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

February 24, 2022

42nd Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2022-Feb-24 vol. A (PDF)

L035A - Thu 24 Feb 2022 / Jeu 24 fév 2022

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 24 February 2022 Jeudi 24 février 2022

Orders of the Day

Fewer Fees, Better Services Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 pour de meilleurs services et moins de frais

Members’ Statements

Government’s record

Black History Month

Northern health services

Flooding in Brampton

Fire in Sandy Lake First Nation

Protest in Ottawa

Peterborough Police Service facility dog

Social assistance

Sauble Family Health Team

Visitors

Invasion of Ukraine

COVID-19 deaths

Question Period

Manufacturing jobs

Manufacturing jobs

Manufacturing jobs

Infrastructure funding

Long-term care

Member’s conduct

Women in science and technology

Pharmaceutical industry

Assistance to businesses

Service fees

Anti-Semitism

COVID-19 immunization

Health care funding

Child care

Business of the House

Deferred Votes

Making Northern Ontario Highways Safer Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 visant à accroître la sécurité des voies publiques dans le nord de l’Ontario

Introduction of Bills

Black Mental Health Day Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 sur la Journée de la santé mentale des Noirs

Petitions

School closures

Employment standards

Optometry services

Employment standards

Transportation infrastructure

Optometry services

COVID-19 response

Employment standards

Orders of the Day

Fewer Fees, Better Services Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 pour de meilleurs services et moins de frais

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers / Prières.

Orders of the Day

Fewer Fees, Better Services Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 pour de meilleurs services et moins de frais

Resuming the debate adjourned on February 23, 2022, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 84,

An Act to enact two Acts and amend various other Acts / Projet de loi 84, Loi visant à édicter deux lois et à modifier diverses autres lois.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I believe that when we last debated this bill, the member for Mississauga–Lakeshore had the floor.

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: Thank you, Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to finish my speech on Bill 84, the Fewer Fees, Better Services Act. Today I’ll be speaking on the part on the centre of realty excellence. The province owns many surplus asset properties in Ontario that are no longer required to deliver our government’s programs and services. Selling surplus properties reduces ongoing operating costs, minimizes risk, and most importantly, it puts the properties back into productive use for urgently needed housing or long-term care, or for economic development.

Locally in Mississauga–Lakeshore, we’re going through this process now with our former OPP building after the detachment moved from Port Credit to the associate minister’s constituency in Streetsville.

Unfortunately, there are often complex policy, operational and governance issues to overcome before surplus properties can be sold. As a result, taxpayers sometimes don’t get the best possible value from our properties. Speaker, if passed,

schedule 11 would help us to address this issue. A new centre of realty excellence would allow the government to unlock greater value, bring in greater revenue and lower costs from the pool of about 20,000 public real estate assets in Ontario, maximizing value for taxpayers. The centre would have an online portal with surplus property information for both the Ontario public sector and the broader public service that can be used by both government and the public to identify new options, opportunities and partnerships and ultimately to help us make better decisions about the best way to use Ontario surplus properties.

Speaker, I’d also like to take a moment to address

schedule 2. As we’re reopening the province and recovering from COVID-19, the US government is implementing buy-American policies that target many key Ontario industries, including automotive manufacturing, but also agriculture, lumber and many more. Having worked at Ford Motor Co. for over 31 years, it’s very troubling to me that the US Congress is considering measures that would impact auto agreements that began with the Auto Pact in 1965. These agreements have brought high-skilled, well-paying jobs to workers and communities across Ontario and North America for more than half a century.

Vehicles and auto parts manufacturing directly supports almost 100,000 Ontario jobs, plus hundreds of thousands more spinoff jobs in communities across the province. Buy-American policies threatens these jobs. They threaten our recovery and the progress we’re making.

I want to thank the Premier for appointing the Council on U.S. Trade and Industry Competitiveness, led by Jerry Dias, president of Unifor. It’s working to protect our economy and employ millions of workers on both sides of the border by promoting a buy-North American policy. As a former Unifor member, I’m glad that Mr. Dias and 10 other members of the council are working together with our government in this critical time.

Schedule 2 will help level the playing field for small and medium-sized Ontario businesses in our public procurements so that local Ontario companies can sell more goods and services locally, and centres more jobs in these communities so that we can get our economy back on track. As I’ve said before here, small and medium-sized businesses are the backbone of our economy and our province. They account for 98% of our businesses and they employ close to 2.4 million people in Ontario. There can be no recovery without them.

Finally, Speaker, I have a few comments on

schedule 7. As a member of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts and as the parliamentary assistant to the President of the Treasury Board for internal audits, I support our efforts to obtain documents for the Auditor General to conduct a value-for-money audit to get to the bottom of the crisis at Laurentian University.

My friend from Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill spoke about the resistance of the university, which was frustrating to all members. I won’t repeat what he said, but I want to speak about how the changes in

schedule 7 of Bill 84 are only the first steps in a series of more comprehensive changes that we’re going to need to make. However, at this time, I believe that reducing the size of the board of governors from 25 to 16 will help support better decision-making at the university so that they can get through the current creditor protection process and once again focus on the success of the students. I want to thank the associate minister for including this measure in Bill 84.

Speaker, it is appropriate that we’re debating this bill this week for Red Tape Awareness Week. As the associate minister said, this is the government’s eighth red tape reduction bill. It builds on the success of many previous bills that I’ve also had the privilege to speak on. These are the high-impact bills that will make Ontario more competitive and help support our economic recovery after the pandemic. In total, this government has taken over 400 actions to reduce the burden of red tape.

We are providing clear and effective rules that will promote public health and safeguard the environment without sacrificing growth, innovation and opportunities. This has resulted in almost $400 million in net annual savings to businesses across Ontario.

Speaker, again, to conclude, I’d like to thank the associate minister and her team for all their hard work on Bill 84, as well as my OLIP intern Iqra for all her hard work in researching this information for me.

