up next week, this is a particularly timely piece of legislation. I look forward to voting for it and encouraging all members of this House to support this legislation and to support our veterans.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): We now have an opportunity for five minutes of questions and responses. The first question: the member from Sarnia–Lambton.

Mr. Robert Bailey: Thank you to the member opposite for his comments there. I just have one question that I would like to get on the record from our side, and also ask the opposition, the independent member. The Standing Committee on Social Policy heard from a number of presenters, including Together We Stand, about the importance of the commission recognizing the contribution of family members to recovery. Would the honourable member have some comments on that, please?

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I appreciate the member opposite’s question. I just want to say that, obviously, not only do we need to support veterans, but their families. I think we all know that when somebody serves their country, it’s that individual making the sacrifice to serve, but it’s also their family, Speaker. Ensuring that we have supports that not only include veterans but include their families is absolutely vital and critical.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Thank you to the member from Guelph for his comments this morning. My question is, yes, the government has announced $1.3 million, but we know that 230,000 veterans are ineligible to receive these Soldiers’ Aid Commission monies. I’m just wondering, if this money does run out halfway through, three quarters of the way through, and then we have veterans who are needing these funds to get a roof or to get dental care or medical care, would you stand with myself and the opposition and help us convince the government to make sure the monies are there all the way through, even if the fund runs out?

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I appreciate the member’s question. I also appreciate the fact that you’ve talked about members of your family who have served. We certainly appreciate that.

Yes, as I said in my comments, I think eligibility criteria should include all veterans and, as I mentioned in my response to the last question, their family members. If the funds are insufficient, then absolutely we should increase those funds.

I think we have a moral obligation to stand up and support the veterans who have served our country. We should provide the funding to ensure that they’re properly housed, that they have access to mental health supports and other social service supports to live the dignified life which they deserve.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question.

Mr. Lorne Coe: Thank you to the member for his presentation. Much of what is in this legislation is improving the lives of veterans and their families. One aspect is increasing the eligibility requirements for counselling and support for veterans and their family members. Would the member speak about the effects of that in his riding, please?

Mr. Mike Schreiner: Thanks. I appreciate the member’s question. Expanding the eligibility criteria for services will absolutely benefit veterans in my riding and in ridings across Ontario.

Speaker, before I run out of time, there’s one thing I want to bring up today and put on the record: I’ve had a number of veterans in my riding reach out to me and say that they would like to see a highway or some sort of significant piece of infrastructure in Ontario dedicated to disabled veterans. They’ve pointed out to me that, currently, we don’t have such a commemoration in place. The Highway 7 that’s being proposed between Guelph and Kitchener-Waterloo is a piece of infrastructure that veterans in my riding have suggested be dedicated to commemorating disabled veterans, and I would hope that’s a conversation that all of us in this House can have.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): We really don’t have time for another question and response.

Further debate? I recognize the member from Peterborough–Kawartha.

Mr. Dave Smith: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ve worn a kilt here in the chamber a number of times. Today, I’m wearing Black Watch to honour some of our veterans. Black Watch is the official tartan of three of our regiments: the Governor General’s Foot Guards, the Canadian Grenadier Guards, and the Royal Highland Regiment, also known as Black Watch.

I’d like to talk a little bit at the beginning of the speech about some of the veterans from Peterborough who have served Canada but currently do not qualify for the Soldiers’ Aid Commission: Bill Steedman served overseas in Syria and Israel as a UN peacekeeper; Frank Schofield served in the Congo as a UN peacekeeper; John Rich, who I met through Toastmasters, served in Germany in the Canadian infantry; Bob Ware served in India and Pakistan; Ron Wardell served in Korea; Padre Frank Patrick, who is returning to Peterborough this month, has been serving in Cyprus; Lee Harrison served in Bosnia in the 1990s, and, after he returned to civilian life, he chose voluntarily to take a leave of absence from Peterborough Fire Services so that he could rejoin his former regiment and serve in Afghanistan after 9/11; and Lee-Anne Quinn.

Lee-Anne is currently the honorary lieutenant governor of the Hasty Ps; she served as a major in the Armed Forces. Later this month, she’ll receive the Sovereign’s Medal for Volunteers from the Governor General. She served in Afghanistan, Rwanda, Somalia and Bosnia.

I’d also like to give an honourable mention to Jim Burgess. Jim did not serve with the Canadian military. Jim served with the Royal Marine Commandos. He was on the shores of the Falkland Islands during the Falklands War.

When we think about veterans, typically we think of older people—people who are my age or older. I’d like to mention one other person who grew up in Peterborough, who doesn’t get to be a veteran: Abby Cowbrough. Abby was killed in the summer of 2019 when her Sea King helicopter crashed. Abby went to high school with my daughters. She was 23.

The Soldiers’ Aid Commission was the first of its kind in Canada and was created almost 105 years ago. It hasn’t been updated since 1970, when we included the Korean War veterans in it. Speaker, I was born in 1970. This is a piece of legislation that has not been updated since I was born.

We’ve heard some of the statistics about it: Approximately 93% of veterans in Ontario currently do not qualify for the Soldiers’ Aid Commission. That’s about 230,000 people. We need to fix this. One of the things that this legislation will do is it will change the definition of “veteran,” and it will put it in regulation instead of in legislation. Typically, we stand up here and we talk about how we need to remove regulations, how we need to get rid of some of that red tape. This is not red tape, Mr.

Speaker; this is an intelligent use of regulations, because it means that we don’t have to wait 50 years to do the right thing. As our “veteran” definition changes, we can change it in regulation, and it means that the Soldiers’ Aid Commission will always be up to date. It means that it will be there to serve the veterans who have served our country, veterans like those I mentioned: Bill Steedman, Frank Schofield, John Rich, Bob Ware, Ron Wardell, Frank Patrick, Lee Harrison and Lee-Anne Quinn, among others.

We’re increasing the funding from where it currently sits, at about $250,000, to $1.3 million this year, if passed, and eventually rising to $1.5 million per year. What it will do is it will cover things like housing expenses for some of these veterans. If they’re having trouble paying the rent, this is something that could be used to help with that. It will help cover some of the health care costs that they may have that are not covered in other ways—dental, for example, something that should be covered for all veterans, personal care items.

And this one jumped out at me, Speaker: assistive devices and prosthetics. You’re in a field of battle. You’re in training. You’re doing all of those things that you would do to serve us. Guns are being fired. Bombs are going off. Your hearing is affected by it. The Soldiers’ Aid Commission would help cover the cost of things like hearing aids, then. And God forbid, if something happened and you lost a limb, the Soldiers’ Aid Commission would help cover the cost of prosthetics.

I can’t imagine a time, I can’t imagine a reason why we would not be covering something like that for someone who willingly stepped forward to make a positive difference, not only in Canada but in the entire world, who voluntarily put themselves in harm. We need to make sure that we’re doing things that help these people.

We can’t wait 50 more years to make these adjustments, and the changes that we’re making in Bill 202 would mean we get to update that list as it’s needed. We get to honour the veterans who have served our country and given up so much to make sure that we have what we have. We enjoy a quality of life in Ontario thanks to what the veterans have done for us. I think it’s incumbent on all of us, when this comes to the third vote, to stand up and say, “I stand with the veterans. I stand with those who stood in front of danger to protect me.”

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The first question goes to the member from Spadina–Fort York.

Mr. Chris Glover: Thank you for your words this morning. This is a bill that the NDP, or the official opposition, will be supporting. My question to the member from Peterborough is, as our member mentioned earlier, if the funds that have been allocated are not adequate, will your government up the funds to meet the needs of veterans in Ontario?

Mr. Dave Smith: I think that what you’re seeing with this bill is that we’re doing just that. Currently, there is only about $250,000 that is allocated to it. Mind you, 93% of veterans do not qualify for this fund. We’re increasing the funding to $1.3 million, eventually getting to $1.5 million. We’re putting our money where our mouth is, and we’re saying, “We support the veterans with this.”

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Next question?

Mr. Robert Bailey: Thank you to the member from Peterborough for his remarks. I did some reading on this and am very supportive of the Soldiers’ Aid Commission. But in my reading, I found here that it said that very few veterans across Ontario or Legion members even know about the Soldiers’ Aid Commission. I think I first heard of it probably about four years ago now. Can you expand upon how the government, if this legislation is passed, will communicate and expand knowledge of this great service?

Mr. Dave Smith: That’s an excellent question, because you’re absolutely right: Most people don’t know about the Soldiers’ Aid Commission and what it can do. That’s probably why it’s not being used to its fullest capacity right now. We’ll be embarking on an education plan with this to make sure that our veterans know about it and know that they can access it at any time for the things that they need help with.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Next question?

Mr. Jamie West: Thank you to the member from Peterborough–Kawartha. Just following up on the previous question and talking about funding, something I was curious about, I know that—I forget the exact stat—60% of the commission’s funds currently aren’t being spent every year. We’re talking about raising it to $1.3 million and eventually to $1.5 million. If we do a good job communicating this and more money is needed, what is the plan to meet that goal? We’ve talked on both sides about the importance of supporting soldiers and veterans. What do we do when we need more money?

Mr. Dave Smith: As I said earlier, I think that we have already demonstrated that we have a commitment to our veterans. One of the things that Premier Ford has talked about is his love of veterans and of what they have done and the service that they have provided this country and this province. Currently, the fund is sitting at $252,000 and, as the member said, it is not being fully accessed. We’re increasing it to $1.3 million if this bill is passed, and it will eventually grow to $1.5 million.

We’re demonstrating that we recognize there are needs for our veterans, and we will be investing in our veterans as we move forward. This is a demonstrative way of showing that we believe our veterans are important and we’re making the investment for our veterans.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Next question?

Mr. Stan Cho: I appreciate that this government is putting its money where its mouth is, and a 700% increase to this fund is indicative of that. But I think there’s something more important than the funds that we need to talk about here, Speaker, and that’s the outcomes. It’s not enough to remember our veterans on one day every single year. Could the member explain how this investment into our veterans is going to actually improve the outcomes for those who served so valiantly for our country?

Mr. Dave Smith: Mr. Speaker, imagine that you are a veteran. You have gone out and you’ve served your country. You’ve come back as a result of serving your country, and you’re not able to do some of the things that you could do prior to serving. For example, you can’t listen to birds chirping; you can’t hear that. You’re not able to successfully navigate your way downtown in that community that you went out to protect.

What the Soldiers’ Aid Commission will do is it will provide opportunities, then, for those veterans. If you need hearing aids, we can provide them for you. If you’re having trouble eating, because you have oral issues—if you can’t eat well, you’re not going to be well. You stood there and put yourself in danger to protect all of us. What we’re saying is that we’ll do what we can do to protect you.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Next question?

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Thank you to the member from Peterborough. My question is a little broader than just the Soldiers’ Aid Commission. Last year, I stood in the House and put a bill on the table to expand the definition of a modern-day veteran. It was to make sure that it’s not only our traditional-day veterans who are waiting to get into long-term care—because their numbers are dwindling, as you would be aware—but our modern-day veterans who are now in need of long-term care and hospital beds and mental health access.

