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

November 7, 2019

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2019-Nov-07 (PDF)

L125 - Thu 7 Nov 2019 / Jeu 7 nov 2019

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 7 November 2019 Jeudi 7 novembre 2019

Orders of the Day

Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur les services provinciaux visant le bien-être des animaux

Introduction of Visitors

Order of business

Order of business

Remembrance Day / Jour du Souvenir

Oral Questions

Hospital funding

Education funding

Environmental protection

Fiscal and economic policy

Sexual abuse

Provincial deficit

Fiscal and economic policy

Education funding

Small business

Treaties recognition

Hospital funding

Veterans

Hellenic Canadian and Egyptian Canadian communities

Retirement homes

Waste reduction

Workplace safety

Notice of dissatisfaction

Correction of record

Member’s birthday

Legislative pages

Notice of dissatisfaction

Deferred Votes

Time allocation

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Arka Chakraborty

Events in Mississauga–Lakeshore

Sikh genocide

Hellenic Home for the Aged

Laurentian University

Class size

Mental health and addiction services

Educational assistants

Woman Abuse Prevention Month

Canadian Cancer Survivor Network

Introduction of Bills

Special Ability Riding Institute Act (Tax Relief), 2019

Petitions

Alzheimer’s disease

Veterans memorial

School facilities

School bus safety

Teachers’ professional development

School bus safety

Long-term care

Veterans memorial

Public sector compensation

Veterans memorial

Long-term care

Private Members’ Public Business

Making Northern Ontario Highways Safer Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 visant à accroître la sécurité des voies publiques dans le nord de l’Ontario

Lupus Awareness Day Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur la Journée de sensibilisation au lupus

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation training

Making Northern Ontario Highways Safer Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 visant à accroître la sécurité des voies publiques dans le nord de l’Ontario

Lupus Awareness Day Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur la Journée de sensibilisation au lupus

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation training

Making Northern Ontario Highways Safer Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 visant à accroître la sécurité des voies publiques dans le nord de l’Ontario

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation training

Religious freedom

Orders of the Day

Better for People, Smarter for Business Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 pour mieux servir la population et faciliter les affaires

Protecting a Sustainable Public Sector for Future Generations Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 visant à préserver la viabilité du secteur public pour les générations futures

Correction of record

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We’re going to begin this morning with a moment of silence for inner thought and personal reflection.

Prières/Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, 2019 / Loi de 2019 sur les services provinciaux visant le bien-être des animaux

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 6, 2019, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 136,

An Act to enact the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, 2019 and make consequential amendments with respect to animal protection / Projet de loi 136, Loi édictant la Loi de 2019 sur les services provinciaux visant le bien-être des animaux et apportant des modifications corrélatives concernant la protection des animaux.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): When we last debated this bill, the member for Brampton North had the floor and I’m prepared to recognize him again. The member for Brampton North.

Mr. Kevin Yarde: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday I did start off by talking about how we got here. I’m not going to continue with that, so I’ll just continue with the rest of the PAWS Act. For too long, animal advocates and stakeholders have demanded the need for change and for a revamped cruelty enforcement regime right here in Ontario.

For decades, animal welfare charities and their donors have been subsidizing this province. They have been the ones providing law enforcement—which is a public service—to investigate animal cruelty in a severely underfunded system. Private charities enforcing publicly enacted laws doesn’t happen in any other area of law, so when you force a charity like the OSPCA to fundraise money, and work to enforce our laws—yes, we can say that the OSPCA is very passionate about protecting the welfare of our animals, and they have to pay for it for themselves—what we’re doing, Mr. Speaker, is committing a disservice to the people of Ontario.

The OSPCA was forced to work with what they had, but there was always a need to move toward a public system, and this bill, the PAWS Act, is an answer to the problems in the old system. Is it, or is it not? Well, that’s what we’re going to find out right now.

One of the key aspects is that there’s going to be a public ministry inspectorate empowered to take the actions in various ways to protect animals, with a focus on oversight, transparency and accountability. Those are the three key aspects of this bill that people were asking for: oversight, transparency and accountability. Now, a lot is under review regarding regulations that this government is promising, so right now, Mr. Speaker, we are only seeing a partial picture of this act. Exactly how effective the laws will be, including their enforcement, remains to be seen, and I’m cautiously optimistic that this government will do the right thing.

Regulations on animal welfare have been long overdue in this province. It is very sad to see animal abuses continue in our province. Many of us have pets, and we consider our pets members of the family. This government, along with the previous Liberal government from what we’ve seen, has known that the system that was in place wasn’t working. The Conservatives seem more focused on allowing dogs to sit on patios than to ensure that they are being treated humanely.

Both this government and the Liberals have let animals and the people of this province down by allowing a broken animal welfare system, with little to no accountability, to continue. This government has failed to act until now, when the situation has clearly reached a boiling point and they have no other choice.

What we’re seeing with this new legislation is encouraging. As I mentioned, I’m cautiously optimistic. Ontario, as some people may not know, is the only province to move toward a fully public model of animal law enforcement, and that is a significant step in the right direction. By employing public servants who are properly trained to handle the unique situations involved in animal welfare, it becomes much safer.

One example where safety became a concern and proved deadly was in Alberta, where they employed municipal bylaw enforcement officers and peace officers to enforce animal welfare legislation. I’ll tell you a little bit about what happened in this case. Rod Lazenby, a municipal peace officer, was killed while investigating an animal-related complaint. The man who killed Officer Lazenby was found not criminally responsible for the death, due to a mental disorder. The more troubling part of this is that the man was known to other policing agencies, but the information was not communicated to the municipality or the peace officers dealing with the animal welfare complaints.

This story is a testament to the importance of taking seriously the occupational risks involved in enforcement work of all kinds and the need to take workers’ safety very seriously when moving forward toward enforcing animal welfare issues here in Ontario. There will always be risks. We know that. There will always be risks in this kind of work; however, more training, resources and protections for these workers have a major effect on their safety.

Other provinces, such as Manitoba, do appoint animal protection officers who investigate and enforce provincial law, with some of them working directly for the government. However, in Manitoba, most are external staff contracted out, with some working for the Winnipeg Humane Society. Manitoba, like other places, has a hybrid public-private delivery model for animal welfare,

whereas a completely public model will ensure more transparency, accountability and safety. That’s what we are hoping to have here in Ontario.

In 2016—I just want to take you back a few years—there were only 91 investigation officers to serve the entire province of Ontario. By this year, that number has dropped to around 60. On average, they are tasked to investigate some 18,000 complaints of animal cruelty each and every year. On top of that, about half of these officers have other responsibilities within their affiliated humane societies and cannot focus their entire attention on animal cruelty investigations.

Many regions in Ontario do not have a humane society to service their area at all, and that is troubling. My members from northern Ontario are probably fully aware of this: In northern Ontario, there are many hours between communities—huge, vast areas. These areas will require the resources and finances necessary to represent such a vast area. Enforcement officers lack reliable communication tools in these areas, they have very large caseloads and they predominantly work alone in the field in potentially dangerous situations.

Many who abuse animals also tend to abuse children—we know that—women, the elderly and other vulnerable people, and they show signs of anti-social and destructive behaviour. If we can shut down the animal abusers at an early stage, it could prevent domestic violence from happening.

I want to give you some statistics here: In 2017, the OSPCA investigation’s data revealed that 15,519 complaints were investigated, 3,998 orders were issued, 573 provincial charges were laid, 21 Criminal Code charges were laid and 1,220 animals were removed from abusive situations. Obviously, it is sad that these abuses still happen in 2019. Animals do not have a voice, so we as politicians here in the Legislature will be their voice. We need to have meaningful measures in place and close the gaps we are currently experiencing to protect them.

Reform to the current deficiencies in animal cruelty enforcement can be seen in the many instances where blatant animal abusers have gone unpunished. What we need is training for crown attorneys and OPP officers, and that should be an important part of this legislation. We’re going to continue to make sure it is in here because we’ve seen in many cases that cruelty charges that could have and should have been prosecuted were withdrawn.

Let’s take the owner of the Skyway Animal Hospital in St. Catharines, which is in the riding of my colleague here, who is probably fully aware of this case. A veterinarian was charged with 16 criminal counts of animal cruelty by the OSPCA: eight counts of causing unnecessary pain or suffering to an animal and eight counts of failing to provide suitable and adequate care for an animal. This, Madam Speaker, after four former employees submitted a dozen surveillance videos as evidence of the animal abuse, including choking and hitting animals in his care.

In one video, the veterinarian can be seen hitting a dog over its snout with a nail clipper while being restrained. In another—and this is going to sound pretty horrific—the veterinarian is seen swinging a sedated cat around by its tail and slamming it down on the counter.

The OSPCA conducted an investigation that included reviewing video and conducting interviews with witnesses and the owners of the pets subject to the abuse. The College of Veterinarians of Ontario found the doctor guilty of professional misconduct and delivered a 10-month suspension. But when tried in court, all of the animal cruelty charges were dropped. The crown prosecutor stated that since the OSPCA started their investigation and obtained a warrant without receiving a formal complaint, the doctor should not have been charged criminally.

The crown also asserted that the discipline from the College of Veterinarians of Ontario was enough for the veterinarian, and he was able to return to work.

If a straightforward case like this cannot get a conviction, and animal abusers just get a slap on the wrist, this is a major sign of a broken system that is failing to protect the animals in this province. The reason I bring this case up is that there has been concern for some time that the crown attorneys need greater training and understanding of these offences. I hope, Madam Speaker, that this new bill will include additional training needed to help them get that.

Animal rights advocate and labour academic Dr. Kendra Coulter undertook an online survey polling Ontarians for their views on the future of animal welfare enforcement in this province. What she found after more than 20,000 people completed the survey—this was a testament to the level of concern that the public has towards the state of our animal welfare laws in this province; the people of Ontario care deeply about the well-being of animals and want better from our government. What did she conclude after 20,000 people completed the survey? It was released in March of this year.

It called for reform and to effectively end the OSPCA’s role in enforcement, as 90% of respondents see animal cruelty investigations as a public responsibility—not a private, but a public, responsibility. Dr. Coulter also stated that “A well-trained and resourced provincial anti-cruelty unit would make Ontario a leader in anti-cruelty enforcement and send a strong message that crimes against animals are taken seriously in this province.”

Dr. Coulter has responded positively to this bill, which is good. She states, “The framework is promising.... Our research has found that a dedicated publicly funded anti-cruelty team would be the smartest option for Ontario so I am pleased that the government has made this the foundation of its new approach.”

Many other animal advocates remain cautiously optimistic, like myself. Animal Justice’s executive director, Camille Labchuk, responded in a statement, “Animal Justice is encouraged by Ontario’s announcement that animal welfare enforcement in this province will become a fully public function. We support a robust, well-funded public enforcement model because animal protection is a key societal value, and this is what Ontarians expect.”

The founder of Reform Advocates for Animal Welfare, Lynn Perrier, is quoted as saying, “Of particular interest to me is the potential contribution crown attorneys can make to enforce animal abuse laws. To date, animals have not been well represented in our courts and abusers get away with a slap on the hand. Hopefully that will end now.” She’s obviously referring to some of the cases I just mentioned.