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

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Speaker, through you to the member opposite: The government has had time, and time again, to confirm they were going to be different than the last Liberal government. But legislation like this one moves the budget to just days in front of an election. We’ve already seen the priorities: licence fees over child care and health care spending. You promised to be different and not move the budget days. Why is it okay now to play politics here?

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I want to thank the member for that question. As you know, the Liberals missed their budget targets six out of the eight times when they were in power.

We are going to have our budget released at the end of April, and we are working very hard to get that done. As well, as you know, we have gone through a pandemic for the last two years, so things are much more difficult than in a usual regular year. Thank you very much for that question.

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

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: As we’ve heard, this bill will introduce the At Your Service Act and enable the government to set business service standards, requiring ministries and other provincial bodies to follow those standards. This is a terrific step in the right direction for people and businesses across the province, but it’s not the final step. Can the member please elaborate on what else this government is planning to do to make it easier for businesses to interact with the government?

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I want to thank the member for that question. In the 2021 budget, which I’d like to remind the House both the Liberals and the NDP voted against, we committed to providing a single window of business, an online portal that would make it easier for businesses to access the information and services they need to get up and running, and create jobs and growth. The digital experience would make it easier for businesses to access the information and services they need. This would include a single web portal that could easily see where in the approval process applications are.

Work is being created out of the Ministry of Digital Government from the member from Mississauga East–Cooksville. The portal alone, with the business service standards implemented by the Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade, will help this move forward much quicker.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

Mr. Michael Mantha: Under this government’s

schedule 1, the At Your Service Act—it was light on details during the briefing. However, they’re saying that they were going to provide a business service standard. In it, the ministry, governments who can’t comply with these standards are going to be named and shamed.

I want to give you an example. The Northeast Superior Mayors Group, on February 5, 2018, sent a letter to the previous government in regard to DriveTests. On March 6, I sent a letter to the previous government on DriveTests. On March 12, I sent a letter to the previous government. On October 15, 2018, I sent a letter to this government in regard to the problems. I sent another letter on June 5, October 1, the dates go on.

Can I ask this government: Who are you going to shame? The entity, the business standards? Or are you going to shame your own government?

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I want to thank the member for that question. I’m not privy to that information that you’ve just spoken about, but I know that we are working very hard to improve the system going forward, and I know with our new Associate Minister of Small Business and Red Tape Reduction, we are working very closely to improve that system moving forward.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: My question is going to be about digital dealer. Many of my constituents in my riding of Ottawa West–Nepean enjoy the convenience of interacting with the government online instead of in person. I have also heard similar sentiments among businesses across my riding and the province.

One area that we can look to further bring into our digital jurisdiction is the automotive sector—which I know is something the member knows a little bit about—through car dealerships. With the digital dealer initiative being brought forward, I wonder if the member can express his opinions on its usefulness.

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I want to thank the member for that question. As you are aware, I worked in the automotive industry for over 31 years, and I’ve spoken to many dealerships through the province of Ontario that I deal with. They think that this is the thing that they’ve been looking for for so many years. It will make it much quicker for them to get plates on vehicles and get the vehicle out so they can sell more vehicles and stimulate the economy even more.

I think this is a great idea, and I think it’s overdue that we do this in the province of Ontario. Other jurisdictions around the world are doing that as well right now, so I think this is a great initiative, and I think that we should continue bringing more digital technology in every aspect of automotive and anything in the province of Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: Good morning, everyone, and thank you to the member from Mississauga–Lakeshore for his commentary this morning. I, too, am frustrated and interested in the area of service providing because this government—and over the last almost four years, service to our constituents in northern Ontario has been just an abomination, specifically the Northern Health Travel Grant. People have had no access to appeal. People are waiting very long times to get reimbursed for money out of their pockets that they have to pay in order to access the health care that everyone is entitled to under the Canada Health Act. We are entitled to equitable health care.

So when we talk about service standards and naming and shaming, what is that going to do about the services that aren’t being provided to the people of northern Ontario?

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I thank the member across for that question. Moving forward with digital technology, it’s going to be much easier to access these programs and find savings as well. This is the step that we’re moving forward with our new Associate Minister of Digital Government. This is what Ontario needs that we haven’t had for years. I think this is going to be a great asset for our province to get things done much quicker and more effectively for everyone.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: I want to thank my colleague for his very informative speech this morning, and I just had a few questions. I was wondering if maybe the member could expand a little bit on what he’s talking about.

Through you, Madam Speaker, there are many items in this bill that are designed to make life easier for people and businesses in Ontario. Our government has made a promise to improve the experience for people in businesses, especially through digital interactions with the government. So could the member please point to any pieces in this proposed legislation that would help alleviate some of that frustration, especially for businesses in this province?

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I want to thank my colleague for that question. As we know, we’re moving into a digital world and doing this digitally will make it much more effective for our business owners. Right now, I look at Mississauga–Lakeshore, where I have tons of restaurants down on the Lakeshore corridor, and they’re always having troubles calling and trying to get through, but doing it digitally will be much more effective for them in getting the funding they need and the access to our government much quicker.

I think this is a great initiative, and moving forward it will make it more efficient for the small business owners across the province of Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): We have time for a quick back-and-forth.

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: Further on what we’re doing, we hear that we’re making digital services available for folks, but I don’t know if any of you have had the experience of trying to apply for any of the government services that are already on digital formats in Ontario, and I can tell you, it is not an easy process. Often, people have to come into our office. We also have many people who don’t have access to those and have to go to a library or come to our office to access those services. What is the member going to do about that, or what is your government going to do about that?

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I thank the member for that question. Like I said, digital is the way of the future, and we are moving in that direction. That’s why we are expanding broadband to northern ridings as well, as our government has said. This is going to be where we’re moving, and that’s where it will be more effective for everyone. This is less travel time as well, so it will reduce the carbon footprint in the province too.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate?

