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

November 19, 2013

40th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2013-Nov-19 (PDF)

L086 - Tue 19 Nov 2013 / Mar 19 nov 2013

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 19 November 2013 Mardi 19 novembre 2013

ORDERS OF THE DAY

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS

AMENDMENT ACT

(LEAVES TO HELP FAMILIES), 2013 /

LOI DE 2013 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR LES NORMES D’EMPLOI

(CONGÉS POUR AIDER LES FAMILLES)

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY

JOB CREATION

HORSE RACING INDUSTRY

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY

AIR AMBULANCE SERVICE

ADOPTION

HOSPITAL FUNDING

FRENCH-LANGUAGE EDUCATION /

POWER PLANTS

SECURITY AT CORRECTIONAL

FACILITIES

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

AIR AMBULANCE SERVICE

WINTER HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

CLARENCE KIEFFER

KOREAN WAR

DISASTER RELIEF

DIABETES

HOME CARE

WAR OF 1812

EVENTS IN NICKEL BELT /

ÉVÉNEMENTS DIVERS À NICKEL BELT

RENEWABLE ENERGY

COLLINGWOOD GENERAL

AND MARINE HOSPITAL

NOTICE OF DISSATISFACTION

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

ENERGY CONSUMER PROTECTION

AMENDMENT ACT

(ELIMINATION OF FIXED RATE

ELECTRICITY CONTRACTS), 2013 /

LOI DE 2013 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR LA PROTECTION

DES CONSOMMATEURS D’ÉNERGIE

(ÉLIMINATION DES CONTRATS

DE FOURNITURE D’ÉLECTRICITÉ

À TARIF FIXE)

ONTARIO PROVINCIAL POLICE

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

AMENDMENT ACT, 2013 /

LOI DE 2013 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LA NÉGOCIATION COLLECTIVE

RELATIVE À LA POLICE PROVINCIALE

DE L’ONTARIO

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

ONTARIO PROVINCIAL POLICE /

POLICE PROVINCIALE DE L’ONTARIO

ANTI-BULLYING INITIATIVES

WORKPLACE SAFETY

ONTARIO PROVINCIAL POLICE

ANTI-BULLYING INITIATIVES

WORKPLACE SAFETY

ANTI-BULLYING INITIATIVES

ONTARIO PROVINCIAL POLICE

WORKPLACE SAFETY

PETITIONS

DARLINGTON NUCLEAR

GENERATING STATION

ONTARIO RANGER PROGRAM

SOINS DE LONGUE DURÉE

LYME DISEASE

MINIMUM WAGE

LEGAL AID

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES

DISTRACTED DRIVING

LONG-TERM CARE

MINIMUM WAGE

WIND TURBINES

LYME DISEASE

TAXATION

ORDERS OF THE DAY

SCHOOL BOARDS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT, 2013 /

LOI DE 2013 SUR LA NÉGOCIATION COLLECTIVE DANS LES CONSEILS SCOLAIRES

ADJOURNMENT DEBATE

PAN AM GAMES

MANUFACTURING JOBS

WINTER HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Good morning. Please join me in prayer.

Prayers.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS

AMENDMENT ACT

(LEAVES TO HELP FAMILIES), 2013 /

LOI DE 2013 MODIFIANT

LA

LOI SUR LES NORMES D’EMPLOI

(CONGÉS POUR AIDER LES FAMILLES)

Mr. Naqvi moved third reading of the following bill:

Bill 21,

An Act to amend the Employment Standards Act, 2000 in respect of family caregiver, critically ill child care and crime-related child death or disappearance leaves of absence / Projet de loi 21, Loi modifiant la Loi de 2000 sur les normes d’emploi en ce qui concerne le congé familial pour les aidants naturels, le congé pour soins à un enfant gravement malade et le congé en cas de décès ou de disparition d’un enfant dans des circonstances criminelles.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The minister moves third reading of Bill 21. Mr. Naqvi.

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Thank you very much, Speaker, for recognizing me. It’s my great pleasure to rise for third reading of the Employment Standards Amendment Act (Leaves to Help Families), 2013. I will be sharing my time with my parliamentary assistant, the member from Brampton West. It is a pleasure to speak to this proposed legislation because of what this bill can mean to Ontario families and their seriously ill loved ones.

I also want to thank several individual groups who are in the gallery today, or are arriving in the gallery as we speak—good morning and welcome to Queen’s Park—for their commitment and support in helping this bill move forward. I want to mention and recognize them in the House and recognize their effort and hard work in support of this bill and bringing it to where it is today, and hopefully its passage through third reading in short order as well.

With us today we have Delia Sinclair, who is herself a caregiver and joining us today as the public policy and stakeholder relations coordinator for the Alzheimer’s Society of Ontario; Vanessa Foran, the vice-president, public affairs and national programs for the Parkinson Society and representing the Ontario Caregiver Coalition. Welcome.

Joanne Di Nardo and Nicole McInerney, the senior manager and senior coordinator of public issues at the Canadian Cancer Society are with us today as well; and Abidah Lalani, the manager of government relations for the MS Society of Canada; Nicole Beben, VP of care and knowledge exchange at Saint Elizabeth; and Eleanor Leggat, vice-president, support services, on behalf of the ALS Society. I also believe Sue VanderBent, who is the executive director of the Ontario Home Care Association, is with us as well.

Welcome, again, to Queen’s Park and thank you very much for your commitment and dedication to looking after our loved ones, be it at home or in a home care setting, and also for convincing the government that this is an important bill that is going to provide relief for our families, especially those who need care at home, in particular, in our communities. I’m very happy that you’re here for the third reading debate.

Speaker, this particular bill goes to the heart of what government should do. This legislation would help the working people of our province to be with their loved ones when they are needed most, at times of major health issues and in tragic situations involving children.

As important as the contents of Bill 21 are, the reason for introducing it is just as important, and that is: compassion. When our government introduced this bill, I had the pleasure of meeting the Munante family from Orléans in Ottawa. The member for Ottawa–Orléans joined me when we went to visit the Munante family. Gabriel, an amazing little seven-year-old, is bravely battling leukemia. Gabriel is affectionately known as Gabo, and just meeting him just puts a smile on your face. You can imagine a seven-year-old; they tend to be shy when they meet somebody new.

A beautiful young boy, close to his parents—I don’t know to what extent he is aware of the illness he’s living through, but one can be confident that he knows what’s going on, given the love and the care he has been receiving from his parents.

Patricia and Carlos, the parents, have been doing whatever it takes to be with him during his treatment. I remember Carlos, the dad, saying, “I know a lot of parents don’t get that opportunity so this legislation is absolutely going to help them if they have to go through something like this. I can’t imagine having to go to work those first four months at least when he was diagnosed. I think this is very important for families.”

Now, Speaker, Carlos worked for the federal government and had accumulated enough leave to take time off when his son was diagnosed. Not all families can do that. Patricia, the mom, said to me, “We have seen some families where ... if they’re from out of town, one of the parents is unable to be with their child because they do need to work.”

I know that every parent wants to be there, and the family caregiver leave would protect a parent’s job while they are looking after their sick or injured loved one.

This bill is about giving families time to look after their loved ones without worrying about their jobs, because looking after a loved one should never put their jobs at risk. Anybody may need some type of job protection so that they are not caught in a situation where they are trying to balance out staying at home, looking after their loved ones or keeping their job.

That whole meeting, Speaker, with Patricia and Carlos and Gabo highlighted to me how important it is that we have legislation like this; how important it is that we ensure that parents, who love their children so much, have that opportunity to stay at home and focus on their child and nothing else: not work, no other things in life but their child, so that they can be with him or her to ensure that the child is growing, is strong and is able to fight any challenge that he or she may be facing.

That’s definitely true for children, Speaker. I’ve got an 18-month-old son who I know, as a dad, I will do anything for. When my son, Rafi, was born, he faced some medical challenges as well. We, of course—my wife, Christine, and I—felt very lucky and fortunate to, one, have the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, CHEO, in our community very close to our home to ensure that Rafi is fine, that all his needs are met.

Also, most importantly, besides having a great health care institution, the best doctors and nurses and all kinds of support workers being there for you at all times, which is extremely reassuring, especially for new parents, with the kind of anxiety one goes through, I also faced that reality for the very first time of not being selfish at all, not worrying about what my needs may be and being very singularly focused on the needs of my son Rafi. Whatever he needed, whatever time he needed, whatever attention, resources, I would have done anything, and I’m sure my wife as well, to get that to him.

That, Speaker, really speaks to the heart of the issue. If we, the government, we, the legislators, can do even a small bit to help alleviate that anxiety that parents may feel towards their child because of whatever health-related circumstances, I think we’ve done our job. We can take that anxiety, especially when it comes to ensuring that parents can feel that one less thing they have to worry about is their job—if they can take time off and know their job is protected by law, that is a huge, huge pressure off parents so they can really focus on what matters most, and that is their child or children.

I think the same goes for parents, for your elders. We know that we live in an incredible time right now where our elders, our parents, our grandparents are living longer. This is an amazing thing, to have that family around you, to have that support around you. They’re healthier, they live longer; they live vibrant lives. But that also means they need more support. It also means they may need more care. We also know that our seniors now want to live at home. They don’t want to be in a retirement residence. They don’t want to be in a nursing home. They prefer not to be in a long-term-care facility either.

If they can live at home and get care at home, that’s where they thrive, that’s where they have their independence, that’s where they know their surroundings best. If we can create opportunities for we who want to look after our parents, to provide them some care, that’s great.

My parents are getting older. I’m in that generation now that I see the health challenges coming to my parents as just a matter of age, even though they live healthy lives. You can see that the frequency of attention or care that they need is growing. That’s something my siblings and I are constantly reminded of as we make plans: making sure that one of us is closer to mom and dad, in case. Our family is not unique. When I speak to my friends, they are going through exactly the same evolution in life, so to speak. We’re all going through the same experiences.

When you talk to them—once in a while I will actually talk about work with my friends—and when I talk about legislation like this, there’s almost this unanimous support for a mechanism by which, if you have to take some time off to look after your mom or your dad, as we do, as we should, again you do not need to worry about your job: You have statutory protection that would allow you to take some time off and focus on your ailing parent.

Speaker, this bill is amazing in that respect: It’s very practical. It doesn’t really speak of some notion up there which many governments and we in this Legislature tend to talk about. This really, actually, in my experience, is one bill that has a direct impact on our lives, on the lives of our constituents. This is really one piece of legislation that does not need a lot of explaining when you’re talking to your constituents, be it at the door or in your community office.

A few months ago, I very distinctly remember I was out in my community in Ottawa Centre, as I am on a weekly basis, going through one of the neighbourhoods, knocking on doors and asking my constituents if I could help them with anything. At one of the doors I went to, a man roughly my age opened the door. I asked the same thing; I introduced myself and said, “Is there anything I can help you with, any issues or concerns?” It was a cold day, actually, so it was earlier in the year.