Will your government take the modern-day veteran definition that you have put in this legislation and expand it to any legislation in this House or in the provincial guidelines? Will you expand the definition of a veteran to be a modern-day veteran?

Mr. Dave Smith: I think that what we’re seeing with this legislation is that we recognize there needs to be an expansion of what a veteran is in Ontario, and this bill does just that. By setting it in regulation, we can make the changes needed as it occurs, rather than having to wait 50 years to define who is a veteran in Ontario.

This legislation clearly shows we have a commitment to recognize everyone who has served our country, everyone who has stood in front of danger and said, “I will protect you.” We are making sure that we’re recognizing all of those individuals, and we will do it in perpetuity. We don’t have to have another piece of legislation come through 50 years from now to do it.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question.

Mrs. Robin Martin: Thank you to the member from Peterborough–Kawartha for his remarks. I was particularly touched by the story of Abby, which is obviously very sad for such a young person to have lost their life in service to our country.

One of the things that I was most enamoured with in the legislation was the fact that it extends benefits to family members. I wondered if you could just talk a little bit about those provisions.

Mr. Dave Smith: As the member has said, we are extending the benefits to family members. We’re all aware of post-traumatic stress disorder. We understand that our veterans, when they’re experiencing some of these challenges overseas, when they’re out there doing the things that they’re doing to protect us, they’re put in positions where they’re exposed to things that normally we would not see and they have post-traumatic stress disorder.

Post-traumatic stress disorder can also affect the families, because you have a member of your family who has gone off, they’ve left, they’re put in unknown danger, and when they come home—if they come home—they’re not the same person most of the time. In this case, with Abby Cowbrough, absolutely her family will have experienced a great deal of grief. This new legislation would recognize that, and we could provide the support that that family needs as a result of it.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question.

Mr. Jamie West: Thank you again to the member opposite for the passion in talking about the people you know personally. That’s something I’ve seen here brought up time and time again, about the people that we know personally.

My question to the member opposite—I know you’ve talked about it in your debate as well, but if you could expand on how we get the information out to the people that we don’t know, to the people that we heard about who are homeless, the people we heard about who have mental health problems and maybe have a difficult time focusing, or just don’t have access to the Internet and that sort of thing. Can you expand more on that like you did in your debate?

Mr. Dave Smith: We will be embarking on a total education plan with this, and we can rely on a lot of our partners. One of the best partners that we have when we’re talking about veterans is our Legions and the entire network that the Legions have. They reach out to different veterans; they work with different veterans. With this legislation, we’ll have an opportunity, then, to work more closely with our Legions so that they can do some of that outreach for us.

We’ll be working with municipalities on it to make sure that everybody who works with our marginalized communities knows about this and has an opportunity to introduce that to some of our veterans who have fallen on hard times and who are working through our social services departments.

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

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: It is always an honour to rise in this House and speak about members of our Armed Forces. I want to take this opportunity to thank the members of the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 85 in Kapuskasing, the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 173 in Hearst, and the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 305 in Smooth Rock Falls.

I also want to thank the member from St. Catharines for her determination and her constant work to ensure that Ontario’s military members receive the help they fully and truly deserve. Thank you, Jennie.

Speaker, I am pleased to speak about Bill 202 today for one particular reason: We need to stand up for and help those who have fought for and honoured Canada. This is especially true of Canadian Armed Forces veterans who have served in conflict zones and peacekeeping missions all over the world since the end of the Korean War. These veterans of as recent military operations as Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia and Afghanistan are excluded and are routinely turned away. They don’t receive aid when in an emergency situation like facing homelessness.

Veteran homelessness is unacceptable, and not offering a helping hand to a veteran in need is adding insult to injury. In 2018, studies revealed that almost 1,000 veterans were in a situation of homelessness in Canada. The same report indicated that veterans accounted for 13% of the homeless in Toronto.

On ne peut pas simplement nier de l’aide aux anciens combattants. Autrement dit, il n’y a pas des anciens combattants de deuxième classe. Que ce soit des anciens combattants de la Deuxième Guerre, de la Corée ou de l’Afghanistan, ils méritent tous notre gratitude et notre appui. Pour cette raison, je suis fier d’appuyer ce projet de loi.

Mais permettez-moi de revenir à la situation législative présente. Couramment, selon la

Loi sur la Commission d’aide aux anciens combattants, la Commission d’aide aux anciens combattants offre de l’aide financière à ceux qui sont dans le besoin et qui ont servi dans les Forces armées canadiennes pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale ou la guerre de Corée; 93 % des anciens combattants n’ont pas accès à l’aide de la Commission d’aide, même si 67 ans ont déjà passé depuis la fin de la guerre en Corée. De plus, la législation date des années 1970 et la loi n’a jamais été mise à jour.

Let me remind all of the members in this House and everyone who is following us in their homes that last year, on November 19, to be more precise, the member from St. Catharines questioned the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services on this issue, on the outdated status of the Soldiers’ Aid Commission Act. That day, the member for St. Catharines spoke about Phillip Kitchen from Kitchener, an Afghanistan vet who returned home suffering from PTSD and was living in a tent with his child. That’s a dishonour to all veterans.

But I also want to remind the members from the government side that a change in legislation is not the end of this story. On the contrary, it is the beginning of a lot of hard work to ensure that the 93% of veterans who are currently excluded from the Soldiers’ Aid Commission get access to the aid they need and deserve.

Je crois fortement que c’est notre devoir d’aider nos anciens combattants. On est à la veille du jour du Souvenir, monsieur le Président. J’aimerais bien que ce jour du Souvenir, on puisse assurer l’accès à l’aide pour ceux et celles anciens combattants qui en ont besoin.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): We have time for questions.

M me Gila Martow: Merci au membre de l’autre côté de la Chambre. Peut-être que vous pouvez expliquer à nous comment on peut aider les femmes qui sont les anciennes combattantes. Notre gouvernement entend que tous les membres ici veulent vraiment donner plus d’assistance. Ça fait longtemps qu’on n’a pas augmenté l’assistance pour les anciens combattants. Comment pouvons-nous aider les femmes, et les enfants des anciens combattants?

M. Guy Bourgouin: Merci pour la question. Écoute, je pense que, que ce soit une femme ou un homme, quand ça vient aux combattants, ils ont tous besoin de la même aide. Quand les familles souffrent, quand les combattants souffrent, je crois qu’on a une responsabilité de le faire. Ma question serait, pourquoi a-t-on attendu neuf mois pour amener un projet de loi qui peut aider tant de familles ou tant de vétérans? Écoute, c’est certain que, les femmes, il faut les aider, mais je crois qu’on ne devrait pas juste arrêter là. Je pense qu’il faut prendre une loupe puis aider tous les combattants, que ce soient des hommes ou des femmes.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question goes to the member from Spadina–Fort York.

Mr. Chris Glover: For the last seven months, I’ve been part of a group that has been delivering meals to vulnerable residents, to seniors and to people experiencing homelessness. During these seven months—one of the people who I’ve met lives under a bridge. He’s lived under the bridge for about four years, and he is a veteran. He served in Afghanistan. He is a graduate of the Royal Military College. He has a .38 slug in his leg from a training accident when he was a soldier.

The honourable member from Mushkegowuk mentioned that passing the legislation is just one step, that we need to be able to find these people and get them the aid they deserve. What should the government be doing? What would that next step look like?

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: Thank you to my colleague for asking this question. All the help we can give to veterans, big or small, should be taken. We should reach out to Legions and ask for their help. But we as a government have a responsibility to the people who made sure that our lives—how we benefit is from veterans. That’s why it’s so important that we surround veterans, the Legions and give them as much help as we can.

Homelessness for veterans should not exist. There need to be homes and places so that we can address the PTSD. So, yes, reach out to the Legions, reach out to the organizations that can help and give as much funding as we can.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question goes to the member from Carleton.

M me Goldie Ghamari: Merci beaucoup. J’ai écouté avec plaisir.

I just had a few questions and comments for you. Our government knows that many veterans face mental health challenges or physical disabilities sustained during their service when they return home and as they transition to civilian life. As we seek to pass this legislation, we really need to ensure that the supports we’re providing to veterans through the Soldiers’ Aid Commission would work alongside other support programs that these veterans may be accessing, such as social assistance. That’s why I’m glad that Minister Smith has reaffirmed that the Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services intends to exempt this funding through regulation for the purposes of social assistance.

I just wanted to know if the member opposite would agree that this exemption is a positive aspect of the support to veterans that the Soldiers’ Aid Commission will provide.

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: Thank you for the question. I would say to the member across, it should be legislation, not regulation.

I think it comes back a little bit to what my colleague from St. Catharines has said. We need to insert this definition in all of the legislation where veterans are affected, and we need to make sure that our veterans get the help they need.

Ils méritent l’aide qu’ils méritent. Ils ont sacrifié—il y en a qui ont sacrifié leur vie, il y en a qui ont sacrifié des membres, il y en a qui ont sacrifié leur famille. Leurs familles ont été tellement impactées. C’est pour ça que ce n’est pas une régulation dont on a besoin. Il faut avoir du langage dans la législation pour faire certain qu’ils sont protégés pour l’avenir.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question?

M. Gilles Bisson: J’aimerais remercier le membre de Mushkegowuk–Baie James pour ses commentaires.

Comme tu le sais, on a souffert à la ville de Hearst dans le comté de Timmins-Baie James avec ce qui est arrivé au soldat Bouthillier, qui est mort en Afghanistan. Lui, l’histoire qui est intéressante—il s’était fait volontaire pour aller, puis sa première mission, il est mort.

Ma question pour toi est celle-ci : dans le cas de quelque chose comme ça qui est arrivé, est-ce qu’on aurait besoin d’avoir regardé à donner ces bénéfices aux survivants, si c’est nécessaire, pour être capable d’aider les familles quand ça vient à la perte de la vie d’un membre de leur famille?

M. Guy Bourgouin: C’est une très bonne question, à mon collègue de Timmins. Quand on pense aux pertes, c’est la perte ultime quand on perd un être cher en guerre, ou dans n’importe quelle situation. Mais sur le sujet dont on parle, je pense que c’est le sacrifice ultime qu’un individu va faire. Oui, je crois que ce serait important que ces bénéfices-là ou l’argent soient remis aux successeurs, à sa famille.

Il ne faut pas oublier que ces familles-là sont mises dans une situation de crise, puis elles ont vécu beaucoup de peine, et que le peu d’argent que la succession peut leur amener peut, peut-être, les aider à l’enterrer ou encore aider à passer à travers les difficultés auxquelles la famille peut faire face.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question?