Mr. Jamie West: Before I begin my debate, I just want to say good morning to Jackson Twain. Jackson is a young man from Sudbury—just a small, little guy—who is going through some cancer treatment here in Toronto and has been living with his family at Ronald McDonald House. Jackson, I just want to let you know that I’m thinking about you this morning as you head off to your treatment.

Today, we are debating Bill 84, the Fewer Fees, Better Services Act. It’s another omnibus bill. It’s another in a series of anti-red tape—anti-red tape, I guess, works well when they poll with voters, so every bill is anti-red tape.

Anyway, before I get into it, Speaker, I just want to set the table. I have talked countless times about the importance of listening to others, about consultation. My background is in health and safety. Health and safety is based on the internal responsibility system, and it’s actually written into law that all the parties—the government, the workers, the employers—have to work together, have to listen to each other.

It’s a great system, and I’ve shared stories of us thinking in our joint health and safety committee room that we have the best ideas, and then going out there and making a mistake of things, with the best of intentions—spending a lot of money, wasting a lot of money, and the results not being what people wanted. I share these stories because I’m hopeful that at some point the Conservative government will think, “Maybe we should work with other people. Maybe we should listen to everybody. Maybe we should check into stuff.” It’s good advice, but four years later, it’s in one ear and out the other ear. This bill is a good example of this.

On Monday we didn’t sit; it was Family Day. This bill was tabled on Tuesday at 2 o’clock. There was a briefing at 4 o’clock, two hours after it was tabled. Most of the people who would be at the briefing were on House duty. Because of COVID, we’re in cohorts, so we have more House duty than we normally would. Our availability becomes reduced and we want to debate what’s going on. So the opportunity to attend the briefing wasn’t there. Then debate started yesterday, so tabling, briefing, debate, back to back. And I know the Conservatives are going to say, “Well, this is efficient,” and all the buzz words, but no, this is ineffective.

Tuesday night, after House duty—6:30, quarter to 7—I go to my office and I search for the bill. I search the legislative web page and it’s not up yet. I can’t find it. I search the Internet to find it and there are a lot of press releases. There’s a lot of fluff. There are a lot of feel-good statements in it, but the bill is not there either. But do you know what I found, Speaker? I don’t think I can hold it up. It’s a government document, but I don’t know if it could be considered a prop. I found a 15-page flyer. This is what I started preparing for debate with: a flyer.

Not the bill, not the briefing notes—no time to prepare for that—a flyer they had online. It’s 15 pages, but that’s generous, Speaker, because most of this is photos. It’s an election ad, let’s be honest.

There’s a nice message from the minister. There’s a photo of a young couple, I suppose; small business owners, I guess; and a nice photo of Queen’s Park in the springtime. You’ve got a table of contents, another photo of a whole bunch of people who have all got their hands together, working with teamwork. You go through this thing, a couple of bullet points, and then you get to page 10 and you find that the last five pages are just, “Here’s what we did in the past.” Nothing to do with this bill. “Here’s what we did in previous bills.” It is basically an election ad.

I have to say, though, there’s a lovely photo of the Big Nickel and the Superstack, which is nice. I’m nostalgic for the Superstack because my office was just below that when I worked at the smelter, so I do appreciate that, but that was not helpful.

On page 9 they talk about Laurentian University. When I saw that, I thought, “Oh, this is going to be good,” because Laurentian University is a big deal in my city. It’s really helpful in my city. I read it, and I’ll just read it out to you. I don’t know if it’s a prop so I don’t want to raise it. It says, “Modernizing the Laurentian University of Sudbury Act to reflect positive change as it emerges from the CCAA (creditors) process and turns its focus to the success of its students.” Well, what does that mean?

I got a copy of this bill at about a quarter to 9, 8:30. I find the Laurentian part of it is

schedule 7 of the bill. I’m going to go to

schedule 7 in the debate as I move forward.

I know the pamphlet is not the bill. I know there’s a process in place. I know maybe I could have searched somewhere else. But the deadline is pretty tight, when just before the end of the day they go, “Surprise, you’re debating this tomorrow.” And I joked before about how the government loves to surprise us, how they don’t often tell us what we’re going to debate the next day. I like to joke that the way the Conservative government handles House business sometimes feels like the most boring improv show, where we’ve got to flip through our notes. They give us a topic, and we’ve got to debate it.

That might be fun for them, but that is a bad way to provide legislation. That is a bad way to get the best results.

I want to remind all of my colleagues that our purpose here is actually to work together. There is the owl behind me, as a reminder for you to make wise decisions as the government. You’re looking at the owl. I’m looking across at the eagle. We’re supposed to look for ways to improve it. When you don’t share information with us, it is tough to improve it. I know there is this father-knows-best attitude, but you get it wrong a lot. A lot of the bills that we have to debate are you fixing stuff you got wrong in previous bills. Let us help you help yourselves.

I’m using that as an example of how difficult it is to get information from the Conservative government, Speaker—how frustrating it can be here to provide good legislation for the people of Ontario. There are people who think that when you’re in opposition, it’s your job to say no when they say yes, but it’s not; it’s to improve legislation. It’s to make legislation better, and we’re committed on this side to making legislation better. We’re hopeful that you will listen, and we’re hopeful that you will share your information ahead of time so we can really get some good things done.

I’m going to jump over to

schedule 7: The Laurentian University of Sudbury Act changes. It’s going to make some amendments to The Laurentian University of Sudbury Act, 1960. It amends the size of the board of governors to 16 members, so 10 of the members will be elected from the board, five members will be appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council and one member will default to whoever the president of the university is—at this time, it’s Robert Haché, but the president’s name changes. I think that’s a good system. I think that makes sense.

The problem, though—and I’ll go back to consulting with others—I talked about working with others, consulting. I talked about how, when you don’t do that, you make errors. For four years, I have told you, when you don’t do that you make errors, and there are countless examples of where you didn’t do that and you made errors—not you, Speaker, the Conservatives. I’m sorry—through you, Speaker.