He said, “Come on inside.” I went inside and he said, “You just brought some bill around getting job-protected leave.” You really get this. You really get, at the door, somebody asking you a very precise question about a particular bill. People live busy lives and they have other priorities on their minds—rightly so. I said, “Yes, it’s the family caregiver leave,” and very quickly explained it. This guy, like I said, was my age, probably a good foot taller than me—

Mr. Bill Mauro: So still a pretty short guy.

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: That’s commentary on me, of course; my height. I appreciate that from the member.

Listen to this: He said that to me, and I explained it to him, and this man started crying. He started crying. He had tears in his eyes because he said to me that his son faced a very significant health challenge. His son was there; I think he was roughly four years old, a beautiful little boy. He said to me, “I would have loved this piece of legislation four years ago, when my son was born.” He said to me, “Kudos for doing something right. It’s great that you’re bringing this legislation.” He apologized to me, of course, very quickly for being so emotional, and I said, “No apology needed.

I guess it’s good to hear that we’re doing something here at Queen’s Park that can help your life get better—not in your instance, but maybe somebody else’s.”

I only share this because I think it’s powerful. It was powerful for me. I was overtaken by emotion when I left that home. It was a great sense of purpose for me. I think I was very new at my job as the Minister of Labour at that time. It was the first piece of legislation that I introduced as a minister for this government. Just to get that very direct feedback from a constituent—very personal—made me realize how important this bill is. It really made me think how directly this impacts our lives. You don’t need some complicated, convoluted explanation as to how this is good for Ontario. This is straightforward. This helps families. This is very much about compassion.

The leaves-to-help-families legislation, if passed, would create family caregiver leave which would provide up to eight weeks of unpaid job-protected leave so that employees can care for family members who have a serious medical condition. An employee could take up to eight weeks of family caregiver leave per year per family member.

A family member for whom an employee could request unpaid time off to provide care or support would include the employee’s spouse; a parent, step-parent or foster parent of the employee or the employee’s spouse; a child, stepchild or foster child of the employee or the employee’s spouse; a grandparent, step-grandparent, grandchild or step-grandchild of the employee or the employee’s spouse; the spouse of a child of the employee; the employee’s brother or sister or a relative of the employee who is dependent on the employee for care or assistance.

Our proposed leaves-to-help-families legislation would also entitle eligible parents to a critically ill child care leave, which would provide up to 37 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave to provide care to a critically ill child if they have been employed by their employer for at least six months. This could provide incalculable human assistance to parents and children facing such a crisis.

In addition, this bill will show compassion by creating crime-related child death or disappearance leave. This leave would provide up to 52 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave for parents of a missing child where the disappearance is likely due to a crime. It would also provide up to 104 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave for parents of a child who has died where the death is probably the result of a crime.

The hard-working people of Ontario and those who depend on them deserve nothing less than this. The same spirit of compassion that inspired this bill also led our government to introduce family medical leave back in 2004. Family medical leave provides unpaid, job-protected leave for employees when a family member is facing a terminal condition. Our proposed family caregiver leave would apply in cases of a serious medical condition, even when there is no significant risk of imminent death. Our proposed family caregiver leave would be in addition to family medical leave.

This means that if you are caring for a loved one under the proposed family caregiver leave and their condition becomes terminal, you would also be entitled to family medical leave.

Our province also provides personal emergency leave. This leave can be taken for a personal illness, injury or medical emergency of an employee, or the death, illness, injury or medical emergency of, or matter concerning, certain family members and relatives who are dependent on you for care and assistance. Personal emergency leave is an unpaid, job-protected leave that allows you to take up to 10 days per calendar year away from work in workplaces of 50 or more employees.

Every member of this House and all those who are listening today to these proceedings share a common human experience: We’re either sons or daughters. We have parents and grandparents, and we may have spouses and children. In short, we are all part of a family. So when those family members have major health problems, we want to be there because we care. We all know that there are many things the members of this House may debate and have varied opinions on, but the need for care and compassion for our loved ones, when they face a medical crisis, is not an issue that divides us but unites us as a House and as a province.

This is an issue on which we are, in every sense, one Ontario, and that is because everyone here today, or who may be watching these proceedings on television, knows that when our loved ones face a major health problem, we need to be there at their side. There’s just nothing more important than that. Our families, those we are closest to, need us close when serious health issues occur. It is when we face a major medical problem that we realize just how dependent we are on those who care for us.

It is when our family members have major health issues and our children face a crisis that we realize just how dependent they are on us. They’re vulnerable, and our legislation seeks to help them by helping the working people who will care for seriously ill family members.

At these times, when we are faced with the health problems of those we love, our concentration and concerns are not on our day-to-day work but on caring for and working to restore those we love to health. We all know time stands still when our loved ones face such crises, and at these times nothing else matters—certainly not that voice mail at work or that deadline we thought required our full attention—because at these times, our hearts and minds are elsewhere, with those we love who are ill and may be suffering.

Our legislation, if passed, would give the working people of this province the right to take care of their loved ones during very difficult times without having to worry about losing their jobs. Nothing can be more fair and compassionate in such times of need. Our bill would allow working Ontarians the one thing they need most when it comes to caring for seriously ill or injured family members: time to be with their loved ones.

That time of need could be the result of a heart attack or cancer or a car accident. Such a time of family crisis can also come when a child is rushed to hospital or, tragically, when a child is missing or dies as a result of a crime. This bill is for the young families or single parent who needs to care for their children in hospital with a serious condition; it is for the husband seeing his wife through a difficult period of chemotherapy; it is for someone helping to care for an elderly parent recovering from a broken hip. In short, it is for all of us when we need it.

Our legislation, if passed, would protect both full- and part-time employees and even those on temporary contract, and it would help protect their families. I think we can all probably speak of personal circumstances where we may have had to take time off in order to look after a loved one, someone who is close to us, who is a member of our family and had to face some sort of serious medical condition, and therefore had to take the time off.

I think what the challenge really becomes is this: Should we have to make a choice between looking after a loved one in their prolonged need of care or worry about our job, whether it’s protected or not? This legislation tries to reconcile those two realities that many Ontarians face on a regular basis.

As those in this House know, we have asked our federal counterparts to provide employment insurance entitlement for those who qualify for family caregiver leave under this bill who are caring for family members with a serious medical condition, just as they do under our family medical leave. We want, and have asked, the federal government to enter into a partnership with us on this so that these caregivers will also have the income security they need and deserve.

If passed, this legislation would give the province’s working people time: time to care for their seriously ill elderly parent; time to be with their hospitalized child; time to be with their spouse who has had a stroke or heart attack. Because all Ontarians are part of a family, we know that both employers and employees alike can face these difficult situations and personal crises when loved ones need care. The need for this legislation is clear and becomes all the more obvious when serious medical problems afflict our loved ones.

The reason we have brought this bill forward and worked with all parties in committee to make it a reality is most obvious when we pick up the telephone and it is difficult news about the health of someone close to us. The need and reason behind this proposed legislation is all too familiar to anyone who has ever personally faced the challenge of balancing work with family members who are struggling with major health problems.

There was a time when our world and our society moved at a slower pace, but as we all know, the world has changed. We are sometimes called the sandwich generation—I was speaking to that a little earlier—a generation of busy parents who are often both working and trying to care for children while, at the same time, often facing the challenge of caring for aging parents or one another when serious health problems arise.

It is times like these that we realize just how important, how critical, it is to have our jobs, our livelihoods, protected when loved ones with major health issues need us most. It is then that we realize our human limitations: in dealing with a family crisis that may involve children and may require 100% of our time.

No one in these situations should have the additional burden of worrying about whether they can take some time off to deal with these personal family medical crises. But without the security of knowing our jobs are protected, and in a way we can count on, sometimes those who need us can be afraid for us and not want to ask for help, not wanting to jeopardize our job, our livelihood, that they may depend upon as much as we do.

Our loved ones can be very legitimately concerned that they are taking us away from our jobs, even jeopardizing them. For the family—the husbands and wives and, at times especially, the parents—of working Ontarians, this reluctance to reach out and ask for help can come from the knowledge that their spouse or child does not currently have the job protection they need, because they may fear that a request for help could cost their loved one their job. That is why, Speaker, we are proposing this legislation.

But there are, as well, other compelling and pressing reasons. That is why I’d like to speak about Ontarians who need to care for their seriously ill and aging parents. We all know that in our society, we have an aging population. We’re going to have 43% more seniors a decade from now and twice as many seniors 20 years from now, and that is definitely a good thing. I’m sure all those in this House hope to be among them eventually.

But we also know that as people age, they need more care. It is at those times of health crises, when serious medical conditions—like a broken hip or a stroke—occur, that our human need is also critical. Our deserving seniors, our aging parents, naturally want to be at home as long as they can be. One day, we will likely feel the same.

We know that care by family members helps to ensure their ability to remain where they want to be: in their own homes, where they are most comfortable and feel more secure. At home, there is less expense for our health care system and less pressure on needed health services.

Our government, Speaker, through the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care, Deb Matthews, launched a care strategy to help seniors remain healthy and to provide better quality care in the home, where they desire to be. As both the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care and the minister responsible for seniors have said, our proposed family caregiver leave will support our government’s Seniors Strategy. This strategy recognizes that providing good care at home allows our older Ontarians to remain where they want to be while, at the same time, relieving the stress on our hospital and long-term-care system.

This is a very important step forward, Speaker, but to take this step, family caregivers have to be able to be there, and our proposed family caregiver leave recognizes this vital role family members play in our health care system. To provide that care, to fulfill that role, the working people of Ontario need to know that their jobs are protected and will be there while they are looking after their loved ones.

A young woman who knows this from personal experience is Marcella Robless. Her experience is touching and compelling. I would like to read from remarks she made on the day that this legislation was introduced. She said, “I took care of my mom for about three years. I am the sole caregiver for her. I’ve been in Canada now for about 28 years. The only family that I have now is my brother who is in Montreal and my mother who lives with me. We’re not fortunate to have a lot of relatives so all of the pressure and her care is on me. Two years of the three that I’ve been taking care of my mother I was in a full-time job. I don’t know how I did it, but I managed to do both things.

“Those very same two years were the worst years for my mother. She was on radiation, had chemotherapy and surgery ... but what I have to say is that care-giving is not just bringing them to the appointments or bringing them to CT scans and MRIs—being a caregiver is also being there in the middle of the night, being there all the time. We don’t have a break; you can’t tell a disease or injury, ‘Okay, I need a few days off and then I’ll be back and take care of you.’ So I really hope that you will support this bill.

“As caregivers we are not invincible, and we need support. I definitely need to feel, if I get a full-time job and my mother winds up being eligible for surgery, I can be there for her and not worry about it.”

This touching human account resonates with many of us who have aging parents or other loved ones with a serious medical condition, and at the same time are trying to juggle their work responsibilities. These words of Ms. Robless truly put a human face on the need for this legislation, and needing time like this can be difficult for the working people of our province when they don’t have the security of knowing their employment, their means of providing for themselves and their family, is protected and is in fact secure. This bill could change that.

In those situations where parents are faced with a critically ill child, their attention and time must be focused on the family.

Our bill is for hard-working Ontarians struggling to balance their jobs and their care commitments.