Humane Canada, which is Canada’s federation of the SPCAs and humane societies, also remarked on this bill. They stated, “SPCAs and humane societies are the leading agencies in Canada dedicated to law enforcement and animal welfare.

While Ontario has moved to internalize it, SPCAs and humane societies continue to have an important role to play in law enforcement whether to lead, assist or consult.” Humane Canada’s CEO, Barbara Cartwright, also remarked on this bill: “Humane societies and SPCAs have been responsible for law enforcement in Canada for 150 years, taking on that mission when the government could not or would not, and developing a unique expertise in this field. While Ontario is stepping forward to assume the mandate, we will be watching closely and advocating to ensure animals don’t fall through the cracks.”

Humane Canada also notes that government commitments to more than just enforcement is key in a strong judicial system that better protects all animals. Cartwright added, in conclusion, “Crown prosecutor training is a breakthrough for Ontario in animal welfare. It will strengthen relationships between enforcement and crown leading to more convictions for animal abusers.”

As you can see, there are a lot of people here who have weighed in on this bill, and they are cautiously optimistic that the government will do the right thing.

Madam Speaker, what I’m going to do now is talk about a description of the bill. The Ontario government Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, or PAWS, was introduced at Queen’s Park on October 29. Now, when this bill passes, enforcement will fall under the Solicitor General’s office. There are a number of major elements of this bill, and I’ll describe them to you. I will go through parts I through VIII.

Part I defines terms used throughout the act. These include “standard of care” and important

definitions of “distress” and “critical distress” of animals.

Part II is the establishment of a chief animal welfare inspector. This position will be appointed by and report to the Solicitor General of Ontario, and may, in turn, appoint one or more deputy chief animal welfare inspectors.

Let’s go through some of the duties of the chief animal welfare inspector. Here they are, as follows:

“1. To appoint animal welfare inspectors.

“2. To supervise, direct and control animal welfare inspectors in the performance of their duties and in the exercise of their powers.

“3. To ensure that animal welfare inspectors receive appropriate training respecting their powers and duties.

“4. To handle complaints about animal welfare inspectors other than the chief animal welfare inspector.

“5. To arrange for the provision of necessaries to, and otherwise arrange for the care of, any animal in the chief animal welfare inspector’s care or otherwise in the possession of an animal welfare inspector.

“6. To arrange for analyses in relation to the following:

“i. The management or allocation of resources related to this act.

“ii. The delivery of programs and services related to this act.

“iii. The evaluation of programs and services related to this act.

“7. To perform such other duties as are assigned to him or her by or under this or any other act, including any duties prescribed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council.”

In

summary, the chief animal welfare inspector has several duties—as we can see—related to the appointment and oversight of animal welfare inspectors as well as the provision needed for animals in the chief animal welfare inspector’s care. He or she is an animal welfare inspector by virtue of being the chief animal welfare inspector.

The animal welfare inspectors, including the chief animal welfare inspector, are subject to a code of conduct. So Bill 136 creates a framework whereby animal welfare inspectors are members of the public service and accountable to the chief animal welfare inspector appointed under the act.

Part III of the bill sets out a complaints procedure and standards about the conduct of animal welfare inspectors, including the chief animal welfare inspector. The Solicitor General will be handling complaints about the chief animal welfare inspector, and the chief animal welfare inspector handles all other complaints. If the animal welfare inspector who is the subject of a complaint has failed to comply with the code of conduct, they can take several actions against them, up to and including revoking their appointment.

Part IV sets out the duties and prohibitions in respect of animals. This bill establishes that every person must adhere to standards of care and administrative requirements in respect to the custody or care of animals.

This part also breaks down exceptions provided for agricultural activities and veterinary activities and establishes that veterinarians and other prescribed individuals have a duty to report abuse, undue physical or psychological hardship, privation or neglect. “No person shall cause an animal to be in distress, permit an animal to be in distress or knowingly or recklessly cause an animal to be exposed to an undue risk of distress, subject to certain exceptions.”

There are also several prohibitions relating to animal fights—I’m glad this is in here—including prohibitions on the possession of equipment or structures used in animal fights.

Dogfighting continues to be a problem here in Ontario and across Canada. Just as animal cruelty can be connected to domestic violence, there’s also a link between animal cruelty and gang violence and organized crime. There is definitely a link.

This can take a number of forms, including illegal dogfights. Dogfighting is the act of baiting two dogs against one another for entertainment or for financial gain. It involves placing two dogs in a pit until one either quits or, sadly, dies. There are two main types of dogfights: street fights and organized professional fights. While street fights can involve betting on the animals, the dog may also serve as a status symbol and a weapon for the gang members due to the size and aggressiveness of the dog.

Studies have shown that when these dogfights occur in rings, they should be raided, and in many cases they are raided. Illegal drugs and weapons are also seized about two thirds of the time when we have raids. So I applaud the focus on combatting this horrible practice within the PAWS Act to also help prevent more serious violent crimes.

The PAWS Act also provides for protecting law enforcement or service animals.

“No person shall possess or breed an animal that has been prescribed by the regulations as a prohibited animal. Orca possession and breeding continues to be prohibited. In addition, the possession or breeding of animals that are prescribed by the regulations as a restricted animal requires authorization by the regulations.”

Bill 136 adds some new offences, which is good, and tougher penalties for animal abusers, with some exceptions made for animals involved in agriculture and husbandry.

The bill states that the standards of care and administrative requirements for animals in

part IV, subsection (1)—“does not apply in respect of any activity regarding agricultural animal care”—it’s very important to mention this—“management or husbandry carried on in accordance with the reasonable and generally accepted practices of agricultural animal care, management or husbandry, unless the standards of care or administrative requirements expressly provide that they apply to that activity.” What this means is that inspectors will have specific expertise in livestock, agriculture, equine, zoos and aquariums to support police and ground inspectors. So we are happy to see that our agricultural communities were consulted by the Solicitor General and represented in this bill.

Beef Farmers of Ontario have stated that the group “looks forward to engaging with government throughout the stages of the bill’s review through the House.”

Other livestock organizations have also been actively involved in the consultation process. It’s easy to think that this bill just represents cats, dogs and other pets, but as you can see, it represents many more animals other than our pets. It represents farmers and our agricultural industry partners. They play an important role in animal welfare in this province, so we need to keep working with them as well as our pet owners. We need to ensure that there is adequate regulation in place so that all animals are protected in this province, regardless of their location, context or the industry that’s involved.

The Ontario government website has touted this bill as introducing the strongest penalties in Canada for offenders, and indeed, this is true. If this bill passes, it is the hope that dedicated animal welfare officers, with adequate support and resources, will be in a position to effectively police animal cruelty complaints, and that the crown prosecutors will effectively enforce the law by prosecuting offences. These are two key points. We need to make sure that they’re able to effectively prosecute and, of course, make sure that they have the resources to do that.

However, as always with this government, the wording is always strong, but the resources and finances aren’t always there to close the gaps. Even the best legislation won’t be able to protect our animals if the funding and resources fall short.

Part V of the bill sets out the powers of animal welfare inspectors to determine compliance with the act and to protect animals. Let’s go through

part V right now. Inspectors are empowered to enter a dwelling with authorization or with a warrant or telewarrant to conduct inspections. They may ask for police assistance, and they may use reasonable force to execute a warrant. Special provisions allow entry to a place where there is reasonable grounds to expect there is an animal in distress, and inspectors may enter a dwelling if the time required to obtain a warrant may result in serious injury or death to the animal.

Inspectors may order the owner to seek care for an animal in distress, take possession or, if necessary, euthanize an animal on the advice of a veterinarian. So there are some key points right there. The police may be called to assist, and reasonable force may be used to take possession of the animal. The animal welfare inspector may also then decide to keep an animal in their care if certain concerns about returning the animal apply. An owner or custodian is liable for the cost of relieving an animal from distress, and forfeits their animal to the crown if they do not pay.

In addition, persons to be prescribed in regulation are authorized to enter motor vehicles to relieve animals in critical distress, and they may cause reasonable damage in entering the vehicle to rescue an animal. We’ve seen this in many cases over several years. For instance, it can take mere minutes for a car to heat up to fatal temperatures on a hot summer day. Brain damage, pain and suffering, even death due to heat stroke or suffocation can be the outcomes if an animal is left inside a hot car. They must promptly notify an animal welfare inspector and must allow the inspector to inspect the animal and determine whether to take possession of it.

Let’s go to

part VI, Madam Speaker.

Part VI of the bill continues to enforce the Animal Care Review Board, where owners or custodians of animals may appeal certain orders and decisions of the chief animal welfare inspector and other animal welfare inspectors to the board. The board has the power to confirm, revoke or modify these orders and decisions and to order that animals be returned to their owner or custodian. The Animal Care Review Board of appointed people will virtually remain as is—nothing changing here—with a person having five business days after charges are laid to file an appeal.

Part VII of the bill breaks down enforcement and sets out the powers of animal welfare inspectors with regard to investigating offences under the act. So let’s get into that just a little bit here. It allows the provision of a warrant or a warrantless search in circumstances where the inspector believes that evidence would be destroyed in the time it takes to acquire a warrant. In other words, it sets out provisions regarding warrants, production orders, evidence and the seizure of animals in certain circumstances. Animals used for fighting may be seized and are forfeited if any animal fighting conviction is established.

Finally,

part VIII establishes both minor offences, such as restricted animals or failing to assist an inspector, and major offences, such as causing distress to an animal or participating in dogfighting activities, under the act. These are subject to different penalties. The penalties are established for individuals and corporations, and vary from minor to major offences.

The fines have been increased, and let’s go through these fines. A first major offence committed by a corporation—not an individual, but a corporation—constitutes a fine of half a million dollars. The top fine is $1 million for a corporation convicted of repeated major offences.

Individuals convicted of a major offence under this new legislation could be fined up to $130,000 and up to two years in prison. If an individual is convicted of a second offence, the maximum fine doubles. Certain mandatory minimum sentences are also established, including $25,000 for causing distress to an animal that causes or results in death, animal fighting or harming a service or law enforcement animal.

Animal welfare inspectors will have greater powers of enforcement, giving them a lot more capacity to go out, make these seizures and put these fines in place. Administrative penalties such as a ticket are also enacted for certain minor offences.

Part VIII also contains a separate

section providing for orders to remove orcas that are possessed in Ontario in contravention of

section 19.

Let’s go to a discussion on long-term plans for new regulations. Going forward, if passed, this bill is planned to be in place with transitional regulations by January 1, 2020. The ministry is planning further engagement of stakeholders in 2020 in order to develop long-term regulations, and I applaud them for doing that. These could include updated standards of care, banning certain exotic animals and the planned multidisciplinary table.

Due to the lack of clarity in these long-term discussions regarding modernizing animal welfare protection, it is hard to evaluate regulations that are still to come. We don’t know what the regulations are, and that seems to be the case with every bill that has come through the Legislature here.

It looks like the government is empowering itself to ban certain types of animals. Ontario is the only province that doesn’t have any exotic animal legislation, which is surprising, besides the current bans on pit bulls, which we all are familiar with.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Don’t forget orcas.