On Tuesday, I finished House duty, I tracked down the bill and then I spent a few hours in the middle of the night talking to LUFA and LUSU. LUFA is the Laurentian University Faculty Association. They represent the profs. LUSU is the Laurentian University Staff Union. They represent the staff workers, the administrative people who take care of the buildings, that sort of thing. So I call Fabrice from LUFA. I call Tom from LUSU. They had no idea—actually, no, Tom did, because Tom saw a tweet saying there was going to be something about Laurentian University, but he didn’t know what it was.

I want to remind everybody about the CCAA process. I’m laying this on the Conservative government’s lap, because this happened under your watch: Over 100 people lost really good-paying jobs. This faculty association and this union represent those workers whose lives are in crisis. You can picture your best-case scenario, but the one I always picture was a woman going into mat leave who lost all of her benefits and was the breadwinner from her house. I can picture the family that was married, who both lost their jobs.

I know the economic devastation that happened under this previous minister’s watch—I notice he’s looking at his phone, because he doesn’t want to make eye contact, and that’s cool.

The workers who remain, the workers who weren’t hired are stretched to their limits. They are feeling the whole weight of this. In January, it was the one-year anniversary of CCAA. That’s one year since the Conservative government dropped the ball. It’s one year since the former minister went into hiding. I remember every question period it was the parliamentary assistant who was answering. It was one year since those programs were decimated. The midwifery program is gone—300 applicants every year, fully funded by the federal government; for some reason, that’s the program they cut.

Environmental science—gone, in the city where they measure pollution in relation to Sudbury, and how Sudbury has re-greened after a century of pollution. They got rid of environmental science. We turned a city that was like a moonscape into a green city, and they got rid of environmental science. And what was the Conservative government doing? Twiddling their thumbs. It’s not important to them.

It’s one year since groups of people were fired en masse in a Zoom call. Imagine how callous that is. Not just you lose your job like that, while the Conservative government stands to the side, but you’re on a Zoom call with your colleagues, and you go in and they go, “Bye.” As you can imagine, trust is a little bit strained. It is tough to do your job when you’re in that university, at all levels. I’m talking about the president, I’m talking about the CCAA group, I’m talking about the faculty, the staff, the students—everybody.

And I will tell you that LUSU and LUFA—I wouldn’t blame them if they had an axe to grind—are committed to the success of that university. I know that the NDP is committed to the success of that university. Both the member for Nickel Belt and I are graduates of Laurentian University. We know how important it is in the north. We’re committed to the success of Laurentian University. I believe some of my colleagues over there—I know they are committed, some of them. Some fail miserably, but I have to believe, because I’m optimistic, they’re committed to the success of Laurentian University.

But I want to remind you, Speaker, LUSU and LUFA didn’t even know this was happening. At a time when trust is really strained, the Conservative government thought, “We don’t have to talk to them.” I picture in my head Jenga, when almost all the pieces are going and you can’t believe the tower is still staying up, where even the people you’re playing with are hopeful that you can do it, where people are holding their breath as they move the pieces. That is how strained the trust is. That is how much trust people have.

They’re working together, they’re hopeful for a better tomorrow, and the government said, “We don’t need to consult. We know best, again.” They made a flyer and they shared it with the media. They wrote a bill, brought it forward, rushed it in for debate. They didn’t consult with a single person who represents those workers. And because it was last minute, I still don’t know if they consulted with anybody.

So I did consult, and this is what I learned and this is what I can share, because it’s not confidential. Like I said earlier, the relationship at Laurentian is fragile, but the university, the faculty and the staff are committed to making it work. They have a term sheet, and the term sheet spells out, “What do we need to do to emerge from CCAA together?” A good example is that one of the term’s agreements they have is that whenever they go to the province, they’re going to go jointly. When the faculty association and the staff union find out this came through, it makes them nervous that maybe the university didn’t go jointly.

Another example is that one of the terms—and this is related to this part of the bill—they agreed that the board of governors in the future is going to include an elected student member, an elected faculty member, elected staff members—not appointed; they would be elected by the people they represent. They would be voting members. This is important that they’re voting members, because that means they can go into in camera discussions so they won’t be surprised.

These people suffered the largest amount of loss from what happened at Laurentian University. They didn’t see it coming. They weren’t aware. They deserve that level of transparency. The university has agreed to it. And the Conservative government came out like a bull in a china shop and knocked over the Jenga set. They need to rebuild that trust. They don’t need a surprise from the Conservative government, especially a surprise that doesn’t match. It’s great to have a happy surprise, but not when you’re messing things up.

What you’re proposing doesn’t include elected student members, elected faculty members, elected staff members. It doesn’t include in camera access. It just says, “We’re changing the size of the board,” and I don’t understand why you would do this. I still don’t understand why you don’t consult on almost every bill. We have bills that have “worker” in the title, and you don’t consult with workers at all. It blows my mind. You don’t share information. You don’t consult. Speaker, the Conservatives don’t share. They don’t consult. They are always convinced they are right, and they are almost always wrong. It’s so frustrating, because I want it to be successful; I want to help them be successful.

I called Tom Fenske from LUSU, and he was hopeful. He said that it’s probably not a big deal to shrink the size of the board of governors. I talked to Fabrice Colin. He said that as long as they can adapt the bilingual, tri-cultural mandate to accommodate enough people, it makes sense.

There is some good in this. There’s a way to develop how to replace board members. Tom said that maybe it’s one change; that maybe there are more changes coming in the future. He said, “But why wouldn’t they make all of them at once? Why would they do this? Why would they not tell me? Why would they just nudge this?” He said, “Make them all at once.” An example he told me is

section 15 of the Laurentian University act. It prohibits what was agreed on in the term sheet, that these faculty members could join and be voting members and have access to in camera. Tom said, “Why don’t they take care of that? Because that would be helpful.” That would help the university, that would help the term sheet, that would help the faculty association, that would help the staff union. Tom said, “Look, don’t do this part and not the other part. Or do it with changes to

section 15.” Also, maybe pick up the phone and call Tom and call Fabrice so they know what’s going on.