In those most difficult, most trying and most tragic of situations where parents face the disappearance of a child or the death of a child as a probable result of crime, our proposed legislation reaches out and compassionately provides job-protected leaves for those who face these painful times of personal crisis. No one should have to worry about being unemployed on top of struggling to deal with a medical crisis of a beloved family member or tragic situations involving our children. Because when hardship and tragedy strike, when the chips are down, you want to know that someone is there for you, that someone is watching your back.

This is an opportunity for government to show the compassion our citizens need and deserve in their time of need. This is the compassionate choice and the smart choice. Caregivers can suffer from incredible stress themselves. Many are taking care of both the children who have always needed them and the parents who have given them so much and now need their children’s help. We need to help them by taking away the possibility that their job could be at risk for doing the right thing and putting family first. It is our way of telling Ontarians that we care like you care, that we’ll help safeguard your means of making a living while you are fulfilling your obligation to your loved ones.

If passed, our proposed legislation would assist working people and the economy in other ways as well, because it will help protect and retain needed employees who might otherwise have to leave their employment or who might lose it. We know that keeping skilled labour is good for employers, employees and the overall Ontario economy alike. We know that skilled labour helps keep our province competitive, and that’s important, especially in these times. Job-protected leave during periods of crisis is one thing we can do to keep our skilled labour force on the job.

Whether in the high-tech or the construction industry, skilled employees are one of the important keys to a prosperous future for Ontario. Without the right skilled employees to do the job, the job will be done elsewhere, perhaps outside of our province. Keeping skilled workers here when they encounter the same family health crises we all face is a matter, then, of keeping our Ontario economy strong and secure. So it would make good economic sense to provide this caregiver leave, rather than see these skilled employees leave their employers.

Speaker, I am confident that our proposed leaves are in the best interests of both workers and businesses, because we know that safe and fair workplaces are the building blocks of stronger communities and a stronger economy. Employers and business owners have families of their own, and Ontario business leaders know and can identify with their employees when a family member is sick or injured. In those cases, all these differences melt away and we are simply people looking after other people.

We are one Ontario. I really hope that we legislators, duly elected by the people of Ontario, as we debate this legislation, remember those stories in our communities, and I’m sure every single one of us may have a personal story or that of a member of our community. Perhaps we should remember all those stories as we debate this bill.

I really want to take this opportunity to thank all the members for supporting this bill. It has been a constructive debate, it has been a good committee process, and I’m grateful to all members for supporting this bill. But I also ask them, as we wind down this legislative session—I think we’ve got three more weeks to go before we break for Christmas and the holidays—that it will be very much appreciated by our friends, our supporters who are here today, who I have met, who have told me how urgent the need is for this bill to pass for, most importantly, our family members in our communities, the parents, the children who need this job protection.

I really hope that we keep this debate and this legislation focused and see if we can get quick passage of this bill. I think we all will be doing the right thing. We all will be winners if this legislation becomes law by the end of the year. We will be doing what our constituents have asked us to do. We will be ensuring that much-needed, compassionate legislation is now law in the province of Ontario.

Speaker, I thank you very much for the time you’ve given me. I would now like to turn it over to my parliamentary assistant, the member from Brampton West.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): The member for Brampton West.

Mr. Vic Dhillon: Thank you to the minister for his remarks. Before I begin today, I’d like to thank all the people in the gallery for their advocacy and support, and especially for coming before the committee process and bringing your views and making them known to the committee. They were very much appreciated.

This bill is about making sure family members have the time they need to look after their loved ones and that their job is waiting for them when they return. Importantly, for many in our province, the proposed family caregiver leave would be taken to care for family members who live in other countries. The difficulty of arranging travel outside of Canada, and the added time this travel requires, can be an added burden for those trying to help seriously ill loved ones.

We know that many Ontarians were born outside of Canada. In the greater Toronto area, many of the people were born outside of Canada; that percentage is about half. The importance of having job-protected time to take care of family members with a serious medical condition is all the more important when distance, sometimes continents, separates us from those we care about and need to be with.

We have seen overwhelming support for this bill from families, from caregivers and from organizations across Ontario. Canadian Cancer Society vice-president Rowena Pinto said, “Bill 21 is welcome news for those who need to take leave from work to care for a loved one with cancer.... This legislation will allow families to concentrate on supporting their loved ones instead of worrying about losing their jobs.” Ms. Pinto also explained that, “Cancer is more than a health issue. It is also a complex social issue.

With approximately 22% of Canadians grappling with caregiving responsibilities for seriously ill family members, the physical, emotional and financial burden on caregivers is a veritable strain on many families.” Madam Speaker, that is why we introduced this important proposed legislation.

We have received other supportive words of encouragement regarding this legislation. Ms. Sue VanderBent, executive director of the Ontario Home Care Association, has said, “Home care systems are dependent on the support of families and loved ones. For many, the caregiving responsibilities are intense, emotional and lengthy in duration, and the demands can result in absence from work. The Leaves to Help Families will provide family caregivers with peace of mind related to their employment. The members of the Ontario Home Care Association are hopeful that all parties will move quickly to pass this legislation.”

Emanuel Carvalho, executive vice-president of health care for the Service Employees International Union said, “This legislation will provide urgently needed relief to overstretched families who are caring for a loved one while juggling responsibilities like work and raising children.”

Mary Lewis, the executive director of mission of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario has said, “We are very pleased to support the Ontario government’s proposed legislation, the Employment Standards Amendment Act (Leaves to Help Families), 2013, and congratulate the government on taking this important step to protect the job security of Ontarians caring for loved ones. The Heart and Stroke Foundation recognizes that the health and support of caregivers is a vital aspect in a person’s recovery from heart disease and stroke.

We look forward to working together to further support caregivers through our health and information programs, like Living with Heart Disease and Living with Stroke, in order to give Ontarians much-needed support when filling this role after a tragic event.”

Lisa Levin, chair of the Ontario Caregiver Coalition, said in supporting this bill: “The Ontario Caregiver Coalition, a collaborative that works to advance the interests of caregivers, is pleased that our decision-makers are recognizing the important contributions made by caregivers. Based on national data, it is estimated that caregiving contributes between $24 billion and $31 billion annually to maintain the health of Canadians. Caregivers need our support to continue their critical role. This is the beginning of a broader dialogue on economic and social supports to help those who take care of their loved ones.”

That is why the leaves in our bill—leaves for parents of critically ill children and of children who are missing or die where it is probably the result of a crime—are so important and so necessary. The leaves complement recently extended federal income supports by providing up to 37 weeks of job-protected leave to care for a critically ill child; up to 52 weeks of job-protected leave for employees who are parents of a child who has disappeared where it is probably the result of crime; and up to 104 weeks of job-protected leave for employees who are parents of a child who has died where it is probably the result of a crime.

Employees eligible for critically ill child care leave may also be entitled to federal employment insurance benefits for most of their leave, while employees eligible for a crime-related child death or disappearance leave may be entitled to the Federal Income Support for Parents of Murdered or Missing Children grant. All parents can sympathize with other mothers and fathers who face these difficult and tragic situations.

Ontario currently provides a number of supports to parents who face crises. Ontario Victim Services, through the Ministry of the Attorney General, provides direct services to victims of crime across Ontario and funds community organizations that deliver support services to victims. The direct services include the Financial Assistance for Families of Homicide Victims Program. The Financial Assistance for Families of Homicide Victims Program helps eligible parents, whether biological or adoptive, and spouses of homicide victims by providing up to $10,000 per homicide.

The Vulnerable Victims and Family Fund helps victims of crime and families of homicide victims participate more fully in the criminal court process. Financial and court-based supports include helping both victims of crime and families of homicide victims to travel to attend court during key points in a criminal proceeding—for instance, a trial—and providing vulnerable victims with interpretive services when they’re observing a criminal proceeding. Victims of crime and families of homicide victims would apply through Ontario’s Victim/Witness Assistance Program, which is available in all 54 court jurisdictions.

Ontario also provides a variety of supportive services to parents of children who face a health crisis. The Assistance for Children with Severe Disabilities program, which is managed by the Ministry of Children and Youth Services, helps parents with some of the extra costs of caring for a child who has a severe disability. A parent or a legal guardian whose child is under 18 years of age, lives at home and has a severe disability may be eligible to receive help under this program, depending on the family’s income.

Parents can get between $25 and $440 a month to help with costs such as travel to doctors and hospitals, special shoes and clothes, parental relief, wheelchair repairs, assistive devices, hearing aids, hearing aid batteries, prescription drugs, dental care and eyeglasses.

The Ministry of Children and Youth Services funds two programs that can give families a break or respite from the day-to-day care of their child with special needs. Under the Out-of-Home Respite Program, families of children with multiple special needs can receive up to seven days of respite care provided in a location other than their home. The child must be under 18 years of age, have multiple special needs because of a physical or developmental disability, and live at home and need care 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

There is also enhanced respite funding. This grant is paid to families who are caring for a child who is medically fragile and/or depends on a technological device, needing care 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, and is paid in addition to other respite services. Families may be eligible for up to $3,500 per child per year. The child must be under 18 years of age, live at home and need intensive care and constant monitoring on a 24-hour basis.

Our bill is for hard-working Ontarians struggling to balance their jobs and their care commitments. In the most difficult, most trying and most tragic of situations, where parents face the disappearance of a child or the death of a child as a probable result of crime, our proposed legislation reaches out and compassionately provides job-protected leave for those who face the painful times of personal crisis.

No one should have to worry about being unemployed on top of struggling to deal with the medical crisis of a beloved family member or a tragic situation involving our children, because when hardship and tragedy strike, when the chips are down, you want to know that someone is there for you, that someone is watching your back. This is an opportunity for government to show the compassion our citizens need and deserve in their time of need.

If passed, our legislation would assist working people and the economy in other ways as well, because it would help protect and retain needed employees who might otherwise have to leave their employment or who might lose it. We know that keeping skilled labour is good for employers, employees and the overall economy alike.

The Ontario Ministry of Finance projects a shortfall of employees ranging from 200,000 to 1.8 million by 2031. This is according to a study entitled People Without Jobs, Jobs Without People, by former Seneca College president Dr. Rick Miner.

Our government, Madam Speaker, has worked very hard to protect working Ontarians and families. Our Premier, Kathleen Wynne, and members of her cabinet have visited communities across the province, met with important partners inside and outside of government, and introduced a number of new initiatives and investments to get government working for the people of this province.

More than 475,000 jobs have been created since the recessionary low in 2009. Our province has invested more than $85 billion in public infrastructure since 2003 to reverse the underinvestment that had accumulated over several previous decades. There are more than 100 hospital construction projects currently on the go, including in Thunder Bay, London and Cornwall. There are also more than 610 new schools that have been opened, planned or under construction across the province.

Our finance minister, Charles Sousa, said in his recent economic statement that now is the right time to invest $35 billion over the next three years in important infrastructure projects throughout the province and that these investments will help support and maintain more than 100,000 jobs annually.