Mr. Lorne Coe: During the consultation process associated with this legislation, we heard from veterans, across all sectors of veterans. But we heard particularly a request to extend the benefits to families, because in many cases, families, when a member is serving, are left behind to maintain a household and other aspects associated with daily living. Would the member please speak to the effect of, in his riding, the extension of benefits to families?

M. Guy Bourgouin: Merci pour la question. Dans une situation comme j’ai dit, comme mon collègue avant m’avait demandé aussi, c’est que les familles vivent des difficultés extrêmes quand elles perdent un être cher, puis on ne le souhaite à personne. Mais ces bénéfices qui sont « extendés », si je peux utiliser le terme anglophone, peuvent aider les familles à passer à travers encore des situations de crise ou de difficulté. Veut veut pas, quand on a une personne qui a été diagnostiquée avec le PTSD puis que la famille passe à travers, je pense que toute la famille a besoin de l’aide.

C’est pour ça que si plus d’aide peut être donnée à la famille ou aux personnes qui ont servi dans la guerre, mieux ça peut être pour tous les partis concernés.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): We have time for a very quick question and a very quick response.

Mr. Jamie West: Just very briefly, the member spoke eloquently in French. I’m just wondering if he has any questions or anything he wants to elaborate on in terms of French services for veterans.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Further debate? I turn to the member from Sudbury.

Mr. Jamie West: Thank you, Speaker. Just give me a moment. I was expecting the government to put somebody up. I’ll just pull my notes up.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak to Bill 202. This is something, as many of us have talked about, that is near and dear to our hearts on both sides of the aisle, and it’s good to debate something where we’ve come together so well.

All of us in the chamber and across Ontario are wearing poppies and supporting poppies and we’re all thinking about Remembrance Day. I know Remembrance Day has been different due to COVID. Last night I was talking to some of my colleagues about how the services will happen in their area and how they, honestly, have already happened in Sudbury. We did ours virtually.

When I attended our service—we filmed it last month, actually, to edit, and it’s going to be played on November 11 in the city. I’ve been attending since I was in Cubs, and it has been a large event at the Sudbury arena, which is a large arena for my community, with Cubs and members of all the different—cadets, different branches of military service that come out.

I was concerned with this small event that we had at Memorial Park with just a limited amount of people that it wouldn’t be the same, but I want to share with you, Speaker, and my colleagues in the Legislature that it was incredibly personal. I don’t know what it was about it. I don’t know if it’s because we’re in a pandemic and we’re trying to come together or what it was about this Remembrance Day ceremony in my community of Sudbury, but it just felt so personal to me. I think being able to see everybody, connecting with the veterans—and we’re doing this for veterans.

To bring us back into the debate, we’re doing this for veterans. When you see many of our veterans, with difficulty walking or standing, but proudly standing and holding the flags and marching together, you get a sense of pride and how critical it is to update this.

Just while I’m talking about poppies that we all have on our chests, I think it’s important that we encourage our communities to make the donations, to reach out to support our Legions. It’s what we do every year. I know there’s a concern in my community, and I’m sure it’s the same in many other communities, that some of these older veterans, because they’re vulnerable, aren’t able to volunteer.

I know many of the younger—not quite veterans yet, but I know many of the younger military people are volunteering for those services and younger people are assisting, and I would encourage my colleagues, if you’re able—what we did is, we had the poppies in our office. We have enough space where we could put them out in our office so people can get them socially distanced without worrying about grabbing a whole bunch at the same time.

I think this legislation—I’ve been here for most of the debate throughout the days and I’m amazed how it touches all of us, how personal it is for so many of us to have these conversations. Both sets of my grandparents were with the Royal Canadian Air Force. It’s where my parents met. My dad served as well. I often joke that my dad would jump out of perfectly good airplanes.

There’s a funny story about my dad. He had this nickname—I want to say Ice Man, but that wasn’t quite it. People felt like he had ice in his veins because the day that he jumped, he was never nervous. I’m blowing his cover, but, honestly, this is more than 50 years ago—my dad threw up all the night before. He was so worried about what would happen and just had nothing left in his stomach the day of.

But it’s where my parents met. It’s where my parents fell in love and dated, and it’s the reason that—ultimately, if they hadn’t met there and decided that my father was going to pursue a career in mining at Inco back in the 1970s, I would never have been born in Sudbury and perhaps would never be here, and so it’s close to me.

My stepfather, Bill—his dad, William, served as well. I had a placement at SickKids when I was in college and I stayed with his mother, Vi. I stayed with Vi and I heard stories about how William and Vi got married before he left for World War II, and how she was 17 years old and they got married because they were in love and didn’t know if he’d come back, and how she spent World War II living with his parents because she was part of his family now.

Interruption.

Mr. Jamie West: That’s not me, I don’t think.

The connection that my stepfather has with the Legion, because we’re talking about Legions and veterans—my stepfather, Bill, regularly attends Royal Canadian Legion Branch 76. He sits at what’s known as the “BS table.” It’s a large table where they play cards and they tell stories, and it’s a group of friends. I knew it was a place he liked to go, it was a place he liked to hang out. Friends from work were there and they had that connection.

He likes to support the Legion, so he would rather spend his money there than somewhere else, but I didn’t realize how important it was in terms of support until last summer when my mom had a stroke. My mom had a stroke in June. I got a weird text that just said, “I think I stroke,” but she was safely in the hospital by then. She just was trying to let me know there was an issue before my dad was able to call.

That November, when I went to the Legion to talk to the veterans and help serve beer and that sort of thing, every single person at the table told me how my dad would come in just once for about 15 minutes to make small talk and say, “I have to go home and take care of my wife.” It’s that support that they provide. There’s so much other support, but it’s that personal connection. I know that him going there and just seeing his friends, to be able to refresh and de-stress—when your spouse can’t speak anymore, when you’re worried, how important that is, to just have a shoulder to lean on.

We all have these different connections when it comes to veterans, and they’re all personal. The reason I’m talking about this and I’m trying to make it personal is so that when we come together—and we are, over this bill—we talk about and we think about the people we care about, and we think about how to make this bill as good as possible.

When I think of the military—it’s weird; I always think of I was going to say “John,” but he’s really Greater Sudbury Police Sergeant John Valtonen. He is a detective. I first met him at Laurentian University. He was a cadet, and he was in the reserves. He has always been proud of his background with our Armed Forces. It’s the cornerstone of who he is. He wears it on his sleeve, wears it on his heart like our poppies.

John was with the OPP for 15 years. He was an active detective sergeant. He just recently made sergeant for the Greater Sudbury Police Services. I’m talking about John because even though John is the first thing I think of when I think of Canada’s military, I also think of John in terms of Laurentian University; I think of John as a community member when we were Beavers leaders together, and those sorts of connections. I want to remind people that sometimes those are connections you don’t know, because a lot of veterans, they don’t wear it on their sleeve. You don’t see it in them if you don’t have that personal connection.

I talked earlier about the Remembrance Day ceremony in Sudbury. Eddie Thompson was there, and even though I know Eddie Thompson is a veteran, Eddie Thompson was a convertor aisle supervisor at the Copper Cliff smelter, so when I see Eddie, I see him not just as a soldier, not just as a veteran—and Eddie, by the way, is one of those soldiers I was telling you about earlier who has a difficult time standing with his back and walks slowly. But I see that pride in him as a soldier and I see that when he came back to work in our community, Eddie had to find work.

There are stats in this bill that we talk about with veterans coming back and having a difficult time finding employment, and how important that is. Eddie was a pretty good supervisor and he had a nice career, but we know there are a lot of soldiers who don’t.

I also think of Shane Cusack. Shane is a friend of mine. He works in transportation. Shane is one of those people who we talked about on both sides of the House. He’s carrying some weight from having served. Shane was—I forget the exact title, but he was the person who would go out if there was a bomb. He was—I apologize, Shane—some sort of engineer, but basically his job was to diffuse bombs. He is very proud of that and he is proud of what he has done, but he’s also mourning the loss of many soldiers that he knew: from the stress, or from having died in battle, or from not being able to deal with the stress and dying after they retired through suicide.

Will Morin is another person I think of. Will is somebody who, even though he is this great Indigenous leader in our community, I always remember him as one of my sister’s friends in high school. He simply cares about people.

Will is an Indigenous leader and he was an Indigenous soldier. That’s something I think we don’t talk about enough, the fact that Indigenous people served with us. They answered the call to serve. I was doing research on this. They were actually volunteering to serve our country before they were able to vote in our country. We owe them a debt of gratitude, and we have to do more than just be proud and sit on our laurels on what we did about allowing them to vote. We have to really provide services.

The last one I’ll talk about is Gordon Nichols. The only reason I want to talk about Gordon—Gordon is American, so he won’t be affected by this— is Gordon was a marine. What stands out to me with Gordon is that when Colin Kaepernick was taking a knee for Black Lives Matter—and you have to put yourself back a couple years to recognize this, because now Black Lives Matter has been more of a conversation, but when he first took a knee, it was a real standoff. People were very divided, especially in the States, where they’re overtly patriotic. I remember Gordon saying, “Stop telling me how the military would feel.

Stop telling me how veterans would feel. Unless you serve, you don’t get to say it.” He wasn’t saying that people were right or wrong; he was just sick and tired of people who hadn’t served saying that veterans would be upset or angry or ashamed.

That’s something that stuck in my head, because with this legislation, Bill 202, I’m worried that because I haven’t served, I’m missing stuff that’s not here. I’m hopeful we got it right, but I haven’t served personally, and I want to make sure we get it as right as possible, just like all members here do.

I want to recognize the members of the Legislature who I know have served. I apologize if I miss—any time you mention someone, you’re going to get somebody missing. The member from Whitby, yesterday, talked very proudly about being a member of his Legion. The member from Timmins has served. I want to talk about the member from St. Catharines as well.

I like to brag about my seatmate. Because of COVID, I’m in the corner office. I normally sit just one chair ahead. The member from St. Catharines sits beside me outside of COVID. As you all know, you get to know your seatmate fairly well. I know the pride she takes in her position as the official opposition’s critic for veterans, Legions and military affairs. We joke around about calling each other “Maverick” and “Goose” while we’re sitting here.

I know the passion she has. I know how proud she is of her son. Her son is actively serving in the Canadian Forces right now. She doesn’t brag about him enough, I feel. I know she’s mentioned it during this bill because it’s relevant, but I think that if I had a family member actively serving, I would bring it up in every conversation I had. So I want to thank your son for his service. A petty officer first class in the Royal Canadian Navy is nothing to sneeze at, and you should be very proud—as I know you are.

She speaks with great passion about our military, about our veterans, about the importance of the Legions. She brings it forward all the time. When I go to my Legions, I talk about her. Last year, the Legions were selling maple syrup and I brought it back for her from our Legion, just because of the connection. I know maple syrup is good wherever you have it, but I thought she’d enjoy it more, having it as a fundraiser for our local Legion.