I’m going to move on—and I don’t have a ton of time—because I have a ton of notes, which is too bad. I want to talk about

schedule 6. This is where they’re going to eliminate vehicle licence sticker fees. Speaker, yesterday when you were debating you mentioned how two of the biggest failures the Conservative Party has had in the last four years was changing licence plates to licence plates that no one could see, and stickers that kept falling off. Someone in their press group said, “You know what’s a good idea? Let’s remind everyone in Ontario about our two biggest failures. Let’s talk about licence plates, let’s talk about stickers so people will remember what kind of boondoggle that was.”

It was discussed a lot of times yesterday. I only have two minutes so I’m going to have to be brief on this: It’s going to cost about $1 billion. It’s going to cost about $1 million to process everything. I know the Conservatives are going to say, “Everyone’s going to get $120 in their pocket”—everyone who has a car, so if you take public transit you’re out. In northern Ontario, you’re only getting $60, but it’s not like they care about northern Ontario anyway.

I talked to a Conservative. He said, “I don’t know what’s going on with this party. I believe in fiscal responsibility. I believe in small government. I don’t know what this is.” They invent ministries so that their members can get raises. They have these kind of back-page fancy ideas of $120 in your pocket. I was thinking about that. Are people going to take their money, $120? Sure, yes; $60 in the north. But you know what’s a bigger bang for the buck? It would be child care.

I was thinking about this: $120 a year is $10 a month. So for someone who is paying $1,000, literally a mortgage payment, a month, Speaker, they will get $10 towards that. They’ll get 1% of their child care towards that, and they’ll go, “Ooh, thank you.” Instead of getting $10-a-day daycare, which in Ontario—the Conservative government is the very last to sign on. They haven’t said they’re going to sign on, haven’t announced; maybe it’s going to be a pre-election issue. But instead of that, what they’re saying is, “Here’s $10 a month for you guys, instead of something that will really make a difference in your life.”

I think I’m out of time, Speaker. I have 10 seconds. Thank you, Speaker.

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

M me France Gélinas: The member knows that my grandson is graduating from college and needs to do his placement. To do his placement he needs to drive. For the last two years, he has had his driving test rescheduled and rescheduled. It was supposed to happen in March; now it has been rescheduled. He lives in Sudbury. There is no spot in North Bay, Sturgeon Falls, Sudbury or Espanola. He is booked in Sault Ste. Marie, which is, there and back, a seven-hour drive, for somebody who doesn’t drive, because he needs his driver’s licence. Do you think that we need to wait for the At Your Service Act to fix this, or could we have DriveTests in northern Ontario where people live?

Mr. Jamie West: It’s a really good question. I brought this up in question period last year, as well as the member from Algoma–Manitoulin, about the backlog in northern Ontario and the lack of access to DriveTests. It was an issue across the province because of COVID-19, and the Minister of Transportation came forward with additional DriveTest centres across southern Ontario and then again, about a month later, with more additional DriveTest centres across southern Ontario.

I don’t want to discount southern Ontario, especially rural areas, but in northern Ontario we don’t have public access to transportation. Sudbury is fortunate, a couple of places are fortunate, but most places don’t. And so you have to drive to get to work. You have to drive to get to your family. You have to drive to get around. Not being able to access your driving test is very damaging in the north. That is something you could address that would help people, that we’ve been calling on this government for months to address, and they haven’t done a thing.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

Mr. Aris Babikian: As the Associate Minister of Small Business and Red Tape Reduction mentioned in her lead-off, the Fewer Fees, Better Services Act is this government’s eighth red tape reduction bill. It builds on the previous legislation we introduced to support people and businesses across the province.

The measures included in these bills have allowed us to reduce needless regulatory compliance requirements by 6.5% since June 2018. We are also near our goal of achieving $373 million in net annual compliance cost savings for businesses, not-for-profits, municipalities, universities, colleges, school boards and hospitals.

Does my opposite colleague support efforts to make things easier for the people and the businesses in our province?

Mr. Jamie West: You talked about red tape and fiscal responsibility. I want to read a quote from the Ontario Parent Action Network. It says: The Premier—it uses his name—“spent just 1.2% of the allocated budget for capital repairs in crumbling Ontario schools this year.” He left “$1b unspent.” He’s using it to rebate licence sticker fees.

When they talk about saving money, Speaker, they’re talking about money that isn’t invested into our schools, into our hospitals, into our roads. I had a fatality south of Sudbury on Highway 69. For four years, I’ve been begging the Minister of Transportation to fix what the former Minister of Transportation, the now leader of the Liberal Party, Steven Del Duca, couldn’t do, and tender the last 68 kilometres of Highway 69.

The party opposite, the Conservatives, wants to brag about the money they’re saving. That money they’re saving is costing people’s lives. It is costing the infrastructure of our communities and our schools.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: Thank you to my colleague from Sudbury for his remarks, which I always enjoy. I was touched by your discussion about Laurentian University and how important that is to our northern mosaic. We have Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, and it’s such an important innovator. It wins awards for mining support, forestry support. Laurentian is, like you said—the midwife program is so vital.

I’d really like to ask you, through the Speaker, why northern universities are so important.

Mr. Jamie West: Thank you to my colleague. Lakehead is a fantastic university. I was actually accepted to Lakehead when I went to Laurentian University, and I had to make the decision. Frankly, we were just too poor to leave home, which is the reality for a lot of people in northern Ontario. The majority of students who go to university in northern Ontario are the first in their family. I was the first in my family to go to post-secondary school. That made a step change in my life. I truly believe I would not be an MPP if it wasn’t for that access to post-secondary education.

Studies show, Speaker, that even attending for one year, even if you don’t graduate, will benefit you later on in life financially and lead to a better class of life.