We’re investing in our infrastructure and we’re also investing in the people of Ontario. This includes: 30% off the tuition grant for post-secondary education, which is helping more than 200,000 students; the youth jobs strategy, which will create 30,000 employment and mentorship opportunities for young people—since its launch just over a month ago, 2,000 jobs have been created; and the first-ever grant program solely dedicated to seniors, which will help older Ontarians remain active, healthy and connected to the community.

To make the province more competitive and create jobs, our government is investing more than $35 billion in infrastructure over the next three years. This will benefit all Ontarians in the near term and for generations to come, helping businesses compete and attract new job-creating investment to the province.

The government’s plan to build modern infrastructure includes: becoming the first province to develop and market green bonds, helping fund green infrastructure projects, including public transit; the creation of a new Trillium Trust, a dedicated fund that would receive gains from asset sales, such as from the sale of the province’s interest in General Motors, to finance key public infrastructure priorities; and ensuring opportunities for companies of various sizes to take

part in projects led by Infrastructure Ontario through its world-leading alternative financing and procurement model.

The Ministry of Labour currently has a panel reviewing the minimum wage to help determine a method of setting it in the future so that it provides fairness and a meaningful opportunity to improve lives and provides predictability for business to help them remain competitive and create jobs.

And to build a fair, compassionate society, our government has introduced this legislation that would, if passed, create these three new categories of unpaid job-protected leave: family caregiver leave, a leave for parents of critically ill children, and a leave for parents of children who are missing or who died as a probable result of crime. We’ve introduced this bill so people can take care of their loved ones without fear of losing their employment. Our proposed legislation would provide reasonable protection for employers and employees alike.

We have asked our federal counterparts to provide employment assistance to those who would be eligible for the family caregiver leave so that they could receive income during these difficult times.

If passed, this proposed legislation would be enforced by Ministry of Labour employment standards officers, who could step in if employees’ rights are denied. I want to add that the strategies, tools and resources that we have over the past few years developed to successfully deal with employment standards claims give us an enhanced ability to enforce this proposed legislation, as well as other provisions of the Employment Standards Act.

This bill is for the young working family or single parent needing to care for their child in hospital with a serious medical condition. It is for the wife seeing her husband through a difficult period of radiation or chemotherapy. It is for someone helping to care for that elderly parent who is suffering major health problems as a result of a fall or the aftermath of a stroke.

This proposed legislation is our way of saying to the people of this province that we will help protect you as you protect your loved ones. Our proposed legislation would assist those Ontarians who are most vulnerable. That is because the burden of caregiving lies most heavily on those without the financial means to provide care. Our bill would help the immigrant family new to Canada already burdened with adapting to a new land. It would help single parents. It would assist single adult children caring for a seriously ill and elderly parent. It would also assist women, to whom, we all know, a disproportionate share of the responsibility of caring for family members still falls.

When we and those we love face these very difficult personal situations, the last thing we need is to fear being left unemployed because we need time away from work. Working Ontarians should not have to choose between their jobs and helping family members with major health problems. This is why our government introduced this bill. That is why we have taken this action for the working people of this province.

Another goal of our government, which I’m sure we all share, is to make Ontario the healthiest place in North America, both to grow up and to grow old in. We all know that across Canada we have an aging population. It is clear that this puts economic pressure on our health care system. So when the opportunity is there to help seniors facing a serious medical condition stay in their homes, where the financial cost to society is lower, we believe making that happen makes sense.

In conclusion, I just want to thank all three parties of the House for supporting this bill and for a smooth transition through committee, and as well, the stakeholders that are here who have given their support to this very important bill. I want to thank you for your support.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Comments and questions?

Mr. John O’Toole: I want to also acknowledge and recognize and thank the members in the gallery who are paying attention to the one-hour lead on third reading of Bill 21, and the remarks by the minister as well as his parliamentary assistant from Brampton West.

Of course our critic, Monte McNaughton, will be doing a lead on this. I think it’s worthwhile sticking around for that, which will probably occur the next time because of the time element left this morning.

There are really a couple of sections that are really worthwhile putting some attention to. We support the intent. We also want to recognize what it is. I think, really, that the first thing is that there is actually no money attached to this, so if people can afford to take time off in Ontario today—first, they’re lucky to have a job in Ontario today. There are 300,000 families that don’t have the job to leave in the first place.

Then, the fact is that they’ve sort of, for some malicious reason, said, “You must take the entire week. Even if it’s taking your spouse to a chemotherapy treatment, you must take the week off.” Then, if you look at

section 52, if you try to go back to work the next day, it’s at the wish of the employer. These provisions need to be looked at. I’m sure, in the drafting, in trying to find consent here, there isn’t much attention being paid to it.

So subsection 49.3(1)—defining a “week” is deliberately mentioned in every section; it must be a week. Now I’ve been through personal experiences—most people have—with someone taking terminally ill treatments who may be in remission for periods of time. That

section needs to be looked at, for sure.

Then again, there is no support here. There’s not one nickel. For a family that’s already suffering under paying the parking—going to the hospital, it costs 30 or 40 bucks a day for parking. They don’t have a job. I think they could go a little further in this in some respects.

I think also the other

part is

section 52 in the bill itself. I’ll just flip over—

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Thank you. The time has expired. Further comments or questions?

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: I think this bill is needed. We all agree that it is a step forward. Many families face illness and they need support. Our home care system—we’re working to improve that. We’ve brought a motion to try to get home care within five days when someone leaves the hospital, so that they can have that care they depend on. But also, family members, of course, want to be there when there’s some kind of serious illness going on, and sometimes they’re required to be there, if that home care isn’t delivered in those five days.

I understand that it went to committee, and there was really good discussion. Stakeholders brought their concerns with respect to the time off and the length of time that the member from Durham spoke about. They were very concerned with the week, that you must take that week off. They wanted to have the flexibility of maybe taking a day or having an afternoon.

We’re in a democratic government right now, as we know, and we’re in a minority government. In that committee, the work was done. It was done by the two parties. The NDP and the Conservatives agreed that those things should be looked at and be flexible, because it’s good for the employee and it’s also good for the employer. Sometimes employers don’t want to have that employee off for a whole week; it could disrupt their business.

The employee, then, can also have the benefit of not having that time off without pay, so maybe an afternoon could be better than a whole week. As the member from Durham said, people can’t afford to have a whole week off without pay. They have to pay their bills, and they’ve got to put the food on the table. Not everybody has that flexibility of having no paycheque for a week. So I really like that—

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Thank you. Your time has expired. The member for Ottawa South.

Mr. John Fraser: I’d like to thank the Minister of Labour very much for bringing this bill forward. I think it’s an important bill for Ontario families that are in a time of crisis. People need support. I think we all agree that this is an important piece of legislation. I’d also like to thank the member from Brampton West for his remarks.

Most of all, I would like to thank the members in the gallery today, most of whom came and presented to the committee, which helped to inform the deliberation and the clause-by-clause. They were very thoughtful presentations. They took the time to come; they are obviously very concerned about the people they represent in their various constituencies and in their roles. I’d like to thank them very much and thank them for being here today.

I would like to, I think, correct the record in regard to the remarks from the member from Durham.

Mr. John Yakabuski: No, you can’t. You can only correct your own record.

Mr. John Fraser: Well, I would like to correct the member—

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Okay. Carry on.

Mr. John Fraser: Thank you very much. I apologize for my misstep.

Mr. John Yakabuski: Just trying to help you.

Mr. John Fraser: Thank you very much for correcting me. I’m so glad I’ve got your help over there.

I do believe that the week—

Interjection.

Mr. John Fraser: I know. We’re together like this.

In fact, that is not restricted to whole weeks; I think that went through committee. There was some discussion and debate. I know there was some concern about small businesses and their ability to accommodate that, but that passed.

Mr. Monte McNaughton: You abstained.

Mr. John Fraser: That’s correct. I do have some concerns about how that’s going to affect small businesses, but it did pass. I’ve actually had some discussions with some of the members who are here today.

Look, many of us have had an experience in our life where we’ve been in a crisis with a loved one. I know that I’ve had a few. We’re currently having one right now; my dad has a very, very serious illness. We’re lucky: I have three sisters—we have lots of kids that live in the city—and I’m here. But we’ve all got some flexibility because of our—

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Thank you. The member for Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke.

Mr. John Yakabuski: I’m going to have some time to speak to the third reading of this bill at some point further on, I believe, but I’m just going to go a little bit off the topic for a second.

I had only a brief opportunity yesterday to announce the arrival of our newest grandchild. Adelaide Helena Colucci was born at the Peterborough Regional Health Centre on Saturday, November 16, at 4:41 p.m., at 8 pounds, 13 ounces, and 21 inches long.

Tom and Emily—Emily, of course, is the mother, and our daughter—are doing extremely well. She was discharged from the hospital yesterday, and we had the opportunity, Vicky and I, to see Adelaide on my way to Toronto on Sunday. She is, of course, gorgeous, because not a bit of her takes after me. But we’re looking forward to spending more time with her. And yesterday, on the 18th, another one of our granddaughters, May, turned six. She’s in grade 1 at Eganville public school in Eganville. So family caregiver leave and talking about your family, I think, mesh very well.

As I said, I’m going to have the opportunity—I share many of the concerns that my colleague from Durham spoke about with regard to how, you know, it’s a wonderful thought, the Family Caregiver Leave Act. There are some weaknesses in the legislation itself with regard to the time off and the blocks that it needs to be taken in. There are some concerns about that. Of course, the other thing is that it’s a bit more of a wish list on the part of the provincial government, without attaching any monetary support whatsoever. That’s an issue that I think still needs to be addressed, but it’s not going to be addressed in my two seconds that I have—

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Thank you. The parliamentary assistant has two minutes to respond.

Mr. Vic Dhillon: I want to thank the members from Durham, London West, Ottawa South and Renfrew.

Madam Speaker, this bill is the right thing to do. We need to extend compassion to people who are down on their luck, who need to care for their child, their parents or grandparents.

One of the most important elements of this bill really struck close to home for me because last Sunday I attended the funeral of a close friend’s father, who was a Canadian citizen who was visiting abroad and had been misdiagnosed and got very ill. My friend was able to go and bring his father back. Luckily for them, they wouldn’t have had to take time off from work, because they are in their own small business. But had it been someone who had a job and needed to do the same thing, it would have been very difficult, because the father really needed someone to accompany him back to Canada.

It’s an unfortunate thing that happened, but at least with this bill it can give family members some sort of comfort and relief to know that their job will be waiting for them after they have looked after their critically ill child or a parent.

I think this is a great bill. It extends compassion to people who are really in a very difficult situation.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): Thank you.

Third reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Julia Munro): It being close to 10:15 of the clock, this House stands recessed until 10:30.

The House recessed from 1013 to 1030.

INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS

Mr. Rob E. Milligan: I have two great guests here from Northumberland–Quinte West this morning, in the west gallery. We have Kevin Burh and Kelly Cocek. It’s great to see you here.

Mr. Rick Bartolucci: I’m honoured to introduce Dominic Giroux, president of Laurentian University, and Michael Atkins, the chair of the board of governors for Laurentian University. I welcome them to their lobby day, and I know that they’re going to have an excellent day.