When she spoke yesterday—I went to Hansard and took a quote out of it. This, I think, is about the passion. It’s out of context, so I want people to understand, anyone who’s watching this or reading this, that this is about working together. It isn’t a negative thing. This is the quote I took from Maverick:

“It is important to note that I will endeavour to continue to have a watchful eye on the proceedings. I will stand vigilantly to ensure this legislation is passed in a way that creates substantive change that is fair and just. Especially in these tumultuous times, it is more important than ever that we provide support for the most vulnerable in our community and that we do it quickly. It is vital that we get the emergency support in the hands of veterans that need it as soon as possible.”

I want to thank her for saying that, because it’s really why we’re here. It’s about looking at this with a critical eye and getting it right, getting it as perfect as we can.

It is unbelievable to me—I can understand why a lot of veterans don’t know that this exists. The legislation was created in the 1960s. The previous iteration of the program left 60% of the commission’s annual budget remaining unspent, year after year—60%. I mean, it’s old. Who it covered, basically, they’re getting old and many of them aren’t here anymore.

Obviously, we’re supporting this bill. I think we’re all supporting it. I’ve heard members from all parties talk about supporting it. But we really need to get it right. We have to make sure that it doesn’t sit gathering dust for another 60 years, because we want to get it right.

There are a lot of ways that I think it is getting it right. I want to congratulate the government—I can’t remember if it went to committee, but if it was approved during committee, I think they did a lot of things well. I think extending it to family is one of those things that resonates with me. I mentioned earlier being cautious because I don’t have personal experience, but I have family experience.

When I mentioned living with Vi Moore previously, in Toronto, when I had a placement at SickKids, it was right after her husband had died. Vi is from a previous generation, where her husband was the breadwinner, and so extending benefits to family becomes really important. The reason so many of our soldiers—male, female—are successful is because of the support they have from family. It’s family that helps them be successful.

I thought it was interesting that the previous version that we’re updating of the Soldiers’ Aid Commission expired just for people who had served in the Korean War or previously. Honestly, I couldn’t remember when the Korean War was. I knew it was some time in the 1950s or 1960s, but I couldn’t remember. I was born in the 1970s. I looked it up: 1950 to 1953. I apologize for anybody who was offended that I didn’t know. But to put things in perspective, I couldn’t remember when M*A*S*H ended, and M*A*S*H was a show about the Korean War, so I looked that up too, just because I was curious.

I ended up in one of those Wikipedia rabbit holes. M*A*S*H ended in 1983, 30 years after the Korean War ended. But even then, if this legislation had come out at the end of M*A*S*H, it would still be 37 years old. That’s a long time. Every year we go out and we talk about how important our military is and how we honour them, and we haven’t dusted this off.

I want to congratulate everyone involved. I know the member from St. Catharines urged this to happen, and I know the government took it on, and I know we’re going to be urging the government to make sure that it gets to third reading, that it gets assent and becomes law. It’s been a very long time.

If you look at who it covered previously: people from World War I—the very last veteran has been laid to rest. The average age of a World War II veteran right now is 94 years old. The average age of a Korean War veteran is 87 years old. What that calculates with numbers is that about 93% of the current veterans couldn’t access the current funding. When you think about it, the member from Windsor–Tecumseh said yesterday that the face of a veteran is different. I talked about Eddie Thompson, and many of us, that’s who we think about for a veteran: with grey hair or retired.

But the member for Windsor–Tecumseh talked about, if you enlist when you’re 19, you can retire after 20 years. Someone looking like me would be an old veteran, because I would have been retired. At my age now, I’d be retired for 10 years as a veteran. We need to think about how that envelops it.

I’m going to run out of time, Speaker. I had a lot more to say. The final thing I just want to squeeze in is just the importance of mental health. We talked about it on both sides of the House, but I just want to underscore, with mental health, one of the concerns I have with the cap of $2,000 is that perhaps $2,000 might not be enough for mental health. We might want to consider doing something specific for mental health for soldiers and for military.

My time is about 10 seconds, Speaker, so I’m going to yield.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): We do have about 10 minutes of questions before we head to our member statements.

I recognize the member for Parry Sound–Muskoka.

Mr. Norman Miller: Thank you to the member from Sudbury for his speech and his comments, personal reflection, with his family members involved with the military and also with the Legion.

He was also, in wrapping up his speech, talking about mental health, and earlier on he talked about suicide. Research from Veterans Affairs Canada shows that male veterans have a 1.4-times-greater risk of dying by suicide than their civilian counterparts, and for female veterans it’s 1.9 times greater. So I would ask the member for his thoughts on adding mental health supports as one of the services accessible through the Soldiers’ Aid Commission and his feelings about that.

Mr. Jamie West: Thank you to the member for Parry Sound–Muskoka for his question. Mental health is one of the things that I’m very passionate about. You talked about the rates of suicide: 1.4 times the rate for males, 1.9 times the rate for females. It’s a terrible statistic. I do think it’s important to have the mental health, and that’s why at the end of the debate I was talking about how we might even need legislation specific to combat this. I think that the aid is going to be there, but $2,000 won’t get you very far. It will help, but it’s not going to help you long-term. It won’t get you very far.

I think that there are things that we can do that would help specifically in this area—and maybe they exist already, but I think we can improve on them. But I do agree that mental health is very, very important in this regard, and it’s absolutely the least we can do for people who have served.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question goes to the member from London–Fanshawe.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: I want to commend the member from Sudbury for his great debate on this bill.

As he talked about, he knows a lot of veterans in his community. I want to put a shout-out to the veterans in my community. Right now, because of COVID, they’re not able to have their coffee club. They would meet every Wednesday morning, weekly, with colleagues in London and surrounding area at a coffee shop, a little bakery. Unfortunately, they’re not able to congregate because of COVID. I’ve been there many times to have coffee with them, and I just want to say hello to them and appreciate all that they’ve done for us, like all veterans.

My question to the member is: The funding for veterans under the commission used to be $253,000. It has gone to $1.5 million.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Pose your question, please.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: Yes. I wondered if you could tell us who the government consulted to come up with that amount, the $1.5 million.

Mr. Jamie West: Thank you to our whip, the member from London–Fanshawe. I don’t know who they consulted on that number. I talked in the debate, actually, about being worried that—we perhaps need to reach out to more people who had served to get that first-hand knowledge, to get the information.

Earlier, I asked questions to the members opposite: What happens if we use up this amount? We know that 93% of the veterans right now aren’t applicable because they were after the Korean War. What happens if we hit that cap level of $1.5 million?

I think we’re united in improving this; we just have to make sure we get it right. The best way to get it right, if I’ve learned anything over the years, is to talk to the people involved in that work, talk to the people who are dealing with it regularly.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Next question?

Mr. Chris Glover: I want to thank the member from Sudbury for his comments today and for sharing his family’s stories. I also want to thank the member from St. Catharines for pushing this forward and making this an issue in the Legislature. So thank you to both.

I’m very concerned about this $2,000 cap per year for veterans. I mentioned earlier that for the last seven months, I’ve been serving meals to people experiencing homelessness, and one of them is a veteran who has been living under a bridge for four years. I’m thinking $2,000 is not going to get him out from under that bridge. What should we be pushing the government to do, or what should the government be doing to actually help people? Because the statistics show that 13% of people experiencing homelessness in Toronto are veterans.

Mr. Jamie West: Thank you as well to the member from Spadina–Fort York. The $2,000-a-year cap is disconcerting, especially when you talk of homeless veterans in Toronto. I think, if you’re lucky, that is going to get you a month and a half of rent; maybe if you’re far on the outskirts, two months. I know in my riding, finding rent for less than $900, maybe $800, is pretty tough, so I can imagine in Toronto. And then all the other services that are required as well.

When we know—I always believe in fact-based, data-driven decision-making. We know there are 13% of veterans who are homeless. That’s a large percentage. And $2,000 isn’t going to help. On top of that, the Conservative government has made cuts to OW, to ODSP and other services. We have to make sure that we have those services as well.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The member for Thornhill.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Thank you to the member opposite for his wonderful talk and support from his community and for our veterans.

What I wanted to ask him: The Soldiers’ Aid Commission, we’ve increased funding vastly, I believe 700%, so we know that it’s not just a funding issue, because veterans are not fully aware of the program. Veterans and their families and their friends are not even aware that this funding exists.

Mr. Jamie West: I want to thank the member for Thornhill. The funding has come up; it’s going to help a lot more people, the—I was going to say the cap. Basically, removing that cap of Korea and earlier battles is really going to help.

Getting the word out: I think we need to talk to Legions and we need to talk to veterans about what they think is the best way. I was talking about people who I think of when it comes to service and people who I forget often—and one of them is named Chris. We volunteer together at the Sudbury arena, holding the doors open for people and things like that. I couldn’t think of Chris’s last name and I tried looking him up on Facebook, and he’s not on Facebook. So my gut feeling would be, “Oh, we’ll put it on the Net,” but perhaps veterans don’t go on the Net, or maybe there are specific places where veterans go to.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The next question.

M. Guy Bourgouin: Merci de ton allocution, à mon collègue de Sudbury. Ma question serait—écoute, tu as parlé de la santé mentale, ce qui était super important, et qu’on semble des fois oublier l’impact que ça peut avoir sur les familles. Mais j’aimerais entendre aussi quoi d’autre qu’on devrait faire. Quoi d’autre pourrait être fait pour aider les vétérans et leurs familles quand ça arrive à la question de santé ou de santé mentale ou autre, pour que les familles puis les vétérans pourraient en bénéficier?

Mr. Jamie West: Merci, pour mon ami le député de Mushkegowuk–Baie James.

I’m going to stop torturing people with my French at that point.

I think it is important to look at the community in whole. I think it’s important that we really, really have a better understanding—my mind wandered; I was actually thinking about French services for military members. I think it goes back again to we need to speak to people who have served about what they want, what they need and how we can help them best. We can have great ideas but go in the wrong direction, and so I really want to go back to the importance of speaking with veterans in the military of how we can help best.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): We have time for a quick question and a quick response. I turn to the member from Whitby.

Mr. Lorne Coe: For many of the service people returning back to our communities, finding a job is really a challenge—it can be. A feature of this particular legislation is employment readiness, which I certainly value because it helps so many veterans reintegrate into our communities.

I’d like to hear from the member from Sudbury on his particular view about the effect of that employment-readiness feature in his own riding.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): The member from Sudbury has 20 seconds.

Mr. Jamie West: Thank you, Speaker. Very briefly, because I only have 20 seconds, I think this is going to be very important to people returning. I forget the exact stat, but we do know that there tends to be difficulty when transitioning from a military life to a civilian life. I think employment readiness is really going to help veterans to be successful and keep them off the streets.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Percy Hatfield): Thank you. The time for debate on this matter has expired.

Third reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Domenico Paniccia

Mr. Faisal Hassan: I am thankful for the opportunity to rise in this House to recognize and honour the life of York South–Weston resident Domenico Paniccia. On Wednesday, September 9, Mr. Paniccia passed away peacefully, surrounded by his family in the comfort of his home.