The access to education is essential in the north because, for example, from my riding to this member’s riding is about a 16-hour drive. That’s a long way from your support system and your family. If you add southern Ontario, you’re looking at at least four hours. You need access to services where you live, and we love living in the north, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: Thank you to the member from Sudbury for those comments. Affordability is a key issue, not only in my Markham–Thornhill riding—affordability, the rising price crisis, the housing price crisis and the cost of living.

Our government’s recent announcement through this bill: Highways 412 and 418 in Durham region—Madam Speaker, you know that; you are from part of the region—and also to remove the sticker price. It’s a key issue. In Markham, the average house has three cars, three automobiles: $120 on their family budget for three vehicles is close to 400 bucks. This would be a key issue for the average family.

Does the member opposite think adding costs to the life of everyday Ontarians is the right thing to do, or are you going to support this bill removing these tolls and stickers?

Mr. Jamie West: I want to thank the member from Oshawa, who’s the Speaker currently, for all the work that you did in removing the tolls in the Oshawa-Durham region, tabling the bill four years ago and then tabling it again. I’m glad they took your advice and moved it forward. I think that’s an excellent part of this bill.

The problem with omnibus bills—and I think the member from Humber River–Black Creek described it best. He said what they do is, they have some good ideas, and then they take a Snickers bar and they throw it into an in-bin, a garbage bin, and let it swirl around with all the juices and stuff from the garbage, and they pull it out and say, “Don’t you like chocolate?”

So, will you support this omnibus bill with a million bad ideas and one good idea? I don’t know. That’s a tough decision. Can we pull the bad ideas out? Then, for sure. But do I want the chocolate bar that’s been floating in the garbage? No, and neither do the people of Ontario, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

M me France Gélinas: Of course I was very interested in

schedule 7 that talks about Laurentian University. Since they declared insolvency, since they chose to use the CCAA process for their insolvency, it has created so, so much hardship in my community. When you look at what’s happening now, 45% less enrolment in my university than before this all started.

I represent the people of Nickel Belt. Nickel Belt is built all around Sudbury. There are many young people right now who are sitting at home. They cannot afford to go to university in Toronto or Ottawa. The only thing they could afford was to go to university in Sudbury, but now their program doesn’t exist anymore. Do you think that

schedule 7 is going to solve this?

Mr. Jamie West:

Schedule 7 isn’t going to resolve this. I’m very hopeful, with the tenacity of LUSU and LUFA, that they’re going to ensure that Laurentian University’s going to be successful. This, as I described earlier, is like a bull in a china shop, the Jenga system of trust where it’s very fragile. And they’re working—I’m including the university as well; I’m including that team working on CCAA—all working to ensure Laurentian is successful and supported, of course, by the NDP at every opportunity.

The member from Nickel Belt is always passionate speaking about Laurentian University, just as I am. When you talk about these students whose programs were eliminated, my son Thomas is one of those students. He fell in love with philosophy, absolutely fell in love with it. He took it as an elective course, fell in love with it, and that became his major. That program was eliminated. When the government talks about people not being affected, they also say that his program wasn’t affected, because he can go into—

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

Mr. John Fraser: As I was preparing for debate this morning, I was having a bit of a hard time, because there’s a lot of things that are going on in the world, have gone on in the world and are going on in this country right now that make it really hard to clearly speak about this bill this morning. It was hard to focus on it, but I’ll do my best. First off, to the people of Ukraine: We’re with you. Our hearts are with you, our prayers are with you.

Anyway, to the bill: We’re speaking on

an act to enact two acts and amend various other acts—that’s a lot of acting—and I think that’s what is at the heart of this bill. It’s called red tape reduction, but I’m not sure who it’s removing the red tape for. It’s removing the red tape for the finance minister and the Premier so they don’t actually have to follow the law that they created three years ago that they’ve only followed once. That’s some red tape to remove. All aside from the penalties and the fines, why did you make the law in the first place, if you weren’t going to respect it? That’s the red tape that sticks out to me the most.

What’s the red tape that people want removed from their lives? They want the red tape that prevents them from getting to a family physician, or getting their child the help that they need in schools, or the mental health help that their child needs. That’s the red tape people want removed.

A really important piece of red tape—that you guys have created, nobody else—is removing the red tape around getting $10-a-day child care here in Ontario. You guys wrapped that in red tape. You’re still wrapping it. Why is it taking so long? You’re the last province, the last government. Six months for people—it may not matter to you, but it’s six months less that they have an opportunity to get affordable child care. Just because the Premier wants convenient timing for announcing it—if that’s the case; maybe he’s not even going to do it, which will be even worse—it is not a good reason to make people wait.

You wrapped that in red tape. Try unravelling some of the red tape around that, maybe this week.

Removing tolls: I’m all for that. That’s great. We’ve got to pay for it somehow. But if I lived in Brampton or somewhere west I might be thinking, “What about that highway that you sold that I have to rent every day when I put my car on it?” The tolls aren’t getting reduced there. And why did you give those people back $1 billion? Was there too much red tape in trying to figure out how you could collect it from them? That’s red tape you should have removed. I think you put that red tape on yourself.

Now, stickers: We had the gas pump stickers—I know the member from Sudbury mentioned it; we don’t need to go back there. And we’re still talking about licence plates. Look, it’s hard on families right now. They need every penny. But you’re not helping every family, not at all. People who drive cars, yes. You’re not helping every family. I don’t know if I’d be that proud of it. What about the families that have to take transit to two jobs because they don’t drive, because they work in a long-term-care home, because they don’t have a pension, because their wages aren’t great? Not that helpful, is it? Not at all. So I don’t think it would be something I’d be crowing about.

The licence plate sticker removal cost follows the Premier’s commitment for a 20% income tax reduction rate at the time of the last election. Did that happen? No.

Gas prices: “We’re going to cut your gas prices.” Did that happen? Nope.

Hydro rates: “They’re going to go down. We’re going to bring them down.” Did they go down? No, they went up 4%.

Buck-a-beer: It went flat after about six months.