Mr. Rick Nicholls: I’m pleased to introduce a couple of friends of mine, in the west gallery this morning: Mark Yacoub and Jeff Turner, who are visiting us from the United Kingdom.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I’d like to welcome guests joining us for question period in the public gallery this morning, from both of the two world-class universities in my riding of Kitchener–Waterloo. From Wilfrid Laurier University: Dr. Max Blouw, president, and Mr. Jamie Martin, chair of the board of governors. From the University of Waterloo: Dr. Feridun Hamdullahpur, president, and Mr. Murray Gamble, vice-chair of the board of governors. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. James J. Bradley: I’d like us to welcome the president of Brock University, Dr. Jack Lightstone, and Joe Robertson, the chair of the board of trustees, in the west gallery.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: I’d like to introduce the best constituency staff in Ontario. I have Marlene Welsh, Trish Fifield, Whitney McWilliam, and with them, my two retired constit staff Penny Rice and Francine Melmer. Welcome to Toronto.

M me France Gélinas: I want to introduce the best health care researcher ever, Miriam Barna, with her aunt Lisa Marson and her niece Marson Davies. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Michael Gravelle: I want to introduce two distinguished representatives from Lakehead University, here for lobby day: Mr. Rodney Hanley, provost and vice-president academic at Lakehead University; and also Cameron Clark, chair of the board of governors at Lakehead University and a former Deputy Minister of Northern Development and Mines. Welcome to both of you gentlemen.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop: I’d like to introduce to you, in the gallery, Sheona and Robert Kloostra, the owners of Happy at Home, a home care program in Orillia. They were representing Georgian College last night at the Premier’s Awards, for Colleges Ontario.

Hon. John Gerretsen: I would like to introduce, from St. Lawrence College: Glenn Vollebregt, president, as well as Marc Schaefer, board chair; and from Queen’s University: Alan Harrison, provost and vice-president academic, and Barb Palk, chair of the board of trustees.

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: It is my pleasure to introduce one of eastern Ontario’s newest 53-year-olds, Steve Clark. Happy birthday, Steve.

Hon. Jeff Leal: It’s a great pleasure to introduce a number of folks with us today in our galleries. From Trent University, we have Steven Franklin, president, and Bryan Davies, vice-chair of the board of governors. From the University of Windsor, we have Alan Wildeman, president, and Jennifer Jones, chair of the board of governors. From Brock University, we have Jack Lightstone, president, and Joe Robertson, chair of the board of trustees. From the Council of Ontario Universities, we have Jennifer Grass, senior director of communications and public affairs.

Mr. Victor Fedeli: Today I would like to introduce Dr. Michael DeGagné, the president of Nipissing University in North Bay; Colin Dennis, chair of the board of governors of Nipissing University; Harley d’Entremont, vice-president academic and research at Nipissing University; and Mr. George Burton, president of Canadore College in North Bay.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I’d like to welcome from my alma mater Patrick Deane, president of McMaster University, and David Lazzarato, chair of the board of governors, who are here for university day. I hope the chamber all welcomes them.

Hon. Teresa Piruzza: November is Adoption Awareness Month, and I would like to welcome Pat Convery and Wendy Hayes from the Adoption Council of Ontario for that; as well, I don’t see them here yet, but Dr. Wildeman, president of the University of Windsor, and Jennifer Jones, the chair.

Mr. Randy Pettapiece: I’d like to welcome—they’re not here yet—the students of the grade 5 class from Elma Township Public School in my riding of Perth–Wellington.

Ms. Soo Wong: I’m pleased to welcome all the visitors who are here today for university day, especially the president and CEO of the Council of Ontario Universities, Bonnie Patterson, as well as Bob Lopinski, the principal of Counsel Public Affairs.

Hon. Mario Sergio: Speaker, I’m pleased to introduce to the House, from York University, Mamdouh Shoukri, the president, and Julia Foster, the chair of the board of governors.

Hon. Glen R. Murray: Joining us shortly is Sheldon Levy, president of Ryerson; Phyllis Yaffe, the chair of the board; and Erin McGinn, who are great city builders in my community. I want to welcome them.

I also want to welcome, Mr. Speaker, my friend Jack Lightstone, president of Brock University, who was a visionary professor, and I am the result of his great labours.

Hon. Liz Sandals: I’m pleased to introduce Dr. Alastair Summerlee, who’s the president of the University of Guelph. I think he’s still on his way in, but I know he’s here because I’ve already met with him this morning.

Hon. Brad Duguid: Mr. Speaker, I probably could have saved us time this morning by introducing everybody at the same time, but this morning I’d like to welcome President Bonnie Patterson and the entire Council of Ontario Universities, as well as Linda Franklin and representatives here joining us from Colleges Ontario. I wish all the members good meetings throughout the day with our post-secondary colleagues.

Mr. Mike Colle: I have the pleasure of introducing the aunt of the page from Eglinton–Lawrence, Cynthia White. Her wonderful aunt came all the way to Queen’s Park to see her niece in action. Welcome, Elena Floros.

Mrs. Donna H. Cansfield: It is my pleasure to welcome to the Legislature Arpana Vora and father, Adesh Vora, and friend Maddy Reid—for page Niam Vora—who are joining us today. I hope you have a wonderful time in the Legislature.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): We have with us today in the Speaker’s gallery—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Did I miss somebody? The Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services.

L’hon. Madeleine Meilleur: Ça me fait plaisir de vous présenter Carole Beaulieu, de OCAD, qui était ma chef de cabinet pour plusieurs années, et elle me manque beaucoup. Bienvenue.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I would be remiss if I didn’t have my two cents’ worth in recognizing Max Blouw, the president of Laurier, who happens to be the president of Laurier Brantford as well. So welcome, Max. We’re glad you’re here.

We have with us today in the Speaker’s gallery a delegation of the American state legislators from the Midwestern Legislative Conference. With us today we have Representative Jim Stamas from Michigan, Representative Tom Letson from Ohio, Representative Eric Genrich from Wisconsin, Representative Rob VerHeulen from Michigan and his wife, Norma, and we have Ilene Grossman, the assistant director of CSG-MLC.

Also with us today is Mary Lynn Becker of the Canadian consulate in Detroit. Her partner in crime, Jim Dickmeyer, the US Consul General, is not here with us, but he was with us yesterday. Welcome to our guests from the United States.

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): As is the custom and tradition, it is now time to welcome—all members will join me in welcoming—this new group of pages, serving in the second session of the 40th Parliament. Could you please assemble, pages?

Morgan Beatty from Prince Edward–Hastings; Julia Brunet from Lambton–Kent–Middlesex; Ana Chu Wong from York West; Amy Falkner from Ottawa Centre; Sarah Giesen from London–Fanshawe; Najat Halane from Ajax–Pickering; Jeffrey Howson from Wellington–Halton Hills; Spencer Johne from Mississauga–Erindale; Michaela Knechtel from Perth–Wellington; Arvind Krishendeholl from Brampton West; Yong Da Li from Don Valley East; Maya Joy Louise Parkins-Lindstrom from Davenport; Zachary Piette from London West; William Randall from Don Valley West; Payton Smith from Northumberland–Quinte West; Marina St.

Marseille from Stormont–Dundas–South Glengarry; Niam Vora from Etobicoke Centre; Matteya Wendling from Welland; Cynthia White from Eglinton–Lawrence; and Jonathan Arta Yapeter from Oak Ridges–Markham.

These are your pages.

Applause.

ORAL QUESTIONS

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY

Mr. Tim Hudak: A question for the Premier: Premier, the current law requires you to produce a detailed financial report about the province’s books before an election campaign—finances, expenses, the debt, growth projections. But there is a loophole in that law that, as it’s written, in a minority situation—so if there’s an election next—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Order.

Mr. Tim Hudak: —that report would not come before the taxpayers of the province of Ontario.

Premier, you said you want to be open and transparent. I don’t think you meant that ironically. Will you be good to your word and actually support closing that loophole?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I love it when the opposition has an epiphany. In 2003, we introduced the financial transparency and accountability act, one of the first pieces of legislation that we introduced. As it happens, the Conservatives voted against that. We absolutely believe that it’s important that people have the information as we go into an election. We put that in place to address a $5.6-billion deficit that had not been revealed before the election. So we believed that it was very necessary that we have that piece of legislation in place.

I have said repeatedly, since that day forward, that we are committed to that kind of openness and transparency. We’re very glad that the Leader of the Opposition has seen the light on this.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Tim Hudak: Well, I guess that’s the answer I expected. I was hoping for a clearer “yes” though, Premier. I hope that you’re not wiggling here—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): We’re going to start right off the bat: Stop. I’ll go into individual ridings now.

Leader?

Mr. Tim Hudak: I hope you’re not trying to wiggle off the hook here with some misdirection. I hope you can give me a straight-up answer on this. Basically, this would be a financial report that the Auditor General would sign off on. So during an election campaign, potentially in the spring, taxpayers would know the true state of the books, signed off by the Auditor General.

When you crafted your legislation, you cleverly left in a loophole that gets you off the hook. I want to commend the member for Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock, Laurie Scott, who has caught you on this, and she has brought forward a private member’s bill that will be debated on Thursday.

So my very simple question to you, Premier, is, will you and the Liberal caucus support Laurie Scott’s bill and close the Liberal loophole?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Be seated, please. Thank you.

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: We have said all along that we’ll continue to look for new and important ways to provide more transparency and openness. As with all private members’ bills, we’ll listen to the debate. I haven’t seen the legislation; I don’t know exactly what it encompasses. I look forward to the debate.

But, Mr. Speaker, I would just ask the Leader of the Opposition to remember that it was our government that introduced the legislation in the first place. We brought in the legislation, because there was a $5.6-billion deficit that had been hidden from the people of Ontario when we came into office in 2003.

Of course we’re going to look for new ways. We’re happy to have passed legislation to bring in the Financial Accountability Officer. We’re the first provincial government in Ontario to have that oversight measure. Of course we’ll be looking for new ways to be transparent. I look forward to the debate on the private member’s bill.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.

Mr. Tim Hudak: Well, Premier, it’s pretty straightforward. If you’re looking for new ways to ensure transparency, it’s kind of staring you right in the face, two desks behind me: Laurie Scott’s bill. She brought it forward. She would close the Liberal loophole, and she would compel the finance minister, then, to put the true state of the books before the province in an election campaign, and the Auditor General would sign off on them. I mean, what’s wrong with that? I don’t understand why you’re resisting closing the Liberal loophole here.

You know, Premier, that when Don Drummond looked at your books, he discovered that you’re actually heading towards a $30-billion deficit, that you’re taking the province to tripling our provincial debt. So we don’t really believe—we’re going to take, with a few grains of salt, what the finance minister says. We actually want to see the Auditor General sign off on the books before a spring election campaign.

Will you close the loophole? Do the right thing. Support—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock, please.

Be seated, please. Be seated, please. Thank you.

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General discovered that we’re the only government that has in fact reduced spending year over year. We have overachieved on our deficit reduction every single year.

I am happy to look at the private member’s bill that the member is bringing forward. I’m happy to listen to the debate. As I said, we haven’t seen the details. We haven’t looked at what the legislation actually—what the implications would be.