Mr. Kevin Yarde: And orcas—pit bulls and orcas.

This should not be a city-by-city process. It needs to be subject to laws that are province-wide. This way we don’t get situations like we did in the past like the IKEA monkey, which we all remember and which I believe, Madam Speaker, is not acceptable in this province or anywhere.

This new bill could also empower new regulations on other industries that use animals, such as setting up legislation to regulate uses of animals in places like zoos and aquariums. This could involve recommendations such as those outlined by the organization World Animal Protection. World Animal Protection suggests establishing a comprehensive captive wildlife licensing scheme to put an end to roadside zoos and strengthen existing captive wildlife standards to better protect animals and better protect animal welfare and people’s safety.

This is something that the people of Ontario have long called for in this province. Now there is a chance to establish stricter regulations on these industries.

Moreover, specific animal practices such as cosmetic mutilations to pets, including cat declawing and tail-docking or ear-cropping of dogs, could be regulated here in this bill. That is something that many animal activists have been advocating for for a very long time.

Let’s discuss funding, because this is a critical point here in this bill. Ontarians care about animals and are prepared to financially support an effective modern animal welfare system and law enforcement regime. While bringing both regimes into the public sector will require funding, the majority of Ontario pet owners understand the importance of protecting them, because they are like family, and making sure that all of the animals in Ontario are protected. That includes pets; that includes agricultural animals; that includes wildlife, in the wild and in captivity; and animals in research. We consider the investment to be well worth the return.

As stated, Madam Speaker, much more is needed to be revealed by this government in implementing new regulations necessary for a modernized animal welfare model in this province. This model will work if—that’s a big “if”—it is public and well funded. Adequate resources need to be devoted to enforcement. If this work isn’t funded, even the best legislation won’t be able to protect our animals.

In the past, the proper funding was not being allocated to animal welfare, and this was one of the downfalls of the OSPCA. Former governments did not provide the necessary funding for the OSPCA to do their job effectively. In other words, we’re not blaming them; they just didn’t get the proper funding that was required.

Indeed, the OSPCA, whose officers have police powers and had led both provincial offences and criminal cruelty charges, lacked funding for many years. They had financial losses as well. That also led to their decision to no longer provide their services here in Ontario.

The OSPCA looked for help for funding, but they did not get it from previous governments. So in the end, what did they have to do? They had to weigh the merits of remaining in the animal cruelty investigation field altogether, citing increasing costs. The OSPCA, for years, operated its enforcement arm at a significant loss and had to balance the books by pulling from the donor dollars that are used to fund other operations. These include shelters and rescue programs for vulnerable animals.

The agency itself brought in $7 million from donations in fundraising in 2017, which is good, but they shouldn’t have to rely on fundraising. It took in about $2.4 million in municipal contract fees and $2.1 million in shelter and veterinary revenue. Animal care—if you listen to this number—and protection cost nearly $14 million. So you can see why the shortfall is there.

Now, this government says that they will provide adequate funding. However, Madam Speaker, they haven’t given us a number. We don’t know what the funding formula is going to be. We don’t have a dollar amount. This is very concerning, as animal welfare and the need for inspectors, as we know, is great. So it would be prudent for the government to let us know how much they are going to allocate: $5 million, $10 million? More? Less? We don’t know. A dollar amount, without surprises, is required.

We only have to look at the past experience with this government, in terms of funding, to be skeptical of their intentions this time around. They have cut funding, as we know, in health care, they have cut funding in education and they have cut funding where the needs are greatest.

So for this, Madam Speaker, I am deeply concerned, with regard to this bill and animal welfare, that the funding model will come up short. I’m hoping that it won’t, but we don’t have a number, and that’s something that they should put forward for the people of Ontario.

I think the substance of what this bill has the potential to deliver is positive—we all agree, it is positive—and I’m cautiously optimistic that we’re going to see more progress in the regulations. I’m confident it is heading in the right direction. Bill 136, the PAWS Act, is aiming to better protect animals from neglect and abuse, along with a strengthened enforcement system. But the key is that it will be a public rather than a private enforcement process.

If it is passed, it would put Ontario at the forefront of the strongest penalties for animal abusers in Canada. This is much needed to protect animals and to ensure justice for our four-legged and two-legged friends.

The PAWS Act would create a chief animal welfare inspector position to handle complaints and enforce policies. Animal welfare inspectors would be permitted to inspect places to ascertain compliance with the act. It would give them the power to submit applications for warrants and to enter dwellings, and the ability to ask police for help when needed.

Examining veterinarians will have a duty to report animal abuse for both physical and/or psychological harm.

The bill is planning to improve oversight and transparency for the public as part of the new regime.

I believe, Madam Speaker, that this is a direct response to the Bogaerts case, where the court had noted: “Although charged with law enforcement responsibilities, the OSPCA is opaque, insular, unaccountable, and potentially subject to external influence, and as such Ontarians cannot be confident that the laws it enforces will be fairly and impartially administered.”

It is also encouraging to see partnerships with members of health and social services to deal with issues such as the hoarding of animals and the linkages between animal abuse and domestic abuse cases.

Madam Speaker, I’m happy that the Solicitor General has consulted with police, veterinarians, local governments, humane societies, academics and the public to create the regulations introduced in this PAWS Act. These consultations improve animal welfare by introducing new offences to combat activities such as dogfighting, as we mentioned earlier; giving inspectors necessary powers to help animals in distress and to hold owners accountable; giving government the ability to take action when an animal is in imminent risk of serious injury or death, or when a pet is left in a hot car; and significantly increasing penalties for serious, repeat and corporate offenders.

These new penalties, as the Solicitor General and her colleague mentioned, will be the strongest in Canada. They aim to improve oversight and ensure increased transparency and accountability, including establishing a one-window complaints mechanism for the public. This will build public trust in this new model. Moreover, establishing a multidisciplinary advisory table made up of a wide range of experts, including veterinarians, agriculture representatives, academics, animal advocates and others, to provide ongoing advice to the ministry to improve animal welfare is extremely important in order to improve conditions for animals in Ontario.

The fundamental goal in all of this is to create legislation that focuses on the animals. We need transparency, we need accountability, to make things better for the animals and to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves, to ensure justice for animals.

An animal that had been deemed under distress or whose owner had contravened standards of care under the old act had been subject to a maximum fine of just $60,000. The fine, as we mentioned, has been increased to twice that amount for a first offence and then double that for a second offence, with the potential for jail time.

The definition of “distress” is outlined in the new act: the state of requiring proper care, food and water, or “injured, sick, in pain or suffering.” For the very first time, the definition of animal distress also includes “psychological hardship, privation or neglect.”

There is a more open investigation process outlined in the act, with a policy of the complainant and the person who is the subject of the complaint being apprised of the ongoing investigation. If an animal is in distress in a vehicle, an inspector “may enter the motor vehicle for the purpose of relieving the animal from distress.... The prescribed person may cause damage to the motor vehicle that is reasonably necessary in order to enter it and relieve the animal” who is in distress. If an inspector deems that an animal in a house is in distress, the animal inspector may, without a warrant, enter and search the place, as it states.

I just want to talk a little bit about some equity considerations. Now in this bill,

section 34, subsection (4) allows for the forfeiture of an animal if an owner is not able to settle their account with an animal inspector—these are some problematic parts of the bill that I’m having some concerns with—who has taken the animal into care or providing necessaries. So there is a possibility with this that we could be revictimizing the poor. I’m concerned about that

section in the bill. There are people who can’t pay their vet bills. What are we going to do, revictimize the poor? We need more clarity on this

section of the bill. I’m hoping that the government will bring forth clarity on that.

In conclusion, animal welfare is first and foremost about the well-being of animals. However, we must also take into consideration the direct connections that animal cruelty has with many social issues such as mental health, domestic violence, poverty, as well as the cost of animal care and public safety. The PAWS Act has the potential to finally create the well-coordinated and properly resourced and funded public animal cruelty investigation system that the people of Ontario are asking them to do for animals.

The reason why we are here, Madam Speaker, of course, is for the animals. I want to just mention some of the animals who cannot speak for themselves, so we’ll speak for them. Our four-legged and two-legged friends: to them, we will be protecting you.

The Afghan hound, the Akita, the Alaskan malamute, the American Staffordshire, the Australian shepherd, the basset hound, the beagle, the bearded collie, the Bedlington terrier, the bichon frise, the border terrier, the boxer, the Brittany, the bull terrier, the bulldog, the bullmastiff, the chihuahua; the collies, the dachshunds, the Dalmatians, the Eskimo dogs, the fox terriers, the foxhounds, the French bulldogs—all are to be protected under this legislation.

The German shepherd, the German shorthaired pointer, the golden retrievers, the Great Danes, the greyhounds, the Irish setters, the Jack Russell terriers, the Japanese spaniel, the Labrador retrievers, the Maltese, the mastiffs, the Mexican hairless, the Newfoundlanders—all protected under this bill.

The Norwich terriers, the pointers, the poodles, the pugs, the Pulis, the Rhodesian ridgebacks, the Rottweilers, which I have, Madam Speaker—very impressive dog—the Salukis, the schnauzers, the Scottish deerhounds, the Shih Tzus, the Siberian huskies, the silky terrier, the Skye terrier, the Staffordshire bull terrier, the Sussex spaniel, the Yorkshire terrier—and of course the list goes on and on.

Mr. Jamie West: The golden doodle.

Mr. Kevin Yarde: The golden doodle. Yes. Sorry, I forgot the golden doodle—

Mr. Gilles Bisson: You forgot the yellow Labs.

Mr. Kevin Yarde: The yellow Labs.

Of course we can’t forget our cat lovers out there. This bill will also protect our British shorthairs, the Burmese, the Cornish Rex, the Devon Rex, the Himalayans, the Maine Coons, the Manx, the Persians, the Russian Blues, the Scottish Folds, the Siamese, the Sphynx, the Turkish Angora, the Turkish Van.

For you pet lovers out there who have birds, this legislation will protect you as well: the cockatiels, the parakeets, the golden conures, the parrots, the canaries, the macaws, the finches, the Moluccan cockatoos, and others I’m sure I’ve forgotten.

The guinea pigs, the rabbits, the hamsters, the goldfish, the gerbils, the box turtles, the leopard geckos, the mice, the ducks, the ferrets, the frogs, the horses, the pythons, the snakes: All will be protected under this legislation.

I’m surprised to see that I still have two minutes and 20 seconds left. But I just want to—

Interjection.

Mr. Kevin Yarde: Sorry, what was that?

Mr. Mike Harris: Keep going; you’re doing great.

Mr. Kevin Yarde: Yes, I could go through all the animals. Exactly. I could continue all day. But the base of this bill is good. We are happy with the bill, overall. We probably will be supporting it. But we will be keeping our eye on the government to ensure that the funding mechanism is there, because we have seen in the past with this government that it hasn’t been there in the areas of health care and education, so that’s one area I’m cautiously optimistic about, Madam Speaker.