Domenico was a kind man and would always try to help others. He was a proud first president of the Pelmo Park seniors’ group that he was instrumental in creating. Domenico’s loving family described him as a devoted, loving and supportive husband to his late wife, Giuseppina. Together, they immigrated from Italy to Canada in 1964 to build a life instilled with the values of unconditional love, hard work and togetherness within their family and community.

There was never a moment where he wasn’t offering something to his neighbours, a testament to his deep-rooted generosity and hospitality within his home. I thank Domenico Paniccia for the many contributions he made to York South–Weston. Domenico loved his community and his community loved him back. Hopefully, we can all learn from his legacy and be kind, gentle and generous in our walk through life.

My condolences to Domenico’s family. I leave you with what Domenico Paniccia often liked to say: “My home is your home. Saluto.”

Education funding

Mrs. Robin Martin: Two weeks ago, I welcomed the Premier and the Minister of Education to Loretto Abbey Catholic Secondary School in my riding of Eglinton–Lawrence to announce $550 million to build and expand schools in Ontario, including $24 million in funding for the school we met at.

Loretto Abbey has been in its current location since 1927, but it was founded in 1847, when six Loretto sisters came from Ireland in the midst of a pandemic and founded a girls’ school named after the abbey in the area they came from.

Our recent announcement was made in the Sister Evanne Hunter learning commons. Sister Evanne was the principal of the abbey for many years. She recently shared with me that she has received hundreds of emails from past students who are absolutely thrilled about the announcement. Sister Evanne herself told me that it was the happiest day of her life.

A few years ago, the remaining sisters moved out and the Toronto Catholic District School Board acquired the entire building in 2011. This funding will be used to upgrade the building to modern standards and to add 620 student places through renovations to the former convent in the historic building.

I know that many future students will continue to make great memories at Loretto Abbey.

Sikh genocide

Mr. Gurratan Singh: Every year, I struggle with writing this speech. How can my words capture the horror of genocide, to share the story of how Sikhs—who stood tall and proud, who looked just like me—had to run and hide from state-sponsored mobs who had but one focus, one goal: murder in the most vicious of ways? Tires were placed around their necks. Kerosene was poured on their heads. They were set on fire, burned alive in the street as the police stood by and watched or, worse, participated in the murder.

Elected officials, just like you and I sitting in this assembly today, ordering the death of Sikhs—betrayal, breaking our most sacred oath to protect those we serve. Combustible powder was used on the flesh of Sikhs. Children were beheaded. Women were raped.

It’s been 36 years. What more can I say about 1984, other than: We will never forget the violence, the genocide that we faced at the hands of the Indian government, and more, we will never stop fighting for justice.

Veterans

Mrs. Gila Martow: As Remembrance Day approaches, I want to take the time to highlight the veterans and also call out to my colleague the MPP for Flamborough–Glanbrook, who is hoping to achieve with her upcoming PMB, the Exalting Our Veterans Act, 2020, that an individual may request to be identified as a veteran on his or her driver’s licence or a photo card. I am hopeful that all members of this Legislature will support year-round support for our veterans by supporting this initiative, as we seem to be all supporting the updates to the Soldiers’ Aid Commission, which we just debated this week.

Our Canadian veterans represent all communities across our province and country. As the representative for Thornhill, I’d like to highlight the sacrifices made by our Jewish war veterans. There were 17,000 Jewish men and women who served Canada during World War II. Every Remembrance Day as far as back as I can remember, Norm Gardner officiated and presented awards to some of them. Last year was included. This year, it’s going to be tough; maybe we’ll have a virtual ceremony. It took place at the Jewish War Veterans of Canada memorial near the Lipa Green Centre at the Sherman campus in York Centre, and I’m fairly certain that former MPP Monte Kwinter attended every year while he was elected.

I just want to mention that Jewish tradition has storytelling from generation to generation. That’s how we pass down information. It’s very important that we do the same with our veterans, that we share their stories, highlight their sacrifices and remember them every day, not just on Remembrance Day.

Treaties recognition

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: I rise today in support of the land defenders at 1492 Land Back Lane.

The Haudenosaunee have lived for thousands of years in the area known today as the Haldimand Tract, and a treaty with the British crown in 1784 guarantees their entitlement to this land. However, in what has become a familiar story in Ontario, their rights have not been recognized and they now face the prospect of forcible removal from their land.

The Haudenosaunee have been waiting for justice for far too long. They have seen the federal and provincial governments continue to pass the buck, refusing to listen to community while their land is being stolen for unwanted development. They have spent decades in the courts to no avail. Now Premier Ford has abdicated his responsibilities, leaving the OPP to enforce the will of the developers.

Police enforcement of a unilateral decision is not a sign of nation-to-nation relationship. Of what use are land acknowledgements if Indigenous people continue to be forcibly removed from the land that is demonstrably theirs?

The critical work of reconciliation cannot occur without respecting Indigenous sovereignty, and that work must start now. I echo the land defenders at 1492 Land Back Lane, as well as the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council and the Six Nations Elected Council, in their call for a moratorium on development to allow for a thorough and respectful nation-to-nation negotiation.

Food for Life

Mr. Parm Gill: I rise in recognition of Food for Life, a community organization locally managed by two leaders in my riding of Milton, Lori Brading and Melani Bastians. Food for Life is helping those most vulnerable with the goal of making Milton hunger-free by sourcing surplus food, like fruits, vegetables, dairy and meat.

Through the generous donation by the Hadley Family Foundation and in partnership with the Optimist Club of Milton, Food for Life is pleased to announce their new refrigerated van is ready to keep serving the Milton community. This van will make sure their food rescue and redistribution efforts can continue. What’s more, Food for Life will be using the van to deliver a new mobile outreach program on Wednesday evenings at the Milton Sports Centre, along with free dinners being offered every Sunday from 5 to 8 p.m. at participating restaurants, like Caribbean Vibes and the Mills BBQ.

I want to thank both Lori and Melani for their tremendous work in the community and for making a tremendous difference.

The Hospice Face to Face campaign

Mr. Percy Hatfield: Good morning, Speaker. I rise today to tell you once again the good people in Windsor and Essex county have come through financially for our local hospice.

For the past 18 years, a friend of mine has run a Face to Face campaign for hospice. It’s a simple concept: You donate $10, then you ask nine of your friends to donate $10, and before you know it, you’ve helped raise $100 for a good cause. John Fairley is the vice-president of college communications and community relations at St. Clair College. For 20 years, he has also been the host of a show on our local cable channel called Face to Face. He interviews the movers and shakers from around town, and his show is one of the more highly rated ones on our local cable channel.

For this year’s campaign for hospice, despite money being tight thanks to COVID layoffs, they brought in almost $96,000. Over the last 18 years, Mr. Fairley has helped raise more than $1.2 million for our local hospice. All of the money raised goes directly to the hospice. There’s no middleman. There’s no management fee. There’s no corporate rake-off. It’s all used to help support patients and their families during their stay at the hospice.

Had I been wearing a cap this morning, Speaker, I would certainly tip it for John Fairley and his Face to Face campaign for the Hospice of Windsor and Essex County.

Mental health services

Mr. Mike Schreiner: Crime Prevention Week is a perfect time to highlight the partnership between Guelph police and the Canadian Mental Health Association Waterloo Wellington, called the Integrated Mobile Police and Crisis Team, or IMPACT.

It is clear that the current policing enforcement model is not adequately equipped to respond to mental health crisis calls. I want to thank police chief Gord Cobey and staff who have recognized this limitation by partnering with CMHA to respond to mental health calls.

IMPACT is a big success. The team of crisis response coordinators working with Guelph police have diverted 130 people from hospital over five months. The result is:

(1) Police officers can focus on community safety needs that reflect their training.

(2) There are reduced demands on hospital resources.

(3) And most importantly, it reduces trauma for individuals in crisis.

This partnership unfortunately has limitations, however, due to the funding model. Guelph police are funded 24/7, but CMHA staff are only funded to 11 p.m. every night. So I would call on the government to provide funding for a 24/7 mental health response for people in crisis so that programs like IMPACT can grow in Guelph and in communities across Ontario.

Canadian soldiers

Mr. Roman Baber: I rise to honour the 2.3 million Canadian servicemen and women who served and continue to serve our great nation and the 118,000 Canadians who made the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty.

When the world is at war, Canada stands with its allies in defence of freedom. From the trenches of Vimy Ridge to the mountains of Afghanistan, we must remember all Canadians who served and died in every war, armed conflict and peacekeeping mission.

We remember the 650,000 Canadians who served in World War I and mourn the 66,000 killed. We remember the more than 1 million Canadians who served in World War II and the 45,000 who did not come home. We remember the 26,000 Canadians who served in Korea and the 516 who died at war. We remember the 30,000 Canadians who fought in Vietnam and the 134 who were killed. We remember the 56,000 Canadian peacekeepers who served in the Balkans and the 23 who died on European soil yet again.

But, Speaker, we must also remember a more recent conflict. Between 2001 and 2018, more than 40,000 Canadian men and women served in Afghanistan. Altogether, 158 Canadians lost their lives in the fight against the Taliban.

Canada’s commitment to peace and democracy around the world has come at a great price. But make no mistake: The men and women we remember in November fought and died for the very principles that define us as Canadians.

I’m proud of Canada’s Armed Forces. I’m proud to be Canadian. God bless our men and women in uniform. Lest we forget.

Events in Barrie–Innisfil

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I rise in this House to recognize Mike and Jennifer Richardson, also known as Keeping Up with the Richardsons, in Innisfil. This weekend, they organized a Halloween contest in Innisfil where people entered for $10 and the proceeds went to the Innisfil food bank and Christmas for Kids. Jennifer’s goal was to have 50 homes participate by decorating and she had 100 homes participate.

Thanks to local businesses that donated many prizes, we were able to award 13 winners. Thanks to small businesses like Johnny Burger, Innisfil Dental, Cookstown Antique Market, Sweet Home Essentials, to name so many more.

Today, Jennifer announced another community event that she’s organizing called Light It Up Innisfil, where she’s encouraging residents to decorate their home for the holiday season, be it Christmas, Hanukkah or Kwanzaa, to bring the spirit of giving alive, again with all proceeds going to the Innisfil food bank and Christmas for Kids, two local organizations that make a very big difference in our backyard.

Like so many of the businesses I have mentioned that also make a big difference and donated prizes—to name some more: A Good Balance, Miss Jennie’s, Rose’s Fiscotti; of course, we have Lavender Floral. And we have many councillors, like our deputy mayor, Dan Davidson, who gave a gift card, along with Carolyn Payne and Donna Orsatti.

So thank you to the mayor, who participated, all the councillors and our MP, John Brassard. And thank you to the Richardsons.

Question Period

Long-term care

Mr. John Vanthof: My question is to the Premier. Earlier this summer, the Premier claimed that he would be taking urgent action to deal with the crisis in long-term care. I quote: “We’ve been very clear that the system in Ontario has been broken, and we must act quickly.”