But we introduced the legislation in the first place. We said that it was important that, before an election, people in the province know what is in the province’s books. We did that because there was a $5.6-billion deficit that had been hidden when the previous government was in office, before the 2003 election. We said that shouldn’t happen again.

Of course we’re willing to look at the private member’s bill. We look forward to the debate, and I’m glad that the Leader of the Opposition finally sees that this is an important path to be on.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock.

Be seated, please. Be seated, please.

New question.

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY

Mr. Tim Hudak: Back to the Premier: I’m not sure, while the Premier is dancing around and avoiding answering a simple yes-or-no question—she says that maybe she has not been briefed on the bill. If you’re not, we hope we get an answer as soon as possible, because, clearly—I don’t know how anybody can argue with this. It closes a Liberal loophole. It would force the finance minister to put the true state of the books before the province, signed off on by the Auditor General. It seems very straightforward. I don’t know why they’re resisting on this.

Well, maybe I have one idea, I guess. In your economic statement that you put out two weeks ago, as Vic Fedeli pointed out in his Fedeli Focus on Finance, your medium-term outlook numbers are absent. You don’t actually show how you get to a balanced budget. This stuff is actually pleasure reading for me, Speaker. I actually enjoy reading these reports. But they were totally blank, the pages that show what you’re going to do for spending in the medium term. You ripped those pages out. It’s like saying the ending of a story and ripping out all the chapters. Why are you hiding information? What are you keeping from the public?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: As I’ve said, we are looking forward to the debate on the private member’s bill, Mr. Speaker. Unlike the Leader of the Opposition, who will vote against a budget before he has read it, I am not going to commit to voting for legislation before I have read it and before I have heard the debate.

I believe that this place works best when we have the opportunity to hear people’s perspectives and to hear what the implications of a particular piece of legislation would be, just as I believe that it’s important to read a budget before you decide whether you’re going to vote against it or not.

So we’re going to read the legislation. We’re going to listen to the debate, Mr. Speaker. We’re going to look at the implications. But I would just say that we brought in legislation in order to deal with the issues around transparency. We did that when we were first elected because of a deficit that had been hidden. We are consistently looking for new ways to be transparent, and we look forward to the debate on this private member’s bill.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Tim Hudak: Well, respectfully, Premier, this legislation was tabled two weeks ago. I would fully expect that you’ve been briefed on it. Your finance minister surely is aware of this bill. I imagine he’s got to be 100% supportive. I don’t see how you can argue with it. If you do agree with Laurie Scott’s bill, because we are 100% behind that bill to close the Liberal loophole, then I’d ask you also to produce what’s missing from the financial economic statement.

It puzzles me what you’re trying to hide. My background is in economics. That’s what gives me this scintillating personality and charming sense of humour. But I actually do read these things. Imagine my disappointment when that outlook was missing from your financial economic statement. It makes me wonder, number one, is the deficit even worse than you say? Are you going to raise taxes, number two? And does this mean you have no clue whatsoever how to get us out of the hole you’ve dug us in—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock, please. Be seated, please. Thank you.

Premier.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Finance.

Hon. Charles Sousa: Mr. Speaker, I find it passing strange that the member opposite and all of his friends there are talking about transparency and accountability, transparency and accountability that this government has brought to this House well before they decided to flirt with the idea. In fact, if they read the budget, from pages 143 to 148 we spoke at length about the new measures of accountability, including post-secondary education, child welfare, community-based mental health, consumer agencies, the tax credit system, and of course the introduction of a Financial Accountability Officer who would have powers well beyond those being brought forward by the private member’s bill.

They, sir, voted against those very measures, and now they’ve decided that they want to come forward with amendments to a measure that they never even read, Mr. Speaker.

We will continue to do our part and bring that transparency and accountability to this House.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.

Mr. Tim Hudak: The finance minister says that there’s a new level of transparency. Well, I look forward to seeing what the OPP have to say after they’ve investigated their office over the gas plant scandal. Come on. Not one but two OPP investigations: That takes some doing.

I’ll ask the finance minister, because I know he’s been briefed on this; I know he’s on top of his files. It was tabled two weeks ago. And I know someday soon he’s going to be moving beyond talking points and actually proving that he’s got this file under control. So I’ll ask him, if I don’t get an answer from the Premier: Will you agree to Laurie Scott’s bill? Will you close the Liberal loophole? Will you put before the people of Ontario the true state of the finances, signed off by the Auditor General, in time for a spring election campaign?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I don’t ask for quiet so that it can ramp back up again.

Carry on, please.

Hon. Charles Sousa: Mr. Speaker, the province of Ontario, this government, is the first government and the first province in Canada to introduce a Financial Accountability Officer to maintain integrity in our numbers. We introduced interim reports illustrating that we cut spending even again last quarter. The Auditor General has audited our books, and it showed that the province of Ontario took determined and disciplined measures to reduce spending as well as control spending for the last four years running.

We recognize the challenges before us. We recognize that the world market has continued to slow, and yet Ontario has consistently exceeded its targets because of the measures and the directions that we have taken. We’ll continue to do that. We’ll continue to do what’s necessary for the benefit of Ontarians and for growing our economy.

And I say to the member opposite, who stood in this House in 2003, before the $5.6-billion hidden deficit, and said this—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.

Hon. Charles Sousa: —“The provincial budget”—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. You’re not going to get to say it.

New question.

JOB CREATION

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is for the Premier. Over three years ago, New Democrats proposed targeted tax credits to reward companies when they put people to work in the province of Ontario. Now, thousands of job losses later, the government has committed to studying the idea. How many more jobs will be lost while the government does that?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I think the leader of the third party knows that we are putting in place measures that will invest in people and infrastructure, and will create an environment that will allow businesses to thrive. We have said that there are a series of tax credits in place that have supported business, and we need to look at those. We need to make sure that the business tax credits that are in place are working and that they are having the desired effects—making sure that we look at those.

I think the notion that somehow there shouldn’t be those kinds of supports in place does not make sense, so we’re looking at them to make sure that the ones that are there are actually having the desired effect of creating jobs.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Before the last budget, the government also said that they would take action to close new corporate tax loopholes that would hand Ontario’s biggest businesses a tax break—not when they create jobs, mind you, but when they wine and dine clients or buy box seats at the SkyDome. Has the government closed that loophole?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I know that the Minister of Finance has spoken to this a number of times and is working with the federal government on some of the specifics, but I think the bottom line is that we need to make sure that we have the right supports in place for business, including the supports that would help small business with their payroll tax, which is why we want to get the small businesses act passed. We want to make sure that the right supports are there so that businesses can expand and, at the same time, make sure that we put the supports for young people in place.

It’s very heartening that the post-secondary institutions today are going to be talking to members about what they are doing to work with young people and make sure that the supports and the programs that are in place in the colleges and universities are preparing young people for the jobs that are available, because we know that we’ve got jobs and we know that we’ve got young people who are looking for those jobs. We need to make sure that those are linked together.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: What the Premier may not realize is that for people losing jobs, this is pretty concerning stuff. The Liberal government plows forward with an HST giveaway that rewards companies for hitting the town, but for some reason the Premier seems to think she needs to hold more conversation and more consultation before she moves forward with proven tools that have helped provinces like Manitoba become the shining star of Canada’s recovery.

Can the Premier explain why proven tax measures go to the back of the line while tax measures that help well-connected insiders and cost Ontarians billions and billions of dollars are the Premier’s top priority?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Maybe in that exchange, the leader of the third party would explain why she’s not going to work with us to get the small businesses act passed, because that will actually help small businesses with their payroll taxes and it would actually help 60,000 small businesses in Ontario. I hope that when the leader of the third party talks about targeted tax measures, she would work with us on that one.

I agree with her that we need to work with the federal government on some of the issues that the Minister of Finance has raised in conversation with the federal government. But there are issues before this House, like the small businesses act, for which we could use the support of the NDP to make sure that that gets passed and we give those supports to our small businesses in the province.

HORSE RACING INDUSTRY

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The Liberals should stop playing political games, and things would move forward a lot more cleanly.

My next question is to the Premier. In communities across Ontario, people who rely on gaming to provide good jobs are wondering what the government’s plan is doing to their industry. Last year, the government plowed ahead with a plan to bring new private casinos to cities like Toronto and push aside horse racing and the people who rely on it. Now the people of Toronto and people in communities across Ontario, in fact, have said they don’t want a casino. Even the Premier has admitted that she doesn’t believe that the Liberals got the horse racing initiative right.

What’s the government’s plan now, Speaker?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Well, there are a number of issues in that question, so I’m going to talk about what is happening. We have been very clear that the integration of horse racing into the gaming plan overall is very important. In fact, it’s part of that five-year plan going forward. We’re investing $400 million in the horse racing industry. That has introduced stability into the horse racing industry. There is a sustainable future for horse racing in the province, which really was not in place when I took this office. The reality of having the integration of horse racing into the overall gaming strategy has happened. That’s part of the plan.

In terms of municipalities’ ability to choose whether to have a casino or not, that has always been the case, and that will continue to be the case.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, here’s the reality: The government’s plan to push new private casinos isn’t working, and it’s putting communities that rely on gaming, like Niagara Falls and Fort Erie, for example, at economic risk.

The Premier has admitted that the Liberal government didn’t get this right. Why is the government upping the ante on a hand that everyone knows is a loser?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I think what we’ve done is we have put in place a strategy that is going to allow the horse racing industry and the gaming industry to work together, to make sure that this industry overall is able to be responsible and sustainable. There are obviously issues around problem gambling that have to be addressed. There are issues around some communities wanting to have casinos and others not.

But that is why it’s important that we have an integrated industry, so that horse racing can be part of the overall strategy. It’s why there’s a new board at OLG. It’s why we’ve got a new strategy in place to make investments over the next five years and to make sure that the horse racing industry is attached to gaming so that we can make decisions that are rational for communities and for the whole industry.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, the net result of the Premier’s OLG privatization scheme is that rural families across Ontario have been thrown into chaos, and regions like Niagara, which have already been hit hard by job losses, feel like they’re being clobbered by their own government. The government could have addressed problems in the Slots at Racetracks Program, but instead, they chose to put private casinos’ interests ahead of tens of thousands of rural families.

The Premier isn’t holding any aces, and Ontarians are calling her bluff. Will she reinstate the Slots at Racetracks profit-sharing program until we can reach a sustainable solution?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Let me just get this straight: The leader of the third party wants to reinstate a program that was bad policy, that was not transparent, that was not working for the bulk of the province, and that was not providing a sustainable and open process and open program in horse racing. Repeated reports looked at that. Back to 2008, there was a report that said this is not a program that is transparent; it is not clear how it can work in a way that is fair across the system. That’s the program that the leader of the third party wants to put back in place.

Well, we’re not going to do that. We’re putting in place a program that’s going to focus on the customer, that’s going to be sustainable and that’s going to provide a future for horse racing. It’s going to be integrated with gaming across the province. That’s the plan we’ve got.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

New question.