And, of course, regulations: We don’t know what the regulations are. It’s going to be a day-by-day routine to see what the government is going to put forth. Unfortunately, that’s what has happened with every bill that has come through this Legislature: The regulations are not there. The funding mechanism is important, the regulations are important, and of course the equity considerations; that’s the one concern I have. That was to subsection 34(4), which allows for the forfeiture of an animal if an owner is not able to settle their account with an animal inspector. I want more clarity on that.

Not everyone can afford their vet bills. What are you going to do? Take the animal, the pet, away from people who can’t afford it? So that’s something—I see that the Solicitor General is paying attention, and maybe we’ll get answers to that.

Also the concern, of course, with the chief inspectors is to make sure that we have proper training for our crown attorneys, and the police will be taking on some of these roles, so making sure the training is there, the funding is there and the regulations are there. We here at the NDP will be watching, because our four-legged and two-legged friends need somebody to be behind them and we want to make sure we get this right.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Questions and comments?

Ms. Christine Hogarth: It’s always a good day when we are talking about protecting animals. We certainly appreciate the members opposite supporting this legislation, as pets have no political stripe. I know, as you mentioned all these animals, you forgot the mutts out there. We all love our mutts that we have in our homes and are close to our hearts. I have one of my own.

This animal welfare legislation is so important, and having the toughest fines in Canada—we can’t state that enough. What hurts most is the toughest fines, so this legislation will impose the toughest fines on first offenders and then second offenders. We want to make sure that is clear and we want to make sure we can get that message out to other provinces if they are discussing this legislation to make sure that, right across Canada, we have tough fines.

I just want to talk about some of the highlights, some of the things we are doing in this bill to protect our animals. One is, we are introducing offences to combat such activities as dogfighting. Can you believe that still happens today? I can’t. But it does, and we need to stop that.

We want to give our inspectors the necessary powers to help animals in distress and to hold owners accountable. Those inspectors, as we talked about, will be directly employed by the provincial government and they will have the appropriate, specific powers to immediately relieve animals in distress and to inspect and follow up on owner compliance. That is a key piece, that they will be employees of the provincial government.

When we talk about distress, the Solicitor General made sure that we looked at the word “distress” and we enhanced that word “distress,” because we talk a little bit differently today than we did years ago about animals and what a distressed animal is. That’s when we look at animals who are stuck in cars—if we can get that message out to people: Please do not leave your animals in a hot vehicle—or a cold vehicle, for that matter. They get distressed. Now these inspectors and the police will have the authority to break those windows to free those animals who are distressed.

We already talked about the highest—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Thank you.

Further questions and comments?

Mr. Jamie West: I want to echo, also, the comments that the member opposite said about pets who are in distress in vehicles. I remember a couple of years ago going to Vaughan Mills mall, and they were checking every car to see if you had pets in your car. It’s a move forward, and it’s a initiative that’s being brought forward by volunteers.

The member from Brampton North, when he talked about this being overdue—we had a system where a charitable organization, doing the best they can as a charitable organization, trying to do this on behalf of the government and having police-like powers but not the transparency that comes along with a publicly funded one. We talked about how we’re very likely to support this, but the devil is always in the details. It comes down to the funding and the efficiency of this.

I think it’s important to note—I think he had mentioned that it was in 2016 that we had 91 officers, which is not enough for the province of Ontario, but we dropped to 60. So that funding that comes down to—will we have adequate officers for the north, for example?

As the member from Brampton North mentioned, the north is vast. I remember driving through Algoma–Manitoulin and having to stop and refill for gas because of the vast distances in the north. The idea that when you’re driving in the south and there’s a sign that notifies you that you’ve left the city and you’re entered a new city—when you drive in the north, when I go to camp—and for those of you in the south, that’s a cottage. When I go to camp, you drive, and my kids will fall asleep because there’s nothing for an hour, and then you get to a town. So how do you resource that for those animal protection officers who are going to be protecting our animals?

I think one thing that really echoed for me was the frustration of the slap of the hand, when he told the story of the veterinarian who was swinging a cat that was sedated by the tail and slamming it on the ground. How can you get away with that and your result be a slap on the hand or, in that case, no result at all?

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further questions and comments?

Mrs. Belinda C. Karahalios: First, I’d just like to say a big thank you to the Solicitor General and her parliamentary assistant, the member from Etobicoke–Lakeshore, on your hard work on this bill. I know, especially for the parliamentary assistant—she had her private member’s bill. You have a really big heart when it comes to animals—and human beings too. But I just want to thank you for the work that you’ve done on this file.

I do want to mention to the member from Brampton North: the corgi. Everyone forgets the corgi. Let’s remember the corgi. Thank you for that.

What I want to talk about in this bill is that people sometimes forget that for individuals who will go as far as to harm an animal, there is usually a link to those individuals who will then harm human beings, and so a lot of people in law enforcement will monitor the severity of abuse that occurs to this animal, what’s happening. There are some pretty nasty things happening out there that I will not repeat or put on the record. Police do monitor that as it is, because we know there is a progression, and things can happen to individuals.

The fact that the minister has introduced this bill and is increasing penalties and putting in more oversight when it comes to having these inspectors I think is a really good thing, because this is one of many levels of things for policing. That’s why this falls so well under your ministry, Ms. Solicitor General.

I’d like to also talk about keeping animals in cars. It’s very wrong. It’s interesting because it’s actually linked to Bill 132. We talked about allowing people to bring dogs onto patios. I’m hoping that we’ll see less of dogs in cars when individuals are, in the summertime, going for a couple of appetizers with their friends and family—to bring their dog. Dogs are part of your family. You want to include them, so I do see a good linkage between those two bills.

I think there was a lot of thought that went into this, and I’m looking forward to further debate.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further questions and comments?

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: I’m an animal lover, so it’s a pleasure for me to rise today.

When we take a look at this bill, it reminds me that how we treat others who have less power shows who we are as individuals and also as a government. So I’d like to congratulate the government for their focus on providing support for the more vulnerable, because we know that animals cannot speak for themselves.

The member from Brampton North brought up some very disturbing comments about an investigation involving animal abuse. It’s absolutely horrific to think of, and it’s disappointing to me as an Ontarian that Ontario has not stepped forward until now, leaving the OSPCA to fund, enforce and look after animals.

Really, what this comes down to is both funding and responsibility. So many institutions within Ontario require the charity of others, and they require volunteers—we take a look at hospitals; we take a look at social service institutions—and it shouldn’t have to be that way. Things should be funded properly. Volunteers should be able to contribute to and enhance the services that we already rely upon. They should not be there to fill the holes, stop the gaps and make up for the cuts. I implore this government to listen to the stakeholders who pointed out that proper funding for this is crucial.

Now I also have a couple of questions: How will this government take care of its enforcement role? Who are they talking about when they talk about a “prescribed person” who can relieve an animal in distress? These are questions that need to be answered. But further, the concerns about the forfeiture of an animal because someone can’t pay: Let’s not revictimize the vulnerable, because who is going to suffer here? That will be the animal who is removed from the person they love.

Remember: Responsibility is fundamental here, but that responsibility includes proper and adequate funding.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I return to the member from Brampton North for his reply.

Mr. Kevin Yarde: First of all, I would like to thank the OSPCA for their 100 to 150 years of service in protecting animals in Ontario. We are now changing from a private to a public model, and unfortunately for 100 to 150 years, they were not funded properly. We applaud the work that they have done.

As my colleague mentioned, one of the main concerns is funding. We have to get this right. We have to make sure we have the proper funding for this model. Also, we have to make sure that we have the proper resources and training.

Now for lawyers as well as for policing, they have to be able to charge. We have seen in the past that there haven’t been convictions where abuses have been 100% clear, so we need to make sure that they are able to put those cases to rest, that the ability to try and charge is there, and make sure that that definitely goes through.

So the funding model is key. It’s good here to see this new bill. We will now have more oversight and public trust and accountability under the chief inspector. Stakeholders were consulted. I’m glad to see that this government has spoken to agricultural members as well as spoken to the police, and other areas that are concerned about this bill.

Now the one concern, as the member mentioned as well, is the equity consideration here where a person is unable to pay a bill—say, a vet bill. What is going to happen? I want to find out exactly from this government, will the animal be taken away from this person? I don’t think we need to be revictimizing the poor. This is one of the concerns we have with this bill.

But overall, the framework is good. I applaud the Solicitor General and her parliamentary assistant, but we will be watching. We will be watching. Why? Because our four-legged and two-legged friends need the support, and we will make sure that they get that.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate? I recognize the member from Kitchener–Conestoga.

Mr. Mike Harris: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I know we’re running a little short on time, but we will get things started and hopefully get a little bit more of a chance to continue this another day.

I am very happy to have a chance to speak to this very important bill here today. Like so many other members on both sides of this House, I full-heartedly support strong animal welfare and protection. We often think of animal welfare as protecting cats and dogs from abuse and neglect, and it’s true. With six in 10 families being pet owners, this is an important part of the animal welfare system. But we are discussing more than just our pets here today. We are talking about a framework for the protection of animals in this province, and it is important to farmers that the highest level of care be provided to their livestock.

As an avid outdoorsman, I take the stewardship of our wildlife very seriously. It is our responsibility to do all that we can to ensure the protection and safety of animals in this province, which is why I am especially proud to stand up here today in support of this legislation which, if passed, would see the first provincially operated enforcement system in Canada. I want to take a moment and thank the Solicitor General for all the work she has done to build and design a system that would ensure the highest standard of protection for animals across this province.

Madam Speaker, when we formed government, we inherited an animal welfare protection system that was completely inadequate and lacked oversight. We took action in our first year in government after the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, better known as the OSPCA, ceased to provide animal welfare services. After passing Bill 117, our government launched a public survey to hear from Ontarians on how to improve animal protection. To echo the fine member from Etobicoke–Lakeshore, the response from the public was overwhelming.

Madam Speaker, this is an issue that the people of Ontario really care about. As with everything else this government does, we are listening and we used what we heard to inform the content of this legislation. What Ontarians want is a clear and accountable animal welfare regime with appropriate oversight, transparency and consistency. The same rules and enforcement practices should be there for all Ontarians.

The system we’re proposing is the product of extensive consultation with a multitude of stakeholders, including humane societies from across the province. These organizations are the front lines of animal welfare education and enforcement, working in the past with the OSPCA. I was glad to have the opportunity to sit down on multiple occasions in the last few months with the Humane Society of Kitchener Waterloo and Stratford Perth to hear their suggestions on the transition from the old act to developing a new, better system for Ontario. I’m happy to say that many of their suggestions are incorporated into the PAWS Act we’re debating here today.

Before I provide a few examples, let me just first thank the organization, staff, volunteers and financial contributors for the amazing work and advocacy they do on a daily basis in Waterloo region and beyond. The humane society has been proudly investigating and enforcing the OSPCA Act in the region of Waterloo, the city of Stratford and Perth county. In 2018, their agents and inspectors investigated 769 animal cruelty cases, 650 in Kitchener and Waterloo alone, and provided pound services for the two cities and Wilmot and Woolwich townships in my riding.

Also in 2018, they rescued 2,109 animals, successfully adopting 1,626, and they were able to return home 656 of those animals. Above and beyond all that great work, they perform thousands of surgeries and rabies vaccinations, while also helping 30,000-plus students learn more about animal welfare.