Yesterday, months after his own expert staffing study called for a minimum standard of four hours of hands-on care a day, the Premier announced that the government would be implementing a watered-down version of that plan, but that it would take five years to do it. What happened to, “We must act quickly”?

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

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. There are two issues here. One is the urgent measures that we’ve been taking to shore up our long-term-care homes during the COVID-19 crisis, as well as the longer-term staffing stabilization plan that we remained very aware of.

As soon as a stand-alone, dedicated ministry to long-term care was created, we listened to the sector to understand the issues there. We’ve been acting all along with every measure possible, getting integration with hospitals, getting the infection prevention and control teams, shoring up staffing, looking at a whole staffing strategy informed by a staffing advisory panel, an expert advisory panel, as well as the early guidance from the commissioners. This has been ongoing and we will not stop.

We are committed to our most vulnerable people in long-term care. That staffing work is being done and we’re getting the support to our homes as we speak.

The average of four hours of care to our most vulnerable people, the announcement yesterday—this is monumental.

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

Mr. John Vanthof: It’s been clear throughout this pandemic that all the time the Premier spent delaying and every time he tried to cut corners and postpone investments, lives were lost in our long-term-care homes.

But in other provinces, they snapped to action, hiring thousands of PSWs and permanently boosting their wages. They truly moved heaven and earth to get staff to the front line, while the Ford government’s expert panel report, which the minister mentioned, sat on the shelf.

Does the Premier realize that seniors and PSWs struggling in long-term care right now can’t wait five years for action? Does he realize that?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Thank you again. I think the concept of the average of four hours for direct care per resident, per day is an absolute imperative for our long-term-care residents, for the high-quality care that they deserve and need. This is something that our government has been working on consistently.

Our plan has hard targets. We will be monitoring and making sure that every step of the way, every single action that can be taken to get tens of thousands of workers trained and into the field will be done.

The previous government neglected this for 17 years. Previous governments put this on the table and never implemented. Our government is dedicated to making sure that this happens, and we have a plan. We have the hard targets. We are making sure that the staffing that our long-term-care sector has needed for so long is going to be addressed.

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

Mr. John Vanthof: I’m not sure a target five years in the future is a hard target.

Sadly, families and front-line staff in long-term care have stopped believing in commitments from the Ford government. The Ford government promised an iron ring around long-term care. Since then, over 2,000 seniors have died. They were promised that no expense would be spared and that the government was taking urgent action to prepare for a second wave. Instead, the government is attempting to rewrite the law so that they will be protected from lawsuits—not the families.

The Premier has utterly failed to protect seniors in the last six months. Why would anyone believe that he’s going to do it in the next five years?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: COVID-19 has been an unprecedented challenge across the world. Our government moved swiftly, across ministries, working in collaboration with governments and the sector, to take every measure possible and to plan. And that is exactly what we put dollars behind. We put $243 million out on an urgent basis to support our homes, issued four emergency orders, amended regulations, continued to put an integrated process in place to assist our homes. Now we are making sure to address the long-standing, long-neglected issue of staffing in our long-term-care homes, really neglected for many years.

The opposition party has presented Bill 13, but it contains no time frame or plan to achieve the four hours of care per resident per day. Our government has a plan. We have the hard targets. We are putting measures in place to make sure that those targets are achieved. We are working, as we speak, about return of service for PSWs and nurses, fast-tracking—

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

COVID-19 response

Ms. Marit Stiles: Good morning. This question is for the Premier. On September 23, the Minister of Education said, “We are cognizant that the risk in our schools is reflective of the risk within our community....”

On that day, the province was reporting 335 new cases, and there were a total of 180 cumulative cases related to schools. But just five weeks later and we’re seeing an average of 919 new cases a day in Ontario and 1,338 school-related cases in the past two weeks alone. Speaker, if growing community spread puts our schools at greater risk, why haven’t there been new supports made available to keep them safe?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you very much. We are incredibly proud of the hard work of front-line educators, of principals, of public health nurses and doctors within each of our communities, working so hard to reduce the risk. In this province, 99.9997% of schools are open, meaning of 4,800 schools in this province, there is a single example that is closed. Some 99% of students and 99% of staff have never contracted COVID, and 88% of schools have never had a case of COVID. Mr. Speaker, we appreciate the angst each and every one of these cases will bring to a school. Of 1.5 million kids and 200,000 students, there are 2,300 cumulative cases province-wide.

We are doing everything we can, following public health advice, working closely with the Chief Medical Officer of Health, to ensure that every school, every community and every student remains safe in this province.

Ms. Marit Stiles: I can tell you that the minister’s assurances ring pretty hollow for parents and kids who have been impacted by cases in their schools. Fifty-eight students at one Scarborough school are in isolation as we speak because they were exposed. Teachers and early childhood educators had to call in the Ministry of Labour because they felt unsafe. Conseil scolaire Viamonde are facing such staffing shortages that they’ve written parents, asking them to sign up and fill roles as custodians and clerks and educational assistants. This plan is not scaling up to meet the challenge our schools are facing.

Will the Premier listen to parents and education workers and act now to keep our schools safe and give them the supports they need to stay safely open?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: We accept that transmission in the community is high. That’s the basis for why, in this province, well before we even announced modified stage 2 in communities like York, this government took proactive action to allocate funding—$50 million of our $1.3-billion allocation, the single largest investment in this country—to ensure that schools are safe, and the data speaks for itself.

While we appreciate, as parents and uncles and aunts and people who are committed to public education, the safety of our staff and our students, we acknowledge that amongst 1.5 million children, 200,000 students, there has been a cumulative total of 2,300 cases.

Now, we acknowledge and agree with the member that each of those cases brings angst to a community, but we need to be proud of the work of our front-line workers, who every day demonstrate incredible courage to keep our students safe. It is for that basis we’re going to continue to have their backs, continue to flow the funds and ensure the protocol remains robust, so that every student in every school is safe in this province.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Our educators and our education staff are exhausted, and it’s only the beginning of November. Our students are anxious. Our parents are concerned. They have no confidence in this government’s ability to keep their schools safely open.

We’ve got a school board that is pleading with parents to sign up to help teach their own kids. This is going to take more than some commitments to attend job fairs or career fairs and a few dollars here and there. The point is, this is a government that is consistently chasing after problems instead of getting out in front of them. By doing the very bare minimum and sitting on federal dollars—$9.3 billion federal dollars—they are putting our kids and their learning at risk.

Mr. Speaker, I’ll ask again: When will this government start to actually spend the dollars that they’ve been given and stop just sitting on them?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: If the member opposite wants politicians to not be reactive, then a year ago, when we had an opportunity to proactively support online learning, because we thought it was prudent in this province to have a backstop—the members opposite defended the status quo, because of course if there is a political party that is most averse to change, it is the New Democratic Party, with the support of their Liberal colleagues.

This party believes in innovation. We believe in providing choice for parents, and we believe now more than ever that the investments, the protocol and the guidance by the Chief Medical Officer of Health have ensured two things, that students are safe within schools and that at the Ministry of Education we provide a quality, high, national-leading standard of online learning. We can do both in this province, and we will.

College standards and accreditation

Mr. Taras Natyshak: My question is to the Premier. Canada Christian College’s now-hidden financial statements demonstrate a lack of financial responsibility. The CCC calls itself a registered charity, but those financial statements they have scrubbed from the Web show the charity is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on line items like travel and automotives. Photos that have suspiciously been scrubbed from the Internet show Charles McVety and his immediate family using the quads, jet skis and pleasure craft of Canada Christian College for their own personal use. They even referred to this equipment as “new toys.”

Speaker, will the Premier be conducting an open review of the college’s financial stability and make all of the findings public before he lets Charles McVety run a university in the province of Ontario?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Colleges and Universities to respond.

Hon. Ross Romano: With respect to the parts of the question that the member opposite raises about the PEQAB process, about the financial elements of the process, that’s a part that is done by an independent body—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Ross Romano: —and obviously, as the member opposite knows, we on our side of the House do not meddle with independent advisory boards.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Ross Romano: That is not what our role is. We take our position very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday to the member opposite and will say again—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Ross Romano: —all of our individual universities and colleges must go through a process. Any single time that any individual, any organization applies for any type of a licence or a designation, they must go through a procedural process. That is something that is guaranteed. That is something that we are ensuring is happening in a fair, open, accountable and transparent way. That is what we are doing. That is why we are in this House debating this right now. That is why we have taken these courses of action.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I wish to inform the House that if the heckling continues, I will start calling you to order by the name of your riding, and your constituents will know.

Supplementary question?

Mr. Taras Natyshak: I feel a little bad for the minister, having to carry water on this issue and on behalf of the Premier who has put their entire caucus in this debacle, but I can sense the trepidation in his answer, in his voice.

We already know one of the reasons the financial statements were scrubbed from the Internet was because McVety loaned himself and his son $1 million for housing and cars. In the 2018 statements, McVety spent $110,000 on automotives. And in the 2019 statements, he spent another $170,000 on automotives. We don’t know if the CCC purchased McVety’s Jaguar out of those funds, but what we do know is that the quads on campus and the jet skis in the marina and the pleasure craft in the parking lot are all available for his own personal use. Of course, photo evidence of McVety using all of these luxury items has mysteriously disappeared from the Internet.

Speaker, it looks like a personal slush fund because it obviously is a personal slush fund. Why is the government bending over backwards to approve what this man does with his school’s finances?

Hon. Ross Romano: What the member opposite clearly demonstrates time and time again, as do all of the members opposite, is a complete and utter non-appreciation of procedural fairness, and the fact that they do so is beyond me.

Let’s just talk about the facts. Let’s talk about what the facts truly are here. Last year, when I became the Minister of Colleges and Universities, I went through and spoke to every single college and university president across the entire sector. Do you know what the number one complaint they had was? That it took upwards of three years to get a program approval process done. We took that program approval process and we expedited that process where we had institutions apply directly to PEQAB, an independent advisory board. We took the PEQAB process, we simplified it and now these types of processes last three to six months.

To take it up a step, we dealt with Algoma University and OCAD University seeking similar designations as now, and we have married a legislative process with a ministerial process—a fair, transparent, open process.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: There’s a marriage there.

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

The next question?

Long-term care

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: The Premier’s first official tour in my riding of Carleton back in March 2019 was to visit the Osgoode Care Centre, a non-profit, charitable, long-term-care home located in Metcalfe. These actions speak louder than words, and the Premier’s visit a year and a half ago reaffirms what we all know, that one of the Premier’s top priorities is the welfare of our long-term-care residents in places like Metcalfe and across the province.

This virus has shone a spotlight on the deep cracks in our broken long-term-care system. Our government inherited a long-term-care system that suffered deeply from decades of underinvestment and neglect. The people of Ontario put their faith and trust in the Premier to fix this broken system, and the Premier made a commitment to families and caregivers that our government would fix this broken system.