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY

Ms. Laurie Scott: My question is for the Premier. Back on October 21 of this year, you wrote an open letter on the ontario.ca website, titled “Let’s Open Up Government to New Possibilities.” In this letter, you state to the Ontario people, “Our Open Government Initiative will help create the transparent, accessible government that the people of Ontario deserve.”

Two weeks ago, I introduced my private member’s bill, the Fiscal Transparency and Accountability Amendment Act (Pre-Election Reports), which will put into legislation that the government must release a pre-election financial report no later than 30 days after the minister moves the budget motion in the year, or within seven days after a writ is dropped for a non-fixed election.

Premier, I’m doing your work for you. Will you support my bill and let voters know our financial situation before they go to the polls?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I commend the member opposite for looking at the legislation that we brought in when we came into office and patterning her private member’s bill on that work that we did. I commend her.

I have said that we are very interested in looking at the private member’s bill. We are interested in hearing the debate, and we are looking for ways to be more open and transparent, so we look forward to the debate. As I said earlier, unlike the party opposite, we’re going to read the legislation and listen to the debate before we make that decision, but we look forward to that debate.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Ms. Laurie Scott: Well, I did bring in the bill two weeks ago. You claim your government—how accountable it is. This could be a major plus for your government. I’m giving you an opportunity.

But let me list your history in transparency: billion-dollar gas plant scandals; your Ministry of Health is rife with scandals—Ornge and eHealth; there are two OPP investigations going on. That’s your record of transparency, so I’m giving you a chance to support a bill that would provide transparency and tell the people of Ontario the state of the province’s finances before they go to the polls.

Will you come back on Thursday for private members’ bills and support this bill, which will help all of us—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Finance.

Hon. Charles Sousa: I appreciate the member opposite’s private member’s bill and her contribution to this debate, and I can appreciate why you’re doing it, because the Premier of the day in 2003 said this: “We are not running a deficit.” The finance minister of the day said, “I’m pleased” that we have a “fifth consecutive balanced budget.” Tim Hudak—I’m sorry; a member of the cabinet—said that the “provincial budget has been balanced....” He said that on October 1, 2003.

I appreciate why you don’t trust the members on your side of the House. We will do our part. We have introduced a Financial Accountability Officer. We have our statements audited. We are presenting our books in advance and will continue to do so.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Please. Order. It’s very difficult to ask for order when the answer is being given and I’m hearing more noise from the side that’s giving the answer. For those that are heckling on the other side, it balances off so that no one can hear, so I’d appreciate a little refraining.

New question.

AIR AMBULANCE SERVICE

M me France Gélinas: Ma question est pour la ministre de la Santé et des Soins de longue durée. Yesterday, we learned that the tragic deaths of four Ornge employees last May in Moosonee was as a result of the organization’s failure when it comes to safety and training. This revelation is deeply distressing, especially given the fact that Ornge has been under the microscope for such a long time, and the government has assured us time and time again that all is good at Ornge now.

Can the minister explain to Ontarians how things could have gone so wrong yet again?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: There is no question that the terrible tragedy of the helicopter crash on May 31 was devastating, both personally and for the Ornge organization. They have taken action. They have responded already to many of the recommendations made by HRSDC, and I know that they are continuing to work with HRSDC to ensure that all of the directions are, in fact, implemented.

I think it’s fair to say that under the new leadership at Ornge, Dr. Andy McCallum, his board and his senior leadership team have put the highest priority on patient safety and on the safety of their employees. I think that it would be important to note steps that have already been taken, and I look forward to the supplementary, where I will go over some of those reforms.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

M me France Gélinas: Too many aspects of what went wrong in Moosonee on May 31 seem like they carried over from the minister’s failures to oversee Ornge. Months before the crash, a safety officer in Moosonee warned about the risk of green pilots and night flights, but tragically, this whistle-blower, like many like him before, seems to have been ignored. As a result, four people lost their lives and three beautiful children in my riding are without their dads.

This government can talk a good game about oversight, but if it does not include basic safety standards, it’s for none. Will the minister admit that she has yet again failed Ontarians?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: In the words of the member from Nickel Belt, she has indeed said herself, speaking to the people at Ornge, “You give us confidence that strong elements of oversight are now there. You guys are a part of this. Your job is to oversee. You know how to do your job. You’re dedicated to it, and it brings results.... Things have changed for the good of the people of Ontario.” That was in May, and I believe that the member opposite was correct in her observation.

Some of the steps that have been taken since May 31: additional training for helicopter pilots, including controlled flight into terrain; they’ve revised their operating procedures for night operations, including operations into black-hole sites; and they’re installing solar lighting pads at 91 helipads across the province, including the north, to assist pilots landing at night.

There are others, Speaker. I will go until you—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Am I out of time?

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): You are. Thank you.

New question.

ADOPTION

Mr. Vic Dhillon: My question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services.

We’re all aware of the challenges faced by crown wards. It can be very difficult growing up in these circumstances. In my community, there are many parents who would like to build families through adoption. Adoption provides a great way for crown wards to find permanent, loving homes. Unfortunately, the adoption process can be very time-consuming and stressful for families.

Minister, can you tell us what our government is doing to make the adoption process easier so more families consider adoption when building a family?

Hon. Teresa Piruzza: Thank you to the member from Brampton West for his question. As I said earlier, November is Adoption Awareness Month, and welcome to the Adoption Council of Ontario, who is here today.

We of course want Ontario to be the best place in Canada for families. This includes increasing the number of children growing up in permanent homes through adoption and legal custody. Through reforms and regulatory changes, we have improved the adoption process for families in Ontario. We’ve removed barriers to adoption and made it easier for prospective parents to adopt a child, provide permanent homes for more crown wards and prepare youth for adulthood.

I would encourage all families looking to adopt to visit the MCYS website. The website provides helpful tips and advice on how to navigate our adoption system.

We will continue to help families who would like to adopt and assist more children to join safe, loving and permanent families.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Vic Dhillon: Thank you very much, Minister. I’m glad to see that we have taken action to improve the adoption process in Ontario and that, through legislative changes, we are helping families and youth throughout the province. I’m hopeful that families will take advantage of the helpful advice posted on the ministry’s website.

Another thing I hear from my community is that many older crown wards are passed over for adoption. It’s important that we help these youth find permanent homes of their own. It’s my understanding that a barrier to their adoption is that the process can be quite costly for prospective families.

Minister, what’s our government doing to encourage the adoption of older crown wards?

Hon. Teresa Piruzza: Thank you again for the supplementary. We recognize as well that there are often challenges to placing older children and siblings in permanent homes. One of the factors that was just raised is the cost associated with adoption.

That’s why we took action to help these youth by making adoption easier for prospective families. Last year we introduced an adoption subsidy for families who adopt children over the age of 10. The subsidy provides financial support of $11,400 per year per child. The subsidy offers great assistance to families who would like to adopt, but face financial barriers. Through this subsidy, 110 children have already found permanent homes, and it’s expected that by the end of the year, 150 more children will be adopted.

These changes improve the lives of children in care and ensure that more children are placed in safe, loving and permanent homes and, more importantly, families.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr. Tim Hudak: My question is to the Premier.

Interjection.

Mr. Tim Hudak: Then to the Minister of Health. Minister, I think you agree with me that the people of south Niagara deserve a modern, state-of-the-art hospital. You appointed Kevin Smith to be the supervisor of the Niagara Health System. I don’t agree with all of your decisions, but I think Kevin Smith has done a terrific job. As you know, he pointed out that a south Niagara hospital, as opposed to maintaining the four existing sites, would save the taxpayer $285 million in capital, and then you’d have a $10-million savings in operating from lower admin expenses that you could put to attracting more nurses and more specialists. I think all of us agree that this is the way to go.

The next step, as you know, Minister, is a planning grant to allow the folks at the Niagara Health System to then decide where the services are going to go and how they’re going to build that new hospital. I ask you, Minister, will you green-light this? Will you grant them the authority and give them the planning grant to go the next step for this needed hospital?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: I’d like to thank the member opposite for acknowledging the extraordinarily fine work that Dr. Kevin Smith has done at the Niagara Health System. As he well knows, it was a difficult challenge when Dr. Smith was appointed supervisor, but I think there is an overwhelmingly strong consensus that he has done a great job and really put that hospital on a much stronger footing.

The member opposite does raise the issue of a capital request for a new hospital in south Niagara. It is something that we are looking at carefully. Of course, it does come with the closure of other hospitals. As Dr. Smith said, we would close five hospitals to build one new one. That is not an easy decision for a community to make. I’d like some clarity from the member opposite whether he would support that plan as described by Dr. Smith.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Tim Hudak: I think I’ve been very clear about that, actually. I said you should carry out Dr. Smith’s recommendations and do it now. What’s not to like about this? It actually saves money. It actually means you have savings you could put towards attracting new nurses who are run off their feet today. So what’s not to like with this proposal? It saves taxpayers’ money and it raises the bar when it comes to standards.

I will caution you to ignore the NDP’s approach. Initially, they wanted the site to be in Welland. Then there was a by-election, so they said, “Well, we also want it to be in Niagara Falls.” They said, “Well, keep them all open.” They want to have their cake and eat it too. Nobody takes that NDP way seriously. I think Dr. Smith has made the right recommendation.

So the question is this: The planning grant is the next step. You did authorize that for Windsor in a similar situation where they consolidated in Windsor from two sites down to one. I don’t know why you did it for Windsor but you’re not doing it for Niagara. I’ll ask you, will you say yes to the planning grant to allow the work to happen?

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.

Mr. Tim Hudak: We want to see that new hospital at the Lyons Creek Road site in Niagara Falls. Why don’t you?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: As I say, Speaker, I am delighted with the conversion of the Leader of the Opposition to actually believing that investing in capital infrastructure, investing in hospitals, is the right thing to do. You will recall that just a year and a bit ago, when our budget included the plans for building new hospitals, the Leader of the Opposition voted against that. He voted against building new hospitals, many of them in communities represented by members of his own party. So I’m delighted he has changed his mind. I’m delighted that he sees that capital infrastructure, building hospitals, investing in that infrastructure, is the right thing to be doing.

So we’re continuing to build new hospitals. We think it’s the right thing to do and we’re looking very carefully at this particular project.

The minister tells us now that he is “upset” about the lack of compliance, but can he explain to Ontarians why his government’s lack of enforcement had to show up in the Toronto Star for him to finally promise action?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: I appreciate the question, as I spoke to this yesterday. I want to repeat that the compliance levels by businesses that have more than 20 employees and were required to file by December 31 of last year—that percentage is unacceptably low. Only 30% of the businesses in this province have complied.

Since becoming minister, I’ve taken this issue extremely seriously. During my tenure as minister and minister responsible for the AODA, we have doubled the number of businesses that now are complying. In September, I asked the ministry and they sent out more than 50,000 letters; 2,500 enforcement letters are going out this week, Mr. Speaker. This is an issue that I take very seriously.