Madam Speaker, in April of this year I sat down with the humane society’s executive director to discuss the need for new legislation. She recommended right off the bat that during the transition period, the province should extend investigative and enforcement authority to affiliated humane societies. That was done. She also suggested that the name of the act be modified from the Ontario SPCA Act to clarify the responsibilities between a modified SPCA and a new framework focused on animal welfare, protection and enforcement. This is being proposed.

In a subsequent meeting to discuss ideas for new legislation, she suggested that the government create its own force of inspectors under a chief inspector who would enforce a province-wide model. That is also being proposed.

I was glad to share the voice of my local humane society, adding it to the thousands of people who responded to a public survey earlier this year asking how animal welfare in Ontario could be improved. I was glad to learn from the KWSP humane society that they welcome the proposed changes and are willing to work with our government to get the system right.

I’ve got a release here that I’m going to kind of paraphrase a little bit, because it does get a bit into the weeds. This is from the Humane Society of Kitchener Waterloo and Stratford Perth:

“The Humane Society of Kitchener Waterloo and Stratford Perth welcomes today’s announcement from the Ontario government, introducing the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act (PAWS) and to share their plans for a new government-focused enforcement model starting in 2020.

“‘We were pleased that we were able to step in and provide a lifeline to the animals and the government through this recent six-month transitional period,’ stated Kathrin Delutis, executive director, Kitchener Waterloo and Stratford Perth”—I know it’s a long name—“humane society. ‘Today’s announcement is a critical first step in establishing a new structure for protecting animals in Ontario.’”

It goes on to say, “‘While Ontario has moved to restructure animal protection enforcement and bring it directly under the government policing umbrella, SPCAs and humane societies will continue to have a role to play in law enforcement, whether to lead, assist or consult.’” I look forward to working with them as we move into this new system. Of course, I don’t need to remind the members of this House about the legal imperative for passing this legislation—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Thank you. I’m sorry to interrupt the member.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Seeing the time on the clock, this House stands in recess until 10:30 today.

The House recessed from 1015 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

Ms. Sandy Shaw: I’d like to welcome to the Legislature two constituents from my riding of Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas: Graham McDonald, who’s a good friend, and his son Malcolm McDonald, who is an aspiring politician running for council at his school, R.A. Riddell in Hamilton. Welcome to the Legislature.

Mr. David Piccini: I rise today to recognize and thank the unsung heroes of our Highway of Heroes. Throughout the year, often braving the elements, these incredible volunteers clean up litter, garbage and all sorts of horrid things along the sacred stretch of highway from Trenton to Toronto, officially renamed the Highway of Heroes. Welcome to the people’s House. We thank you. I thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to ask that military members, veterans, first responders and families of the fallen please stand.

In addition, I would like to introduce two mothers of fallen Canadian soldiers: Anna Loveman, mother of Craftsman Kyle Sinclair; and Honorary Lieutenant-Colonel Nancy Siew, mother of Captain Cletus Cheng. Welcome to the people’s House. Thank you for what you do.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I’m pleased to rise today to introduce Sam Hammond, the president of the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario, and many ETFO members who are here as well.

I also want to welcome and say hello to the students and teachers from Bennetto elementary school, who are here from my riding of Hamilton Centre.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: It’s my honour to introduce two guests today. The first, in the members’ gallery, is my friend and University of Guelph alumni, Mike Bumby. I’d also like to welcome the chair of LUMCO and the mayor of Guelph, His Worship Cam Guthrie.

Hon. Todd Smith: It’s a special pleasure today to welcome His Worship the mayor of Quinte West, Jim Harrison, with us today, and his better half Jane is with us today as well. They’re sitting with the volunteers who maintain and look after the Highway of Heroes, as the member from Northumberland–Peterborough South had mentioned earlier. I would just like to say, and the mayor will appreciate this: Quinte West is the best.

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: I would like to welcome Loyola Catholic Secondary School grade 10 students from my riding who are visiting Queen’s Park for the first time. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I have two introductions this morning. Nicole Schram, from York University, who is doing a student placement in my constituency office—I’m deeply indebted for the work you do; and also, my constituent Joy Lachica, who is the head of Elementary Teachers of Toronto. Both of you, welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I would like to welcome Amarjit Bola, mother of page Robbie, who has joined us in the gallery today. Welcome.

Ms. Jennifer K. French: I would like to welcome folks from Oshawa and from the Durham Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario: Mary Fowler, president; executive member Angela Inglis; and former president Dave Mastin.

I recognize Eva Guta and Kaitlyn Jefferies, also from the Oshawa area.

Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Michael Parsa: I want to introduce my good friend George Habchi, visiting me here today all the way from Ottawa. It’s his first time at Queen’s Park. Welcome. He’s one of the smartest guys I know. Thanks very much for joining me, George.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: There are a number of people here from the Canadian Cancer Survivor Network, and I want to welcome them all here to Queen’s Park on behalf of the official opposition.

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: Meegwetch, Speaker.

Remarks in Oji-Cree.

I’d like to welcome Frank McKay, council chair for Windigo First Nations Council, and his senior adviser, Anne Chabot.

Ms. Jane McKenna: The very first time I’ve ever had a page—and I’ll say he’s the best page: from Burlington, Owen Welch. Thank you so much for being here. You did a phenomenal job with the rest of the pages. I look forward to lunch today.

Mr. Parm Gill: I also want to recognize Omar Sinno, the page from my great riding of Milton. He goes to Irma Coulson Public School. I want to wish him all the best.

Mr. Percy Hatfield: I’d like to welcome Mario Spagnuolo, who is on the executive of the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario, from Windsor-Essex county. Welcome back to Queen’s Park, Mario.

Mr. Stan Cho: I’ve got six constituents visiting me today. It’s my great pleasure to welcome Jenya Drazman and her children Ariel and Naena to the Legislature. I’d also like to welcome back Brian Lukshis and Lynne Morrison, proud parents of today’s page captain Elizabeth, and Liz’s brother Deckert, the kid with the awesome hair. Welcome to the Legislature.

Ms. Jessica Bell: I’d like to introduce Catherine Nasmith, Anne Washington, Dianne Robinson and Betty Robinson—people who live in my riding and nearby. Thank you for coming.

Mr. Billy Pang: I’d like to welcome champions for lupus awareness, Linda Keill and Diana Bozzo, in the east members’ gallery; also, my staff Larry Lau, a volunteer to clean up the Highway of Heroes.

M me France Gélinas: I’d like to introduce members of the Retired Teachers of Ontario: Gordon Lynden Hough, Anna-Rita Lunghi and David Kendall. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Mike Harris: I just wanted to give a quick welcome. I see Jeff Pelich up in the gallery and the other members who are here from ETFO Waterloo region.

Mr. Joel Harden: It’s a great pleasure to see Jim Grieve in the members’ gallery. I encourage all of us to head to the Retired Teachers of Ontario reception at noon. It’s nice to see you, Jim.

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I would like to welcome Neeru Arora and Tarun Arora, parents of page Alisha, from the riding of Mississauga Centre. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Wayne Gates: I’d like to welcome Lindsay Gillis. She’s here today to spend the day with her favourite MPP, who just happens to be me. What she doesn’t realize is, I’m the only MPP that she has, as well. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Lindsey Park: I’d like to welcome my new OLIP intern, Misha Apel. She’s in the east members’ gallery today. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I’d like to welcome members from Ontario Racing here today: John Siscos, John Hayes and Kathryn Curry. Welcome.

Mr. Lorne Coe: I’d like to introduce Cindy and Tracy Otter, who are the parents of page McKenna Otter. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Marit Stiles: It gives me great pleasure to welcome here to the House my new OLIP intern, Kieran Lawlor, who is returning here after having been a page before. We’re very excited to have him here with us.

Mr. Robert Bailey: I’d like to introduce and welcome to Queen’s Park today my page from Sarnia–Lambton, Davina Bhola, who’s following a Bhola family tradition. She’s the third Bhola family member to be a page at Queen’s Park.

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: It is my pleasure to welcome the president of ETFO down in my area, Windsor–Essex: Adelina Cecchin. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Order of business

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

Mr. John Fraser: Point of order: I’m seeking unanimous consent to ask a question on behalf of my colleague from Thunder Bay–Superior North.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Ottawa South is seeking unanimous consent of the House to ask a question today in place of the member for Thunder Bay–Superior North. Agreed? Agreed.

Order of business

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

Hon. Paul Calandra: I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding Remembrance Day.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader is seeking unanimous consent of the House to put forward a motion without notice regarding Remembrance Day. Agreed? Agreed.

Once again, the government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: I move that Remembrance Day tributes take place before question period, with two minutes allotted to the independent Green member, followed by two minutes allotted to the independent Liberal members, followed by two minutes allotted to Her Majesty’s loyal opposition, followed by two minutes allotted to the government.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Calandra has moved that Remembrance Day tributes take place before question period, with two minutes allotted to the independent Green member, followed by two minutes allotted to the independent Liberal members, followed by two minutes allotted to Her Majesty’s loyal opposition, followed by two minutes allotted to the government. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Motion agreed to.

Remembrance Day / Jour du Souvenir

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the member for Guelph.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: It is an honour today to rise on behalf of the Green Party to express our sincere gratitude for the sacrifices our veterans and first responders have made.

Speaker, those who risk their lives in defence of democracy and freedom must never be forgotten. It is our solemn responsibility to cherish their legacy, courage and heroism.

We must also continue to honour the values and institutions that veterans have defended and military personnel and first responders continue to defend.

We owe veterans a debt of gratitude that can never be repaid. For those veterans who have returned home, it is our duty to ensure that you receive the care and support you deserve. We must continually honour and support the families of those veterans who have made the ultimate sacrifice.

Speaker, war touches us deeply, personally and across generations. Several of my family members, including my grandfather and father-in-law, served. Like many veterans, they did not like to talk about the horrors they experienced. They wanted to protect us, their family members, from the pain and horror they saw. But we must continue to tell and remember their stories: stories of loss, fear, courage and sacrifice.

Let us remember and honour veterans of both World Wars, Korea, Afghanistan, multiple peacekeeping missions and all the other conflicts that Canadians have engaged in. We continue to benefit from their sacrifice, and we owe a debt of gratitude to them.

Lest we forget, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the member for Ottawa South.

M. John Fraser: C’est un honneur et un privilège de prendre la parole et de dire quelques mots, au nom de mon caucus et de ma circonscription, au sujet des sacrifices qui ont été faits et qui continuent d’être faits pour notre liberté, notre démocratie et notre façon de vivre.

I want to acknowledge that it’s Remembrance Week in Ontario right now. It started this past Tuesday. Our colleague the member from Simcoe–Grey brought this initiative forward in 2016. I want to thank him for this and for his efforts to include members of all parties on the bill. I was honoured when he asked me to do that, as I know Cheri DiNovo was as well. I know that all members in this House appreciate it, as do the men and women who have served our great country.