We’ve delivered a plan with over half a billion dollars to prepare our long-term-care homes. Speaker, can the Premier please share with the Legislature how our government is addressing some of the key recommendations from the long-term-care commission inquiry appointed in July?

Hon. Doug Ford: I want to thank the member from Carleton. She’s doing an absolutely great job up there. I want to give a big shout-out to the nurses and the PSWs in long-term care. They’re absolute champions. They are all-stars. They’re out there on the front lines, and they don’t get exhausted after a couple of months, by the way. They’ve been going about six, seven, eight months now, full steam ahead.

I’m proud to announce that we’ll be increasing the average daily direct care in our homes to four hours a day.

Ms. Catherine Fife: For 2025.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Doug Ford: I know the opposition tried to do it for God knows how long—20 years, and so did the Liberals try for 20 years, but they haven’t been able to get it done. We’re the only government setting a gold standard, blazing a new trail for long-term care with four hours of care every single day.

We will be the gold standard around North America, and I just want to thank again the nurses and the PSWs.

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

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: This is wonderful news for the long-term-care residents at the Osgoode Care Centre, the people of Carleton and all Ontarians.

We’ve delivered a plan with over half a billion dollars to prepare our long-term-care homes for future waves and surges of COVID-19. I know that for many of Carleton’s residents, this announcement will mean that the increased level of care will dramatically enhance the quality of life and care for their loved ones. This will help ensure that residents will have the support they need when it comes to taking their heart medications three times a day. This will mean that elderly individuals can get the assistance they deserve with bathing, a change of clothes, and meals.

To our residents and their families and caregivers, four hours a day will make a world of difference, and Ontario is leading the charge on this.

Can the Premier please share with the Legislature what the response has been from the sector to this great announcement by our government?

Hon. Doug Ford: Again, I want to thank the member. You know what else is critical that the opposition didn’t do? They never gave these folks an increase. For the first time, they’re actually seeing an increase through our government in pay per hour.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take the opportunity to read out a few quotes, one being Jerry Dias, president of Unifor. He said about our government’s announcement: “Ontario’s long-term-care system has been in crisis far too long”—way too long; 17 years—and, “This announcement gives workers and residents hope for brighter days ahead ... I am relieved that [Premier Ford] listened to our demands and is committed to fixing our long-term-care sector.”

Another great statement from Patty Coates, the president at the Ontario Federation of Labour: “The Ontario Federation of Labour ... is pleased that the Ford government has recognized the urgent need to establish a legally enforceable minimum standard of an average of four hours of direct care....”

This is a game-changer. This is something that the other government talked, talked, talked about but couldn’t do anything—

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

The next question.

Indigenous affairs

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: Meegwetch, Speaker. This question is to the Premier. This week is Treaties Recognition Week. Ontario is a signatory to Treaty 9, as is Neskantaga. Neskantaga was evacuated 16 days ago because of a public health emergency. They have no safe running water in the community.

Now they are being left out of the environmental assessment consultation for the supply road to the Ring of Fire. Neskantaga told this government in September that it could not engage in the process in a meaningful way because of the pandemic. Now they’re expected to consult in the middle of a public health crisis.

Speaker, why is this EA process proceeding without Neskantaga?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The parliamentary assistant to reply.

Mr. Dave Smith: Last year, our government signed a historic agreement with the communities of Webequie and Marten Falls with respect to the road leading into the Ring of Fire. We continue having ongoing negotiations and conversations with the First Nation communities around the Ring of Fire, and we’ll continue to make sure that we consult with all of the communities that are involved.

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

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: Back to the Premier: Neskantaga has been without safe tap water since February 1995, over a quarter of a century. We need a gold standard on this.

Renita Moonias is a mother of two young children, from Neskantaga. She was born in 1996, which means she has never experienced clean tap water. Now, as a mother, she will not wash her children with the tap water because it causes sores and skin infections. She has to use bottled water to bathe her children, aged 1 and 3. She hopes that clean water will flow before her children become of an age where they remember having to live this way.

Speaker, we must do better for her children. Ontario must do better for her children. Why is this government, why is Ontario ignoring and not helping Neskantaga through this crisis?

Interjections.

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

The Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks to reply.

Hon. Jeff Yurek: Thank you for that question. I thought I’d give an update on where the province is at. We’ve been leveraging the provincial expertise through the Indigenous drinking water projects office and its two agencies, the Ontario Clean Water Agency and the Walkerton Clean Water Centre, to support Neskantaga First Nation in the completion of their newly constructed water plant.

Two days ago, a team from the Ontario Clean Water Agency flew into the community after receiving an invitation from the chief. They have started the commission of the water plant and an assessment of the water system infrastructure. They will conduct a 14-day stress test for the plant and provide high-level recommendations for longer-term system sustainability focused on removing the boil-water advisory that has been in place, as the member opposite mentioned, since the 1990s. We remain committed to helping ensure that water infrastructure in the community is well maintained and in place for future needs.

Mr. Speaker, I’m with the member opposite. I call upon the federal government to step up and take care of the promise to remove boil-water advisories across the entirety of First Nation communities. Step up with the money and make this happen.

College standards and accreditation

Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Premier. So it’s another day and it’s another Charles McVety revelation. Yesterday, he said the NDP were anti-Christian. He’s the same guy who said that Islam is not a religion and who has said so many hateful things about Ontario’s LGBT community.

Charles McVety preaches fear and division. But make no mistake about it, this isn’t about religion. It’s not about faith. It’s not about God. It’s not even about education. This is all about money. Giving Charles McVety the ability to grant more dubious degrees allows him to cash in, adds to his bottom line to fill up what looks like his own personal piggy bank.

Speaker, through you, can the Premier explain why he’s continuing to allow this bill to go forward?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Colleges and Universities.

Hon. Ross Romano: Again, any organization out there, any college which seeks to obtain status of this nature, which seeks to grant degrees, any institution across this entire province has three options by which to do that. They can proceed by way of a private bill. Any member in this House can rise and introduce a private bill. It goes directly to a committee, a very sheltered process. It never gets debated in this House—a very sheltered process, not very transparent.

The second option is it can proceed through ministerial consent. I explained that process in my last question, whereby in applying for ministerial consent, the institution now applies directly to PEQAB, an independent advisory board. That’s not the way it used to be, Mr. Speaker. We simplified that process in last year’s red tape bill. A third option is to bring it forward in legislation in this House.

We’ve taken the second option and the third option and we’ve married those two options together. We have created the most clear, transparent way to obtain this type of relief that is possible, the most clear way that has existed in this government ever.

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

Mr. John Fraser: Speaker, this is all about patronage. The Premier has dodged questions for a week. He’s here today. I’d like to get an answer.

At least the Deputy Premier, in a scrum last week, had the courage to stand up and say that hate and the kind of things that we’re hearing have no place in Ontario. She’s the only one, and I know how everybody feels over there. She did what leaders do. You address the issue head-on.

So, Speaker, is the Premier ever going to step up or is he just hoping this will go away and that we’ll all forget? Because we’re not going to. Will the Premier step up and do the thing that leaders do, address the issue and remove

schedule 2 from Bill 213 today, and make that commitment?

Interjections.

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

One more time, I’ll remind members not to make reference to the absence of another member.

The Minister of Colleges and Universities to reply.

Hon. Ross Romano: Thank you again, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to provide clarity as to the work that our government has been doing under the great leadership of our Premier—outstanding leadership throughout this period of time that we’ve been dealing with COVID-19. Over several months, we’ve flattened the curve under the leadership of our Minister of Health. Our team has done an incredible job at addressing COVID-19 and the people of this province are well aware of that.

Mr. Speaker, the question that the member opposite raises, especially as a member of the former government, a former government that sat by and allowed processes for colleges to obtain degree-granting approval to take in excess of two, sometimes upwards of three and even more than three years—talk about red tape.

That’s why in last year’s red tape bill, we amended it. We changed it. We simplified the process and we made it a transparent process. Two institutions went through the bill last year, Algoma University as well as OCAD University, and now three more institutions are going through that same exact transparent, open and accountable process.

Long-term care

Mrs. Robin Martin: My question is to the Minister of Long-Term Care. I’ve heard many times from constituents who are concerned about staffing levels in long-term care. It’s clear that staffing has been an issue across the long-term-care sector for a very long time. We know that the staffing issue did not arise overnight and that it will take time and effort to resolve. We’ve seen that the COVID-19 pandemic has put further stress on long-term-care homes and exacerbated staffing problems that they had after years of neglect.

I know that the minister and her team have been reviewing the staffing study and developing a plan to fix staffing in long-term care for future generations. Could the minister update this House on what she is doing to improve staffing levels in long-term care?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: I’d like to thank the member from Eglinton–Lawrence for her question and her excellent work. Thank you.

We’re acting on our commitment to protect loved ones in long-term care by increasing the average daily level of direct care to four hours a day per resident. This will ensure that the needs of seniors are met, help keep them safer and provide them with higher quality of life. Ensuring that standard of direct care was one of the interim recommendations made by the Long-Term Care COVID-19 Commission. While the commission completes its work, our government will not wait to act. Along with the commission, this was recommended by the staffing study expert panel, and we have taken their recommendations to heart.

There is much work still to be done, and I look forward to updating the House as we progress in creating a long-term-care system for the 21st century.

Mrs. Robin Martin: Thank you, Minister, for that response. Last week, I was in this chamber when the member for Ottawa South stood up and boasted about voting for three previous versions of Bill 13, while the government and the ministry that he was part of never implemented it. I should also note that the former government was elected in 2003 on a promise to bring in a minimum standard of care of 2.25 hours and then never implemented any minimum standard of care. I am glad to be part of a government that is making the sorely needed changes in long-term care happen.

Four hours of direct care is an excellent step towards improving resident care in the province, good for the personal, medical and psychological needs of residents, and a reassurance to their loved ones. Can the minister expand on what will have to be done to ensure that all residents can receive an average of four hours of direct care per day?

Hon. Merrilee Fullerton: Again, thank you for your good work, to the member for Eglinton–Lawrence.

Improving the quality of life and care for long-term-care residents is the cornerstone of our approach to long-term care. The new commitment to improve quality of care includes:

—an average daily direct care of four hours a day per resident, and that means hands-on care is provided by nurses and personal support workers to support individual, clinical and personal care needs;

—hard targets set over the next four years to achieve this standard by 2024-25, and this progress against these targets will be measured and reported regularly; and

—an unprecedented change to educate and recruit the tens of thousands of new personal support workers, registered practical nurses and nurses that will be required.

Affordable housing

Ms. Suze Morrison: My question is for the Premier. It’s the second wave of the pandemic, but it’s clear that the Premier is back to his old ways. In my riding of Toronto Centre and my colleague Chris Glover’s riding of Spadina–Fort York, the Premier is cutting a special deal for developer insiders to build new condos on provincial land in the West Don Lands. He’s using the heavy hand of a ministerial zoning order to bypass the rules and regulations that exist to give my community, our community, a voice in local decisions. Coincidentally, it’s been revealed that those same developers have donated $25,000 to the Premier’s party over the last three years.