I really am not sure whether the Premier of Ontario is running to be his class president or the Premier of Ontario. What Ontario needs is a Premier who gets up every morning and says, “How do I make Ontarians healthier? How do I make Ontarians smarter? How do I make Ontarians safer?” Not a Premier who wakes up and says, “How do I make myself more popular today? How do I help my friends?”

We need a Premier who wakes up and says, “The first thing I want to do every day is to help Ontarians, not myself. My job is to do whatever I can to make people’s lives better—not my life, not my opportunities in an election.” That’s what’s happening here. That’s the acting that’s going on in this act to amend many acts and create other acts. I think you’ve got five acts in that bill. It is quite appropriate.

Why are we delaying the budget? Does anybody know? Any answers? I’m not hearing any, but we’ll wait for the questions, Speaker. Why are we delaying the budget? Because it doesn’t fit into the Premier’s election plan. This nonsense about, “Well, we’ve got to watch the economic”—no. I could buy that in 2019, I could buy that in 2020, or in 2021, maybe; not now. It just doesn’t ring true.

I’m going to be happy to take questions afterwards—I’m sure I’ll get some interesting ones—but I just want to recap. What Ontarians need is for this government to remove the red tape around $10-a-day child care that they put in place. They need the red tape removed from getting access to a primary care physician. They need the red tape removed from getting their child the kind of help that they need in school, whether it’s with their education or mental health. That’s the red tape that Ontarians want us to remove. They don’t want us to tinker around the edges.

They don’t want gadgets and baubles that don’t come into place, like gas prices, like hydro prices, like buck-a-beer, like the 20% income tax cut. They didn’t happen, but they sounded really good at the time, didn’t they? That’s what this bill is about—more of the same. You’re not taking red tape away from the people who matter most.

I want to say something here that I haven’t had a chance to say, and it’s not partisan in any way, but I want to say it on behalf of the people I represent. The citizens of Ottawa, especially the ones downtown, had an awful three weeks. They didn’t feel safe in their own neighbourhoods. I had never felt so let down by a leader and a government as I had over the last three weeks. The approach of the government was to say, “We want it to be somebody else’s problem.” And it was somebody else’s problem.

Thousands and thousands of people in downtown Ottawa had their lives turned upside down, were terrorized, and the Premier stood by and watched for two weeks. I have never felt so let down, so abandoned, so angry as I did over the last two weeks. I don’t get angry often, and I’m not angry right now, but to say that I’m disappointed and discouraged doesn’t go far enough.

I’m happy to take people’s questions.

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

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: Thanks to the member opposite for his presentation.

Under the Del Duca-Wynne Liberals, the annual costs for businesses to comply with regulations soared to $33,000 per business, the highest in Canada. It’s no wonder that businesses were packing up and leaving before this government stepped in.

Would the member opposite prefer to keep the Del Duca-Wynne Liberal legacy going, or will he vote in support of this legislation, to make it easier for businesses to operate in the province of Ontario?

Mr. John Fraser: I thank the member for the question.

Yes, I want to keep a legacy going, of great schools, of world-class health care, of investing in the things that people need. That’s why we collect the monies we do. That’s why we collect taxes. That’s why you and I pay taxes, so that we can bring the things to all of us that all of us need. That’s public education, publicly funded health care. Yes, I’m proud of that legacy. There’s a lot more work to be done in there, but I thank you for the question.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

M me France Gélinas: The MPP talked a bit about the Fiscal Sustainability, Transparency and Accountability Act, 2019. That’s a mouthful, let me tell you. The act amends it to provide that the deadline for the release of the budget for 2022-23 will be April 30, 2022. How is this going to help the community care sector, and everybody who is waiting to see how much money they are going to get to provide the care that we need, to provide the education that we need? Who is going to be helped by moving this date to April 30, 2022?

Mr. John Fraser: I’d like to thank the member for the question. If you’re dependent on the government for your budget—you’re a school board or you’re a hospital or you’re a community health centre—you need to know what your budget is, just like we all do every month to know how much money we have to spend on groceries or tuition or rent. It doesn’t convenience any of those people; it makes their job harder, in a pandemic.

And the government—look, April 30, a few days away from a writ. If you’re not telegraphing what you’re doing, I don’t know what. The only person that I can see that it advantages is the government’s plan for the next election, and that’s not a good reason. It’s not a good enough reason. As I said earlier, what the government should be doing is removing the red tape from the $10-a-day child care. They should be doing that right now. People have waited too long.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

Mr. Michael Parsa: Look, I listened to my colleague, and I thank him. I always enjoy debating him here in the chamber. I get it; it’s tough. It’s tough being in opposition, but this particular member had an opportunity when they were in government, and some of the things that he mentioned here, he needs to address.

He talked about schools. This was a member who was a part of a government which closed 600 schools—600 schools across the province. It was their party that left this province in a position where manufacturing and jobs were fleeing this province. We turned that around, Madam Speaker. When you look at the electricity prices alone, when we were campaigning—he heard it as well—we changed all that. He referenced gas prices. We talked about this. When the carbon tax came in, we opposed it. We said it was going to make life more unaffordable for Ontarians.

My question to my honourable colleague is, as we listen more and more—and he’s also referenced support for small business as well; I congratulate the Minister of Small Business and Red Tape Reduction for bringing this single window for businesses—and that is, has he talked to his businesses to ask them how this will support the local businesses in Ottawa—

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

Response, the member from Ottawa South.

Mr. John Fraser: I’d like to thank the member for his question. I did catch on something you said. You talked about hydro rates, but you also talked about gas prices, and you also talked about a 20% income tax cut, and you also talked about the price of beer—buck-a-beer. You talked about it. That was great. Did it happen? No. You could do all the talking that you want.