War touches everyone, everyone’s family, somewhere. In my family, my wife’s uncle, Robert Ansley Cavanagh, died at Dieppe in August 1942, along with thousands of other young men. We never knew how he died until many years later. Thankfully, it was swift; however, the loss remained. My mother-in-law passed away just two years ago. She was 97 and she was closest to her brother, Ansley. She loved him dearly. She kept his picture on her dresser for 75 years; that’s a long time. She never forgot him.

We now have his picture in our house, along with his letters home. And thanks to her, we’ll never forget him and the sacrifice that he made, and that’s why I mention him today.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Next I’ll recognize the member for St. Catharines.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: It is my distinct honour to rise today and speak in recognition of Remembrance Day and Remembrance Week.

On November 11, Canadians across our country will stand in silence, united in remembering more than 118,000 Canadians and Newfoundlanders who, since Confederation, have given their lives for our freedom. Remembrance Week justly extends the opportunity that Remembrance Day has long provided to honour the heroism and the sacrifice of men and women of all orientations who helped to shape our fine country’s history.

I am fortunate to come from a community in St. Catharines that has a rich tapestry and celebrated history with veterans and their Legions. St. Catharines will remember our own local heroes as well as all of our heroes—our most recent, Warrant Officer Dennis Brown. Dennis was a reservist in the Lincoln and Welland Regiment. He was a son, he was a husband and he was a father of three boys, Mac, Owen and Ben. Dennis was a very dear friend of mine. Dennis was killed 10 years ago while deployed with the Canadian contingent of NATO in Afghanistan at the age of 38.

Remembrance Day carries a special meaning for myself and my family. I’m a very proud mother of an active service member, Jonathan Lindal, Petty Officer Second Class in the Royal Canadian Navy. Jonathan has completed three tours of duty abroad.

I would like to say I know the importance of recognizing our veterans and recognizing their families. We can never repay the debt we owe, nor will we ever have enough gratitude for the freedom we enjoy every day. We must remember our veterans answered the call to defend freedom—those who served in Korea, the South African war, the conflict in Libya, the 158 men and women who gave their lives for us in Afghanistan, and our veterans who fought in other conflicts, which include peacekeeping missions.

We must remember the soldiers, the sailors and the airmen who guarded and continue to guard our freedom through NATO and UN missions against terrorism and piracy. We thank them all for their sacrifices.

On November 11, Royal Canadian Legions across Ontario will be hosting ceremonies to reflect and acknowledge the sacrifices of all our veterans, past and present, our men and women in uniform. We join together in a moment of silence. We will remember them.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Next I recognize the Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: Mr. Speaker, it’s an honour to rise in the House today to recognize our veterans ahead of Remembrance Day next Monday, the 11th of November. Next year we’ll be celebrating victory in Europe, or VE day, marking 75 years since the fall of the brutal Nazi regime, and also marking Canada’s pivotal role in the Allied victory. On that day, our country joined together with the rest of the world in saying, “Never again.” We would not allow such atrocities to happen again. VE day is not only a celebration of the liberation of Europe and the ultimate defeat of the Nazi forces, but also the triumph of good over evil.

Throughout history, Mr. Speaker, Canadians and Ontarians have proven that our commitment to one another and to our fundamental freedoms is unbreakable. From Cambrai in World War I to Kabul in our own recent memory, Canadians have stood fast against tyranny and against terror. They left their homes, their families and their communities to defend our way of life and to protect the values we hold dear.

Mr. Speaker, this is a debt that we can never repay, but we can begin to show our gratitude by paying tribute to these brave men and women who gave their lives in the call of duty, today and every day, and especially on Remembrance Day, by honouring those heroes who still walk among us today. As we rise together in the House to pay our respects to our veterans, their tremendous sacrifice puts our role as legislators into perspective.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to take the liberty of asking all members to rise and observe a moment’s silence in memory of all who served in a Canadian Forces uniform.

The House observed a moment’s silence.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We will remember them. Thank you.

Oral Questions

Hospital funding

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My first question this morning is to the Premier. For weeks we’ve been hearing disturbing details of the ongoing crisis in hallway medicine: hospitals regularly operating above 100% capacity; patients being treated in hallways and going days without basics like a shower; one woman in Ottawa trapped in hospital for two years waiting for home care supports.

Despite this crisis, last spring’s budget laid out a plan for spending restraint in the health care sector, including a plan to hold funding below the rate of inflation over the next three years. That plan remains unchanged. When does the Premier plan to fix this and start to take on the hallway medicine crisis that was left by the Liberals?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Health.

Hon. Christine Elliott: To the leader of the official opposition: Well, we can certainly agree on one thing, that we were left a huge mess by the previous government, which did basically nothing over 15 years, which led to this crisis of hallway health care. It didn’t just spring up overnight. It’s been building and building and building for years.

We promised the people of Ontario that we would do something about it. As you heard in the fall economic statement yesterday, we are adding $1.9 billion more into the health care budget this year than last year. With that, we are also transforming our health care system into one that’s truly patient-centred, that brings in the latest technology and the latest techniques, and it is going to work to break down that number of people receiving health care in hallways.

It’s not acceptable. We are working on a number of fronts to deal with that. I’ll have more to say on that in the supplemental.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: There is absolutely no doubt in anybody’s mind that the Liberals—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Don Valley East will come to order. I can hear you.

I apologize to the Leader of the Opposition. I’ll give you extra time.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Thank you, Speaker.

There’s no doubt that the Liberals left health care hanging by a thread, but the Premier seems to think the status quo of cuts is good enough. Can the Premier confirm that, despite hospitals in Brampton, Sudbury, Hamilton and Markham operating above 100% capacity, and independent reports confirming hallway medicine will grow worse if the government fails to take action, the Ford government is still offering hospitals hundreds of millions dollars less than the amount necessary to prevent further deterioration in the hospital system?

Hon. Christine Elliott: It is important to stick to the facts, and the facts are that we are increasing funding, as I indicated before, by $1.9 billion this year over last year. That’s a 3.1% increase. We have added $384 million this year to hospitals’ operating funds, in addition to $68 million that has been divided up amongst small to medium-sized hospitals that had a structural funding deficit due to a funding formula that was put in place by the previous government. They didn’t do anything to fix it, but we are. Those small and medium-sized hospitals are very happy to receive the funds that they have.

They’re using it to reduce hallway health care, as we are across many, many priorities that we’re putting in place.

We have tried to move people into reactivation care centres. We are moving some people who are in alternate level of care into retirement homes, with appropriate home care supports. We’ve also invested an additional $155 million into home and community care, which is also a key part of the solution to this problem. When people don’t need to be in hospital—

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

The final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, health care inflation runs at about 4.3%, and this government’s funding health care at an 1.6% increase. That means a serious cut to our health care services in this province. Do you know what? For patients caught waiting in hospital hallways, the new Ford government looks a lot like the old Ford government. It’s the same Premier making the same cuts and taking the crisis in hallway medicine that the Liberals left us from bad to worse.

Can the Premier explain how he plans to move patients out of hospital hallways when his plan, like the Liberals before him, consists of health care funding that doesn’t keep pace with the patient needs of an aging population?

Hon. Christine Elliott: As you know, we are introducing a system transformation in our health care system, and it’s not always hospitals where patients need to receive care. That’s why we are investing across the board in home and community care supports as well, so that people don’t need to end up coming back to hospital time and time again.

The best example of that is in mental health and addictions care, where we see the same people in many, many hospitals circling in and out because they don’t know where else to go when they have a mental health emergency or crisis. If they’re feeling suicidal, they go to the hospital emergency department. It should never get to that, and that is why we are coming forward with a comprehensive mental health and addictions plan that will ensure that people can receive the mental health care they need in the community before it ever reaches that crisis point. That’s why investments in both hospital care and home and community care are so important.

Education funding

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also to the Premier. Parents and students are also concerned about cuts in the classroom and the quality of their education. Students are seeing course options disappear. Teachers and education workers are disappearing with them. Can the Premier confirm the government is still on track to fire 10,000 teachers?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Finance reaffirmed that this government is absolutely and firmly committed to the maintenance, defence and improvement of public education in the province of Ontario with a plan to invest an additional $200 million more, an historic investment, the highest levels ever recorded in provincial history to support our young people. This is in addition to $500 million to rebuild schools and in addition to our plan to invest $200 million to increase math scores over the next four years.

Mr. Speaker, our plan is working. It is helping to ensure young people are able to achieve their potential and get good jobs in the labour market. That’s our vision; that’s our aspiration. We’re going to keep working hard to ensure every student succeeds in this province.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, apparently yesterday in estimates, this minister actually confirmed that they’re on track to ditch 10,000 teachers out of the education system in Ontario.

The Ford government was clear in last spring’s budget, and that plan did not change yesterday, Speaker.

Over the next four years, the government plans to hold education funding below the rate of inflation, even if it means school roofs will continue to leak, courses will continue to disappear, and 10,000 teachers will lose jobs. If the Premier has a different plan, when is he going to reveal it?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: To the member opposite, Mr. Speaker: This year we intend to spend $1.2 billion more than we spent last year in the defence and the improvement of public education. Let those facts permeate the debate.

Mr. Speaker, our plan is to get labour deals, as we’ve done in our agreement with CUPE, which has restored over 1,000 front-line workers in schools in every region of this province. My aim as the minister, in conjunction with the leadership of our Premier, is to make sure that our students remain in class. That’s the first point of this discussion. We are working hard, in good faith, so that parents know with confidence that we’re going to continue to keep their kids in mind and keep them in class, so they can focus, they can learn and they can get a good job at the end of their journey.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, delaying and repackaging cuts does not make them go away, and it does nothing to reverse the deep cuts to public services and the harm that they’ve already done.

The Ford government’s plan will mean fewer courses for students, fewer teachers in schools, and a backlog of school repairs that keeps growing. If the Premier is genuinely interested in cleaning up the mess left by the Liberals, will he stop trying to repackage cuts, actually reverse them and work with parents and teachers to improve the quality of education in our schools?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Mr. Speaker, I think it is important for families at home to know the investments we are making, just to debunk the narrative of that question. We intend to spend $1.2 billion more than we did last year. We have doubled the mental health envelope from the peak of Liberal spending in the former government. We’re spending the most, over $3.1 billion—the highest levels for special education needs, the highest levels for transportation, the highest levels for First Nation education.

Our plan is to invest in the areas of need. We’re helping our kids achieve their potential. We’re doing it through investments, but we’re also doing it through a modernization of our curriculum, because we know that young people need to have the core competencies in order to succeed with their careers in the job market. We’re going to continue to focus on those investments, on improving our schools, updating our curriculum, and giving young people the tools to succeed in life.

Environmental protection

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is to the Premier. Amidst growing concern about the climate emergency, Ontarians are desperate for real action from their government. Can the Premier explain why the $50-million budget cut to the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks announced in last spring’s budget grew even deeper in the fall economic statement, and is now a $76-million cut to environment and conservation programs?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of the Environment.

Hon. Jeff Yurek: Thanks very much to the member opposite for that question. I want to be clear with the member opposite and members of this House that there is not a reduction in environmental programs or productions. This is a part of the broader effort to centralize money and be more efficient and effective in the delivery of government services. There is no impact to the ministry’s services and the delivery of our mandate.