To some extent, unfortunately, I have to admit that in the AODA legislation itself, as was passed unanimously by this Legislature, the mechanism for enforcement is in some respects cumbersome in terms of the process that we have to follow. For that reason, we are following the process as outlined in the law, but I am working on this vigorously. I intend to go as far as we need to to get full compliance.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: Speaker, this 2005 legislation is an essential tool for ensuring equal access for persons with disabilities in Ontario, but it can only be effective if the standards are enforced, which is up to this government. Even more outrageous, the government earmarked $24 million to enforce the act, but they never bothered to spend any of it.

Instead of platitudes and empty promises, can the minister provide Ontarians with a concrete timeline—what you’re actually going to do—for enforcing the AODA, finally?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: Well, I think it’s important. There are two issues I want to reference. First of all, we didn’t have an opportunity to enforce a customer service standard until this year. The requirement for businesses to comply was December 31. Since the beginning of this year, we have sent out two letters to all the businesses across this province, more than 50,000 in September alone. I’m following up with 2,500 enforcement letters. We also have a marketing plan that we’re launching as well.

I want to say, because this is important, on the positive side as well, many businesses have complied. But we have 100% compliance for this act as well as for this standard in the entire Ontario public service and the agencies this government is responsible for.

We are working on this vigorously, and I’m prepared, if necessary, to issue further enforcement letters, including fines, until businesses comply.

FRENCH-LANGUAGE EDUCATION /

Mr. Shafiq Qaadri: My question is for the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, the Honourable Brad Duguid.

Speaker, as the MPP for Etobicoke North, I have many college-aged students who attend, of course, various institutions, many of whom are seeking quality training in French. I’ve also noticed that many francophone students travel far and wide for the great opportunities available at GTA colleges.

When choosing an area for higher study, francophone students across the province deserve fair and equitable access to quality post-secondary education. Such students should be able to choose to study in their area of interest and rest assured that they will have options. Yet, unfortunately, still to this day, they are often limited in those very choices.

Speaker, can the minister please tell the House what the government is doing to create more opportunities for post-secondary students wishing to study in French?

Hon. Brad Duguid: Merci beaucoup pour votre question. Ensuring that francophone students have better access to French-language programs is a key priority for our government. On October 24, Mr. Speaker, our government announced an action plan to increase access to French-language post-secondary education, particularly services in central and southwestern Ontario. We’ll be committing $16.5 million to help universities and colleges expand their French-language programs, including expansions that are already under way at York University’s Glendon College, Collège Boréal and La Cité collégiale. We’ve also expanded distance grants for students.

But I’d like to take a moment to acknowledge the work of our minister of francophone affairs. She’s been a passionate champion for our francophone community and post-secondary issues. I’ve had the honour of being able to announce these initiatives, but it’s the minister of francophone affairs who’s really championed them within our government. She’s the one that deserves the credit, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Le ministre pourrait-il nous dire ce que ce plan signifie pour la communauté francophone de l’Ontario?

Hon. Brad Duguid: I think I’d best refer this to the minister of francophone affairs.

L’hon. Madeleine Meilleur: Merci au ministre de la Formation et des Collèges et Universités pour ses beaux commentaires. Merci au député d’Etobicoke North.

Ce plan d’action a une importance bien particulière parce que d’ici 2020, 50 % des francophones vont vivre ici au centre et au sud-ouest de l’Ontario. Alors, nous augmentons les programmes avec un financement additionnel de 14,5 millions de dollars et en encourageant la collaboration entre les institutions.

Nous créons un comité consultatif qui commencera dans les prochains mois, avant l’échéancier du printemps 2014. Nous allons aussi revoir la capacité de Glendon à jouer un rôle beaucoup plus important, et nous discutons avec l’Université York pour parler de la gouvernance au collège.

POWER PLANTS

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: Good morning. My question is to the Acting Premier. Last week, in an unprecedented event, the elite anti-rackets squad of the OPP took an after-hours tour of the Premier’s office. It was described as a crime scene because some in this government destroyed documents so no one would find out about a $1.1-billion scandal.

We have asked for a debate and a vote on a non-confidence motion, and we have asked for a judicial inquiry into this $1.1-billion scandal. The Liberal government has refused on both occasions.

Would the Acting Premier please explain to this House why she thinks the Premier can maintain the confidence of the people of Ontario, now that the OPP have directly been engaged in her office?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: I think that our Premier has done an extraordinary job in being open and transparent. From the moment she became Premier of this province, she indicated that she would be open, she would be transparent, and that she would continue to co-operate fully in any effort to gather information.

She wrote to the Auditor General. She re-struck the committee. She provided 186,000 pages, including 30,000 from the Premier’s office. The committee heard from 70 witnesses during more than 100 hours. All documents were released; the opposition voted against that, strangely enough. The Premier appeared at the committee in April. She’s coming back on December 3. She has accepted responsibility as a member of cabinet.

Speaker, I think our Premier has done everything possible to make sure that people get the information they need.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: Back to the Acting Premier: Does this sound transparent to you? Your government broke the law. Your government told this House on several occasions that the cancellation was only $40 million, when instead you knew for as many as two years that it was over $700 million. You obstructed the Information and Privacy Commissioner and destroyed official government documents.

At what point does that government not go to the people to seek a mandate because they have lost the trust of the people of Ontario? Will you call an election and seek a mandate from the people of this province?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

Deputy Premier.

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Government House leader.

Hon. John Milloy: First of all, the member should be very, very careful, I think, with her language.

But there’s a broader issue here, and that is that she can’t ignore the fact, as she tries to, day after day, that it was the Progressive Conservative Party that went from door to door in those ridings involved with the gas plant and said the only way to see them cancelled was to vote for the Progressive Conservatives.

It was the leader of her party who stood up at a press conference, which is available on YouTube, and said that if he was elected Premier, the gas plant would be “done, done, done.” It was their party that went into the last election promising, through robocalls, through press releases, through tweets and through door-to-door pamphlets, that the only way to get rid of the gas plants was to have them form the government.

It’s time they came clean with their analysis, their costing and their—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. New question.

SECURITY AT CORRECTIONAL

FACILITIES

Ms. Peggy Sattler: My question is to the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. Earlier this month we learned of the death of Adam Kargus at the Elgin-Middlesex Detention Centre, after he was housed with another inmate with a long history of violence.

In addition to specific issues of overcrowding and lack of direct supervision at EMDC, this tragedy also shows the ineffectiveness of the province-wide offender tracking information system in letting correctional officers know about inmates with previous records of assaults or gang activity.

When is the government going to take real action to ensure officer and inmate safety across all of Ontario’s correctional facilities?

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur: Merci beaucoup for the question. I think it’s a very important question.

As you know, the safety of both the inmates and the correctional officers is my number one priority. We focus strongly on communication between our correctional facilities and the justice system. We have a centralized database, the offender tracking information system. Inmates’ demeanour and threat levels are on OTIS, this information system. Access by administrator, by facility transfer—we have procedures/standing orders for sharing inmate information. Correctional officers are trained for this. Information is shared with staff, including criminal and behaviour history.

Information is also shared with staff verbally, in writing and electronically. Correctional officers are expected to familiarize themselves with inmates’ situations and share any updates during—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Supplementary?

Ms. Peggy Sattler: Again to the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services: I think it would be helpful for the minister to actually talk to correctional officers herself. They know that a provincial database is only as good as the information it contains and how widely it is shared. There has been no auditing of the database to ensure accuracy. There are no processes in place to provide consistent access across institutions and, despite what the ministry claims, there are no mechanisms for staff to raise concerns.

When will the minister accept her responsibility for oversight and put systems in place to make sure that the offender tracking information system is doing what it is supposed to do?

Hon. Madeleine Meilleur: Thank you for the question. As I said, the health and safety of both the correctional officer and the inmate are my number one priority.

This system, the OTIS information system, is constantly reviewed. That review is part of our continuous improvement process. The process includes a weekly report of employee concerns related to the system, so we are taking the complaints and we are addressing the complaints.

OTIS was audited this past year from a technological perspective, and probation and parole officers, as well as approved designated staff who have a business reason to access the offender’s record, can use a centralized database for this purpose.

Mr. Speaker, we take it very seriously. It’s continuously reviewed. If the correctional officers have a concern about it, I advise them to bring their concerns to the management.

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Bill Mauro: My question is for the Minister of Energy. Minister, in 2003, all three political parties and all three political leaders committed to closing all coal-fired energy in Ontario, and two of the five plants producing energy that way were in my riding of Thunder Bay–Atikokan.

For 10 years I’ve been working on the conversion, the maintenance and the sustainability of both of the coal plants in my riding, including the plant in Atikokan, and that conversion, I’m pleased to say, is well under way.

Over the next decade, there’s the potential for a number of mining projects to come on stream in northwestern Ontario, and while there continues to be disagreement over the energy needs of northwestern Ontario in the next five to 10 years, we need to ensure that Thunder Bay and northwestern Ontario are positioned for the economic growth and job creation these projects may bring.

Last Friday I was pleased to announce, along with my colleague from Thunder Bay–Superior North, that the Thunder Bay generating station will be converted to burn advanced biomass fuel.

Minister, for the benefit of the House, could you please share some of the work that went into ensuring the future of the Thunder Bay generating station?

Hon. Bob Chiarelli: I thank the member from Thunder Bay–Atikokan for his question. The member and his colleague the Minister of Northern Development and Mines have been advocating on this issue for many years—unlike the third party, who only seem to have discovered it yesterday—and I want to commend them for their work on this file.

Friday’s announcement was the result of the member’s strong leadership over the past 10 years, as well as that of his colleague from Thunder Bay, and months of working with the local stakeholders and residents and Ontario’s energy agencies.

The conversion to advanced biomass is another step in reducing dirty coal burning in Ontario and puts our province on the leading edge of worldwide biomass research. The continued operation of this plant will ensure that Thunder Bay has the power it needs to support future economic expansion.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Bill Mauro: Minister, thank you for the response. Having worked on this issue for 10 years, I know how important Friday’s announcement was for the constituents in my riding and for the future of northwestern Ontario. Not only will this cost-effective conversion to advanced biomass ensure that Thunder Bay has the supply of clean and reliable electricity it needs, it will secure significant employment until at least 2020.

With the Thunder Bay and Atikokan generating station conversions now in place, I feel we’re well positioned to move forward and prepared for the mining expansion that may come in the northwest. The five-year contract will allow us to monitor the region’s energy demands over the near term and make the appropriate decision at that time.

Can the minister please update the House on what other steps our government has taken to ensure that northwestern Ontario has a supply of clean, reliable and affordable electricity?

Hon. Bob Chiarelli: Iain Angus, the chair of the Northwest Energy Task Force, states, “Five years is really good. A commitment to keep the plant alive is really good.”

We expect the converted unit will begin operating in 2015 on a five-year contract, helping ensure that the residents of Thunder Bay continue to have a clean, reliable, cost-effective supply of electricity.

To ensure the region has the energy it needs for new mining projects, we have also committed to building a new transmission line between Wawa and Thunder Bay, which will provide an additional 650 megawatts of capacity for the northwest. The North of Dryden report lays out additional options for new generation and transmission lines over the short and long term, including the connection of remote communities in the region.

Our government has taken action to ensure that northwestern Ontario has the energy they need when they need it, and we’ll continue to work to ensure that the capacity is there for mining