Why is this government cutting special deals for their developer friends who appear to have insider connections and have donated significant amounts of money to their party?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The parliamentary assistant, the member for Milton.

Mr. Parm Gill: I want to thank the member opposite for that question. These MZOs issued by the minister in the West Don Lands leverage unused, provincial properties to create almost a thousand new affordable homes in Toronto West Don Lands. These projects will also create 17,000 square feet of new community space to support the local community’s needs.

The builders signed an exclusive lease agreement for these sites with the previous Liberal government. Since the groups were chosen by the Liberal government, any attempt to link the MZOs with political connection is completely baseless and not supported by fact.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Spadina–Fort York.

Mr. Chris Glover: Your government passed the ministry zoning order; I don’t know why you can pass it on to another party.

My question is for the Premier. The Premier is on record as saying the West Don Lands developer deal has a guarantee of affordable housing, but when the Toronto Star reviewed the terms of the agreements, that turned out to be false. Toronto and Ontario are facing an affordable housing crisis, but, apparently, this government’s priority is to collect political donations from deep-pocketed developers who want to bypass planning orders and rules and community voice.

Over in Pickering, the government has cut another deal for another development. This time, he’s allowing them to pave over environmentally sensitive wetlands. Why is no one in the Conservative caucus standing up and saying that the Premier should not be cutting special deals for insiders?

To the Premier: We are in the middle of a global pandemic. Why is your priority pushing through developer deals for your buddies?

Mr. Parm Gill: The city of Toronto has consistently called on the province to build more affordable housing; that’s exactly what these projects will do. Given that the agreements that selected the developer to build on these lands was conducted and signed by the previous Liberal government, any suggestion that our government favoured them is nonsensical.

Let me also point out, a senior executive of Kilmer donated to the NDP. A senior executive from Kilmer group also donated to Steven Del Duca’s recent leadership campaign. In fact, donations from senior executives of these companies total at least $12,314 to Steven Del Duca’s Ontario Liberal Party and the NDP as well.

Opioid abuse

Mrs. Belinda C. Karahalios: My question is for the Minister of Health. Since 2016, over 5,000 people in Ontario have died from opioid overdoses—more than the number of people who have died of COVID-19. In August, the Liberal Minister of Health sent a letter to this government advocating for only one proposed solution: the funding, production and distribution by this government of pharmaceutical grade drugs for consumption, which they refer to as “safe supply of narcotics.”

Recently, the mayor of Cambridge made public statements in support of this, advocating for the safe supply of pharmaceutical grade drugs to work in tandem with drug consumption sites.

Can the minister tell us if this government is in favour of and has any plans to fund production and distribution of a safe supply of hard narcotics in Ontario?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions.

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Thank you for that question. Mr. Speaker, our government takes the opioid crisis very seriously. Our government, as you know, just a few weeks ago, along with Premier Doug Ford, announced an additional $176 million being invested toward building a comprehensive and connected mental health and addictions system where every Ontarian could be fully supported.

As part of this funding, we made targeted investments, which is long overdue, ensuring that money was being invested to look after the addiction challenges we have in the province. That included $4 million being invested in nurse practitioners for detox services, $8 million for addictions day and evening care, $3.5 million in in-home and mobile withdrawal management services, and an additional $900,000 for in-patient beds to support capacity pressures at CAMH.

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

Mrs. Belinda C. Karahalios: The root cause of the opioid epidemic is people with addiction issues using lethal drugs laced with fentanyl, accessed over the Internet and illegally shipped here from China, often by Canada Post. Thousands are being poisoned from illicit drugs made in China. I find it concerning that the federal Liberal government’s only proposed solution is a safe supply, while ignoring other possible methods to reduce demand or supply.

Can the minister tell us, in this government’s close relationship with Prime Minister Trudeau, have they ever advocated for other solutions, like holding China accountable for the illicit drugs flooding Canada, implementing tougher border controls or giving law enforcement better tools to seek warrants for Canada Post mail in order to stop us from being flooded with this poison from China?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Once again, I want to reiterate the importance of dealing with the opioid crisis and having a strategy in place. Mr. Speaker, this government, for the first time in the history of this Parliament, is investing $3.8 billion over 10 years to build this comprehensive plan in the province. This includes implementing a comprehensive suite of policies and programs to address opioid addictions and overdose which are focused on appropriate prescribing and pain management, treatment for opioid use disorder, harm reduction services and supports, and surveillance and reporting.

These are fundamental principles, Mr. Speaker, that we are implementing and working as a government to put in place.

As part of our plan, we’re also investing up to $31.3 million in funding for up to 21 consumption treatment services through key regions across the province. We will continue working to ensure that a system is built that works—

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

Electricity restructuring

Mr. Michael Parsa: For too long, Ontario’s electricity system has been burdened by the waste and mismanagement of the previous Liberal government. The Liberals spent 15 years adding billions of dollars to the electricity system by signing contracts for power we did not need and could not afford. My constituents are concerned. They’re concerned, Speaker, because they understand that when electricity system costs are high, so too are their electricity bills.

Will the Associate Minister of Energy please tell this House what the government is doing to unravel the hydro mess we inherited?

Hon. Bill Walker: Thank you to the great member from Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill for all the great work he does on behalf of his constituents. Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government chose ideology over the hard-working people of Ontario and made a mess of our energy system; we all know that. Today, the contracts signed by those Liberals generate only 10% of Ontario’s power, but account for almost 30% of its cost.

Mr. Speaker, immediately upon getting elected, we cancelled 751 unneeded renewable energy contracts, saving $790 million. We centralized conservation programs, saving as much as $442 million for the taxpayers of Ontario. And we’re expanding natural gas to rural and northern Ontario, saving an average residential customer between $800 and $2,500 a year.

Mr. Speaker, we are determined to fix the mess left behind by the Liberals and ensure our energy system is reliable and affordable.

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

Mr. Michael Parsa: Speaker, through you to the minister again, I thank the minister for his comment.

To my constituents and, in fact, all Ontarians, Speaker, this is indeed a great deal of progress. Would the minister please let us know how he plans to continue to support Ontarians through the COVID-19 crisis, while rebuilding the electricity system?

Hon. Bill Walker: Thank you again for the great work, to the member from Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill. Mr. Speaker, we know there’s still much work to be done. That’s why we continue to support electricity consumers, as we respond to COVID-19, by providing customer choice, stable rates and financial support to millions of Ontarians who are working and learning from home.

First, Mr. Speaker, we put $175 million to hold time-of-use electricity prices at the lowest rate 24 hours a day for the first 69 days of the COVID-19 state of emergency. Then, on June 1, we replaced time-of-use rates with a new fixed COVID-19 recovery rate of 12.8 cents per kilowatt until October 31. And now, Mr. Speaker, thanks to our government, Ontarians can choose an energy program that works best for their lifestyle, whether it’s through time-of-use electricity rates or tiered rates.

Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to fixing this hydro mess created by the Liberals and supporting Ontarians throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

Flu immunization

Miss Monique Taylor: My question is for the Premier. My office has been flooded with calls about the flu vaccine shortage in Hamilton. Last week I heard from James, who lives in my riding of Hamilton Mountain. He has been looking everywhere for a flu shot for his 80-year-old mother and special needs son. He is rightfully concerned about their health in this flu season and he wants to protect his family. Despite his efforts, no flu shots are available at his doctor’s or any of the pharmacies that he has called.

What does the Premier have to say to James and the many out there who just can’t get the flu shot because of the shortage?

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

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you to the member for the question. Protecting the health and safety of all Ontarians has been our key priority since taking office, and even more so preparing for the flu campaign.

We ordered last year $70 million worth of doses. We ordered 5.1 million, 700,000 more doses than last year—and this was long before COVID-19 was even on the horizon. We were then able to purchase another 350,000 through the federal government’s reserve and with their assistance.

But what we’re dealing with now is really a great situation in the sense that we know that many Ontarians want to protect themselves, their own health, their family’s health and that of their friends and neighbours. They’ve come in record numbers to receive the shots. As of today’s date, over one million vaccines have been delivered just through pharmacies, where at this time last year, it was only 250,000.

So I want to thank the people of Ontario for stepping up.

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

Miss Monique Taylor: The people of Ontario would like to thank the minister for being able to get a flu shot—which they’re not able to do.

Over and over, the Minister of Health has said that there is no flu vaccine shortage. But across Ontario, people are finding it impossible to get a flu shot. Yesterday, my office received a call from Wayne. He has been looking all over Hamilton to get a flew shot for his mother who is 88 and his father who is 93. He is just trying to protect the health of his parents. Everywhere he calls, Wayne is told that the flu vaccine is unavailable.

Is this what the Premier and the minister envisioned when they made the flu shots a central part of their failing second wave plan?

Hon. Christine Elliott: We have a very robust and comprehensive second wave plan for protecting the health and safety of Ontarians. We did order, as I said, 700,000 more doses before we even knew that COVID was on the horizon; 350,000 extra doses we purchased—5.45 million doses. This is the largest, most significant flu campaign in Ontario’s history, and I am very grateful to the people of Ontario for responding to that.

As part of our plan, we also allocated another $28.5 million in the event that we needed to purchase extra flu vaccines. That’s what we’re in the process of doing right now. I have spoken with the federal Minister of Health, asking to procure extra supplies from the federal government’s pandemic reserve. We’re also dealing with global manufacturers, trying to obtain extra vaccines from their reserves.

Again, this is a great success, this flu campaign. I am very, very grateful to the people of Ontario.

Public health

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: My question is to the Premier. Under the Harris government, the province downloaded the costs of public health services to municipalities in a 50-50 cost-sharing split. The error of that decision became clear in 2004 after the Walkerton water outbreak, the emergence of the West Nile virus and, of course, SARS.

Many reports and commissions urge that public health be entirely provincially funded, or to return to the 75-25 cost-sharing split under the former Liberal government. Before the COVID pandemic, this provincial government revisited the split and once again downloaded the cost of public health to municipalities. This attack on our public health system left municipalities unprepared for the pandemic.

Speaker, through you to the Premier: In your upcoming budget, will you permanently reverse this mistake or will you repeat the mistakes of the Harris government?

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

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you to the member for the question. We are very grateful for the incredible work that our public health units have been doing throughout this entire pandemic. They’ve been working overtime. They’ve been helping out with schools; we’ve got public health nurses now working in schools. We’ve got public health units doing contact tracing and contact management. So they’re doing everything that they needed to do.

But this was a situation with respect to public health that had been commented on by the Auditor General several times. The previous government didn’t do anything to deal with it. We are dealing with it. We did make some suggestions. What we have done is provided extra financial help to the public health units to get us through this pandemic, but we’re going to learn lessons and review the system once we’re through the second wave to see if any other changes need to be made