The $25-million decrease to the ministry’s funding is due to the centralization of several government services. The centralization of these internal government services impacts all ministries, not just the Ministry of the Environment. The funding has been reallocated to other ministries and therefore is fiscally neutral to this government.

Mr. Speaker, the member ought to rest assured we will continue to protect the environment, implement our environment plan for Ontario, and ensure there is a healthy balance between a healthy economy and a healthy environment.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, when it comes to responding to the climate crisis, people were desperate for a change, but sadly, they see the same Ford government fighting in court against putting a price on pollution, spending millions on partisan ad campaigns promoting climate denial and threatening small businesses with fines if they fail to promote their partisan campaigns. Now we see even deeper cuts to environmental initiatives. Why is this Premier going to war against the environment?

Hon. Jeff Yurek: Since we were elected last June, we’ve moved forward with a plan for the environment for Ontario to not only balance the healthy economy, but also balance the environment as well. It’s interesting that it comes from the member opposite whose party, in the last election, didn’t even mention climate change once, Mr. Speaker. We are moving forward with changes.

Just this morning, for the member opposite’s interest, we announced our new climate impact assessment across this province.

What this will do is analyze different parts of the province so we know where impact to climate change is going to occur and how municipalities, communities, Indigenous communities and people can focus on what to prioritize to deal with climate change, to adapt in order to ensure that, as the changes grow in the climate change emergency that’s going on, we make the changes that are necessary and prioritize what projects we’re putting forth in our communities so that we can become more resilient to climate change and better prepared for the upcoming changes.

We will continue to produce our Made-in-Ontario Environment Plan.

Fiscal and economic policy

Ms. Jane McKenna: My question is to the Premier. When our government was first elected, we inherited a dangerous fiscal and economic situation. The people of this province were struggling. They were being squeezed by higher gas prices, more taxes and skyrocketing electricity costs. They were working harder, paying more and getting less.

When it came to the vital services that people require, we inherited a broken system from the previous government, whether it was hallway health care, declining math scores, overcrowded transit systems or congested highways.

Premier, can you speak to the vision and plan that our government has laid out in the fall economic statement that is helping to turn this province around?

Hon. Doug Ford: I want to thank our all-star MPP from the great city of Burlington. What an incredible job she’s doing, Mr. Speaker.

Our government’s plan is a balanced, prudent and thoughtful approach to governing, which puts more money into people’s pockets. We’re investing $1.3 billion more in critical public services this year alone: increasing health care by $1.9 billion, education by $1.2 billion.

We inherited a $15-billion disaster deficit on the backs of the people of Ontario. Our deficit now stands at $9 billion. That’s $1.3 billion lower than the $10.3 billion of last year.

Mr. Speaker, our government has proved that we can be fiscally responsible and very thoughtful when it comes to health care, education and creating 272,000 jobs. Our economy is booming because of the policies of—

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

The supplementary question?

Ms. Jane McKenna: Thank you for the response, Premier, and for your strong leadership.

Ontario is truly turning around economically because of the strong and prudent plan that has been laid out, and we are already seeing the results of our plan come to fruition: 272,000 net new jobs since we formed government in 2018; 80,000 new self-employed and 41,000 public sector positions have been created this year alone.

Premier, can you elaborate on the other measures our government has announced that will help to make life more affordable for the people of this province?

Hon. Doug Ford: I want to thank our MPP for the great question.

Mr. Speaker, for northerners, we are proposing to reduce the aviation fuel tax, saving money for individuals and families on vital issues like groceries and travel costs. It’s putting more money in the pockets of the people in the north.

Our government is making life easier for families by letting kids ride for free on GO trains and buses.

We’re helping over 100,000 low-income seniors by providing them with free, publicly paid dental care.

We’re providing free museum admissions for young people.

We’re proposing to cut small business taxes by 8.7%. Small businesses are the backbone of our economy, and they have been crushed for the last 15 years. Finally, they’re seeing the light. They are so grateful for our policies that are putting $1,500 in the pockets of small businesses.

We’re also saving the taxpayers of this province—$3 billion back into the pockets of the great people—

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

Next question, the member for Toronto–St. Paul’s.

Sexual abuse

Ms. Jill Andrew: My question is for the Premier. Just this morning, CBC News is reporting that this Conservative government’s cuts to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board have resulted in sexual abuse survivors no longer receiving the therapy they are entitled to. These cuts also mean that survivors of childhood abuse are no longer eligible to apply for funding for supports.

I am a survivor of child sexual abuse. One in three women will experience some form of sexual violence in their lifetime. That means that many women in this very Legislature—MPPs and visitors—will be or are survivors of sexual violence.

Why is this government refusing to honour promises made to survivors of sexual abuse?

Hon. Doug Ford: Attorney General.

Hon. Doug Downey: This is a serious area—and thank you for sharing that, member from Toronto–St. Paul’s. It is critical that we provide resources immediately after violence, and so we have taken the VQRP program and doubled the funding from $6 million to $12 million to have the resources there for those people immediately after a violent incident. The VQRP program—that $12 million—allows victims to receive supports, whether it be cellphones, fixing locks, immediate counselling, residential. It’s critical that we have those supports for them when they need them immediately.

We’ve not only doubled it. What isn’t widely known is that this allows them to not be out-of-pocket. That $12 million is not a capped limit. If the need is greater, we will increase the fund, and we’ve said that publicly on the record; it’s not new right now.

Mr. Speaker, this is a critical issue. We have to be there for victims. I’ll have more to add in my supplementary.

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

Ms. Jill Andrew: My question is again for the Premier—and just to state, gender-based violence, including sexual violence, disproportionately impacts women-identifying people. I wanted to put that on record.

Last night we were contacted by a survivor of sexual violence, Kelly Grenier, who says that despite a signed settlement with the board, she can no longer access funding for therapy that is rightly hers, and no one in this Conservative government is picking up her calls. She doesn’t know where to turn next.

She and other survivors were never consulted or informed about these cruel and retroactive cuts. It’s not too late for this Conservative government to do the right thing and reverse course.

Mr. Speaker, my question is this: Why is this government so intent on revictimizing Ontario’s most vulnerable people? What does this Conservative government have against survivors of sexual violence, for goodness’ sake?

Hon. Doug Downey: I want the opposition and the public to know how seriously we take victims of violence. It is a critical issue. I would like to tell you this, Mr. Speaker: This is a personal issue for me as well. My mother was a counsellor. She was one of the founders of the York region victim abuse program, which is still operating. I’ve been dealing with shelters and understanding that reality for a very long time. This is not a new area of interest and passion for me.

Let me tell you, Mr. Speaker, the Victim Quick Response Program that I spoke of has not only doubled the funding—not capped the funding—we’ve expanded services, because we know things like human trafficking are such heinous crimes. We know when people come out of those situations, that immediate aftermath of violence, that they need supports right away.

Mr. Speaker, we have done some reforms to deal with outdated programming that actually did revictimize individuals, and we’re putting the resources in their hands immediately, at every turn.

Provincial deficit

Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Premier. I know he’s mentioned this this morning, so I’m looking forward to his answer because I know he’ll be anxious to talk about this.

Yesterday, Speaker, the government introduced the fall economic statement. While the Minister of Finance sang sweetly and, I might add, in very dulcet tones, it’s the same old song that we’ve heard before. Will the Premier tell us why he manufactured a phony $15-billion deficit and why he continues to—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member to withdraw.

Mr. John Fraser: I withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): He may place his question.

Mr. John Fraser: I will rephrase it.

Will the Premier tell this Legislature why there was a manufactured $15-billion deficit—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member to withdraw again.

Mr. John Fraser: I withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I look to the Premier now to reply. Premier?

Hon. Doug Ford: I can’t believe what I just heard from the leader of the no-name party.

Mr. Speaker, you know something? When we went into the election, we didn’t know if the deficit was $3 billion, $5 billion, $10 billion, $15 billion—it was all over the place. But what we did do, Mr. Speaker, was something that they never did: We confirmed it with the Auditor General, with third-party validation through an auditing firm. We confirmed it with the finance minister, the president of the treasury, and we all agreed. For the first time ever, we all agreed that it was a $15-billion disaster that the previous government left us, on the backs of the people of Ontario and on the backs of the businesses.

We’ve turned the corner here in Ontario. We’re paying down our deficit. We’re creating jobs the likes of which this province has never, ever seen—272,400 jobs. We have many more coming in to this province.

Mr. Speaker, we’re on the right road to prosperity, to growth, in this great province.

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

Mr. John Fraser: I’d like to thank the Premier for his answer, but I would like to remind him that the FAO said the deficit was never $15 billion. Public accounts said—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I apologize to the member for Ottawa South. The government side has to come to order now.

Member for Ottawa Centre.

Mr. John Fraser: The public accounts of this province said it was $7.4 billion. So we know—we know—that that number was never real. The reason that the Premier and his colleagues did this was to create a context for cuts—cuts that hurt families in Ontario. We are spending less per student than we were before. We’re going to spend less in post-secondary education and on community and children’s services in real dollars. An increase in health care of 2.3% does not even meet the standard.

Speaker, through you: Why does the Premier continue to use a number—an inflated number—that he knows is not right?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): You have to withdraw again.

Mr. John Fraser: I withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Premier to reply.

Hon. Doug Ford: To the great Minister of Finance.

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, let’s talk about the record. Let’s talk about taking over a government after 15 years where the Auditor General had refused to sign off on the books of the province of Ontario. Let’s talk about the off-book accounting for hydro costs.

Of course, we brought in an independent financial commission. That commission found that the deficit was $15 billion. The member mentions the FAO; with the hard work of this government, the FAO confirmed in May 2019 an $11.7-billion deficit. That’s because of the hard work of this government.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was very proud, on behalf of this government and this Premier, to say that we are beating the target that we set in the last budget. The $10.3-billion deficit that we had last year is now going to be $9 billion—a $1.3-billion reduction.

Fiscal and economic policy

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: My question is for the Minister of Finance. Yesterday, we were thrilled to join the minister and the Premier of Ontario in this House for the 2019 fall economic statement.

Our government for the people was elected with a mandate to restore confidence in Ontario’s finances and put more money back in people’s pockets. The minister’s statement made one thing very clear: Our plan is working. We are bringing relief to families and businesses in my riding of Carleton and across Ontario.

Through you, Mr. Speaker: Could the minister please elaborate on yesterday’s exciting announcement and inform the House on our government’s plan to finally bring our budget to balance?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Thank you to the member from Carleton. I know that she does great work for her constituents.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was pleased to announce our plan to build Ontario together and to speak to this House and to the people of Ontario about the progress that this government is making. We were able to announce that we have made progress on the deficit that we inherited, that we have moved the deficit from $10.3 billion to $9 billion next year.

We were also able to announce that we are making $1.3 billion more—a very important critical investment in the key services that our province requires.

Our government is focused on making sure that we balance the budget by 2023, that we also invest in key services, that we make a difference for the people of Ontario and that this province is the kind of home of prosperity that we know it should be.

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

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: Thank you to the minister for his response. It’s great to see that our government is continuing on our prudent and balanced plan to build Ontario together. I can see that the vision put forward by our Premier when we were elected 16 months ago is becoming a reality.

Thanks to our responsible fiscal management and our government’s focus on making positive change for the people of Carleton and Ontario, we are seeing results. Could the minister please explain the approach our government is taking to solve the challenges we inherited due to 15 years of Liberal waste, mismanagement and neglect?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Thank you to the member. We are taking a balanced and prudent approach. We are balancing three sets of priorities: We committed to put money back into people’s pockets, and we have put $3 billion back into the pockets of Ontarians.

We promised that we would put Ontario on a sound footing, and we have reduced the deficit down to $9 billion—towards balancing that budget in 2023.

We promised we would invest in critical public services like health care, education and children, and we increased that investment yesterday by $1.3 billion.

This is the balanced, prudent approach we are taking. This is the approach that Ontarians expect.

Education funding

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is to the Premier. They may be working hard to hide it, but under this government’s watch, things keep going from bad to worse. No one knows that fact better than parents, teachers and students across this province.

There is lead in the water and our schools are crumbling, and this government thinks the answer is cramming more kids in classrooms, firing teachers and gutting school budgets.

My question is simple: Does the Premier still think that balancing the budget on the backs of our students, staff and families is a good idea?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Indeed, it is this government that is investing over $13 billion over the next decade to improve schools and improve facilities in every region of Ontario.

We’re also investing, in this year alone, an over half-a-billion-dollar allocation to improve the state of schools inherited from the former Liberal government after 15 years of dereliction of duty.

In addition, we are meeting the Auditor General’s recommendation of a 2.5% allocation to improve schools.

Mr. Speaker, what is also important is an acceptance. It is an acceptance that intergenerational debt is morally wrong. The transfer of debt from one generation onto the next is not an acceptable proposition for the very parents we suggest we represent.

Families in this province want us to invest in the front lines, keep taxes low and grow the economy while doing what we do best, which is creating the conditions for young people to achieve their full potential in Ontario.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Mr. Speaker, you can put a new spin on these things, but it’s the same old story. Seven schools in my community alone have been found to have unsafe levels of lead in the water, and there are thousands more across the province.

Let’s do the math, shall we? Fifteen years of Liberal inaction resulted in a $15.9-billion school repair backlog. Now, in just over a year, the government has grown that backlog to over $16.3 billion. That’s about a half a billion dollars. And that doesn’t even include the cost to remove the lead from our schools.

Given that the fiscal update yesterday did nothing to fix the damage that this government has done in the year they’ve been in power, when is the government going to do the right thing, reverse the cuts, and stop hurting our families?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: It is under the Minister of Finance’s leadership—yesterday, he confirmed that we are, in fact, on track to spend $1.2 billion more than we did last year.

Mr. Speaker, we announced in our last budget a $550-million investment to improve schools and $80 million to improve child care facilities, because we accept that after 15 years of the former Liberal government there is so much more to do to support our kids in schools with better facilities.

But, Mr. Speaker, what I said earlier—$1 billion a month on interest—spending money that we do not have is not in the interests of the next generation. They want government to live within their means. They want government to set them up for economic success. That’s why we’re growing the economy so that we’re able to invest more.

As the Minister of Finance confirmed just yesterday, more money than ever before in the history of this province—for health care and education and the social services that every family deserves.

Small business

Mr. Michael Parsa: My question is also for the great Minister of Finance. As many of us in this House know, small businesses play an important role in our local communities. Small business owners are the people who make investments and create jobs right here in Ontario.

For too long, these innovators and entrepreneurs were not set up for success by the previous government. With our plan to build Ontario together, and by creating a more competitive business environment, those days are over, Speaker.

We also have a plan to develop a small business success strategy, consulting with industry and business leaders to identify the needs of their businesses.

Would the minister please inform the House about the steps our fall economic statement took to create a more competitive business environment?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member from Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill, thank you for the question. He is correct. Small businesses are the backbone of Ontario’s economy. They employ one third of private sector employees. Almost two million Ontarians derive their livelihood from small businesses.

They also play a large

part in our economy, making us more productive and more effective. That’s why we have proposed, as the member mentioned, the small business success strategy.

We have also, yesterday, committed to following through on one of our important commitments. Yesterday we committed that we will be cutting the small business tax rate by 8.7% in this legislation to be tabled. This is a promise made and a promise kept by this government.

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

Mr. Michael Parsa: Thank you to the minister for his response. It’s reassuring to know that, if passed, the fall economic statement introduced yesterday will bring much-needed and much-deserved relief to small business owners. In fact, small business owners in the ridings represented by every member in this this House would stand to benefit.

In addition to the action our government has already taken, could the minister please explain the great impact our proposed small business tax cut would have for small business owners?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Thank you to the member. Should the bill pass, this small business tax cut will represent up to $1,500 of relief annually for small businesses. This is in addition to the benefits that small businesses are already receiving from accelerated writeoffs, from reduced WSIB premiums and from the elimination of the cap-and-trade carbon tax.

Mr. Speaker, taken together, these tax measures will deliver over $255 million of Ontario income tax relief to small businesses in 2020. This is what small businesses need. This is what they deserve. They are our partners in prosperity and we will support them on this side of the House.

Treaties recognition

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: Yesterday I rose in the House to ask the Premier what this government was doing to honour its treaty obligations. But then, I got my answer with the government’s latest budget. There was hardly any mention of specific commitments to First Nations or Indigenous peoples in Ontario. Instead, there was over $2 million less in base funding for Indigenous affairs.

Premier, this government has already cut the budget for Indigenous affairs in half. Now another $2 million is being cut. Why is true and meaningful reconciliation not a priority for this government?

Hon. Doug Ford: Associate Minister of Energy.

Hon. Bill Walker: Thank you to the member for the question. Our government is working for all people in Ontario, including Indigenous communities. An important part of that is ensuring that the next generation of young people know the shared history, the culture and the diversity of language that exist within First Nations communities of this province.

Our government has expanded and enhanced education and learning of First Nations history from grades 1 to 8. That’s why we’ve added 10 additional courses for secondary school students so that they know more about the incredible contributions of First Nations. We share a passion for the opportunities of renewed economic prosperity with Indigenous peoples in Ontario. We believe there’s tremendous economic opportunity and potential within our First Nations community, a fast-growing community in this province.

We’re going to continue to work with them in good faith to ensure they’re able to reach their full potential, get economic opportunity and realize their dreams. This country should be able to provide for the First Peoples of our community.

Mr. Speaker, we’ve engaged with community leaders from across the province and look forward to strengthening those relationships as we move forward with the—

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

The supplementary question?

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: This government has an obligation to the First Peoples of this land, but there are First Nations that have gone decades without clean, reliable drinking water. Clean drinking water is a basic human right.

These communities call on you to be a better treaty partner. Yesterday, Matawa First Nations called on you to honour the treaties that govern their territories with respect to Bill 132. Speaker, reconciliation requires real resources and real effort. Will the Premier restore the base funding for Indigenous affairs that he has cut since forming government? Yes or no?

Hon. Bill Walker: Again to the member, thank you. This is a very important issue. We inherited yet another issue from the Liberals. They had 15 years to have taken action so you wouldn’t have to stand here today. It’s sad that they actually built our debt; we spend $13 billion a year on interest payments. That money could have gone to programs, services and, yes, clean water.

The Minister of Indigenous Affairs, the great member from Kenora–Rainy River, has a great relationship with many of the First Nations chiefs across our great province and he’s working hard to address these problems that we’ve inherited. He actually appointed Mr. Clifford Bull to ensure there is an opportunity for him to be a special adviser on Indigenous affairs. Mr. Bull has travelled throughout northern Ontario and visited several communities to meet with Indigenous leaders and hear about the unique issues affecting Indigenous communities.

We, as the government of Ontario, are committed to working in partnership with Indigenous communities to promote economic opportunities, improve quality of life and meet Ontario’s legal obligations. The funding that was there was one-time funding. We continue the base funding that is there. I know Minister Rickford is going to do everything he can to work with members like Mr. Mamakwa to make sure our Indigenous communities have the opportunities that we all have—

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

The next question, the member for Northumberland–Peterborough South.

Hospital funding

Mr. David Piccini: My question is to the Minister of Finance. Ontarians know about the dire fiscal situation we inherited from the previous government. It has been famously said, “Show me your budget, and I’ll show you my values.” Sadly, under the previous government, those values were deeply misaligned as interest on the debt rose to the fourth-largest line item.

Yesterday in the fall economic statement, the Minister of Finance outlined a number of important investments our government is making in health care, in education, in social services and in children.

Minister, could you please outline some of those important investments and touch on some important investments we’re making in health care?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Thank you to the member from Northumberland–Peterborough South.

Mr. Speaker, as has been said in this House—$1.9 billion in additional spending.

The member is a great advocate for Northumberland Hills Hospital and the constituents there, who I know are proud that he fights for them.

Working alongside the Ontario Hospital Association, the Ministry of Health was able to identify some long-standing funding issues for small and medium-sized communities. That’s why our government has invested an additional $68 million to support small and medium-sized hospitals. That’s in addition to the $384 million that hospitals received in our budget.

Our government is taking the steps to create healthy communities, cut hospital wait times and end hallway health care, and we’re doing it for small and medium communities throughout Ontario.

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

Mr. David Piccini: Thank you, Minister, for your answer, and thank you for touching on important health care funding, an area important to the people of my riding.

Mr. Speaker, I was delighted to hear about the $68 million our government allocated to small and medium-sized hospitals, $3.8 million of which went to Northumberland Hills Hospital in my riding. In addition, we committed to fixing the funding formula for medium-sized hospitals, which has, for decades, led to decreased funding in many medium-sized hospitals across rural Ontario. This funding announcement has breathed new life into medium-sized hospitals across Ontario, new life into Northumberland Hills Hospital, and in the words of Dr. Andrew Stratford, one of my local surgeons, it has given them hope.

Could the minister please outline more information on that important investment we made to fixing the medium-sized hospital funding formula?

Hon. Rod Phillips: The Minister of Health.

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you very much to the member for the question.

In addition to our government’s additional investment of $348 million for hospitals and the $68 million to support small and medium-sized hospitals, we have developed a comprehensive, four-pillar plan to address hallway health care.

First, through health promotion, we want to keep Ontarians healthy and out of hospitals.

Secondly, hospitals aren’t always the best place for a person to receive care. We will ensure that Ontarians receive the right care in the right place.

Third, we are better integrating care to improve patient flow and ensure that patients who are ready to leave the hospital can do so with the care and support they need.

Finally, by investing $27 billion over the next 10 years in hospital infrastructure projects, we will build capacity throughout the system, including in our hospitals and other community-based facilities.

Speaker, we made a commitment to the people to end hallway health care, and we are well on our way in that plan.

Veterans

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: To the Premier: Ontario’s Soldiers’ Aid Commission provides grants to veterans facing emergencies, such as rent payments. However, most of the money under this program is never spent. This is because Ontario refuses to extend the program to veterans who served after the Korean War.

Will the Premier stop treating most of today’s veterans as second class and extend this program to all who have served?

Hon. Doug Ford: Government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: At the outset, let me just thank the honourable member not only fo