When this government took over, for five years Ontario led the G7 in jobs and growth. For five years, we were in the top three for foreign direct investment here in North America. You never talk about how many schools we built: 800 schools. You never talk about that. I’m proud of the work that was done. Was there more work to be done? Yes. There will more work to be done for you. There’s a heck of a lot more work to be done on the other side of the aisle, and you know that.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

Mr. Michael Mantha: I want to put my question to the member in regard to

schedule 2, the Building Ontario Businesses Initiative Act. It says, under

schedule 2, provide preferential treatment for Ontario businesses when conducting procurement processes for government goods and services.

I want to know if he’d be surprised if I informed him that not one, but two mask-developing organizations, businesses, have happened in my riding of Algoma–Manitoulin, one in Wiikwemkoong First Nation, where the Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions—I’m glad he’s here—was actually there with me for the opening of this plant, recently creating 30 jobs. Recently, in Sagamok First Nation, another plant has been opened. Would you be surprised if I told you that not one mask from this government has been procured in regard to these two production plants?

Mr. John Fraser: No, I wouldn’t be, because I’m sure that somebody has got those deals locked up. I don’t know how, but they’ve got them locked up. We should be trying to promote our local manufacturers. Obviously, it’s not happening here. That’s what I hear from—was it the mask-making company in Waterloo? Same thing: They’re doing the right thing; they get stuck with an overload of masks.

Look, this stuff is not easy. It’s been hard. People invent medical devices in this country all the time in this province, and they can’t sell them to Ontario hospitals. That has been a long-standing problem. I’m not going to say it’s all your problem, but it’s a problem that needs to get solved, and it’s not getting solved by saying, “We’re going to do it.” It’s not going to be solved by talking about it. Talking just ain’t going to cut it.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Question?

Hon. Ross Romano: My question is obviously to the member opposite. I’m trying to get my timer going here.

When you reference the PPE issue—I’m just curious now. If you go back to the start of the pandemic, the Premier had to walk into a warehouse and see that we had a PPE stockpile of masks rotting, quite literally. We pledged, our Premier pledged, to never again be in this situation. Never again would Ontario be beholden to any other jurisdiction.

I can tell you, Madam Speaker, just before Christmas, we procured 79 million masks from the 3M factory in Brockville. We’re buying all of our PPE now—all of our masks are coming from Ontario-made businesses.

My question for the member opposite is, what do you have against local manufacturing here in Ontario?

Mr. John Fraser: I don’t have anything against it, and that was the point. The point was, you’re not actually looking at this member’s community, where they’re manufacturing masks. You’re not looking at Waterloo. And as far as masks go and not rotating them and not fulfilling that stock, that’s the problem with two governments. We take responsibility for that, but you guys have to too. You were there too. There’s no sense in looking back on that, but we have to do something to support our local businesses when they’re trying to help us. They’re trying to help our economy.

They’re trying to help our health care system. It’s hard, because sometimes they’re small, and sometimes maybe they can’t sell them, but you’ve got to figure out a way. You can’t just talk about it.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate?

Mr. Dave Smith: I’ve been in the chamber this morning for a little over an hour. When I first thought about what I was going to say on this speech, talking about this bill, I had some great thoughts, and I was going to approach it a certain way. I’ve sat here and I’ve listened to the opposition and to the independent member stand up and talk. You would think that somebody shot their dog, that this was absolutely the worst thing that has ever happened, that, my goodness, there’s nothing good at all about this.

This is another one of our red tape reduction bills; we’ve had a number of them since we’ve come in. Whenever you talk to anybody about red tape, they all say the same thing. Everybody says the same thing: “We’ve got to reduce red tape. Cut it down. Get rid of it.” Different people have different opinions on what red tape is. Different people have different opinions on how you should be doing things. Here’s my take on it: I believe that as government our job is to regulate to the point of integrity but not to the point of interference. We shouldn’t be getting in people’s way.

We shouldn’t be making things difficult. We should be finding ways to make it easier for people. We should be doing things that make life better for the people in the province of Ontario. That’s why we’re elected. We’re brought here to make good decisions, to take a look at what the situation is, to adjust, to move forward and to do things in a way that makes it easier and better for the people of Ontario.

I do have a little bit of a joke that has been said to me repeatedly since I got elected. I was not a politician prior to 2018. I didn’t have a whole lot of the political engine behind me in how things work and so on. But this is something that has been said to me a number of times, and I think a lot of times it’s true—Ronald Reagan touched on it; I’ll touch on his comment in a minute—“To err is human, but if you really want to foul up you bring the government in.”

Ronald Reagan once said that the most dangerous thing you can hear is, “I’m here from the government and I’m here to help.” Really, when you look at some of the things that have gone on, government has gotten in the way. And government continues to get in the way. We’re not moving at the speed of business. We can’t. Our entire process—everything that we do—is to drag things out to make sure that you’re getting it right and that you’re doing it in a way that is most appropriate.

Another thing I’ve heard is that we spend a lot of money to show that we’re not spending too much money. When you look at some of these things, a lot of these things really come to fruition. It’s really true.

Where I’m going with that is the renewal of licences. I don’t think that there is anyone who is going to say to you, “We should not be having a renewal process for licences. We should not be checking to make sure that you’ve got insurance on your car. We should not be checking to make sure that your vehicle is still registered to you. We shouldn’t know any of that information.” I don’t think that there is a single person in Ontario who is going to tell you that.

But what I will tell you is, everyone who has talked to me about it has said, “Why do I have to pay you to check to make sure that I’m doing what I’m supposed to be doing? Why can’t you just trust me and give me a process that I can do this, and not reach into my pocket?”

And I take a step back and I think: Yes, why? Why am I saying to you, “You have to come to me and tell me that you’ve got your insurance and you’ve got to come to me and tell me that, yes, you’re still driving the car and yes, it’s still going to be on the road and all of that—and by the way, you need to give me 120 bucks to tell me that you’re going to do that, to tell me that you’ve done what you’re supposed to do”?

When you step back and think about that, I’m putting, as government, the onus on you to make sure that you’re doing the right thing. I’m coming to you as government to say, “These are the parameters that you have to follow.” We all agree that government is there to regulate to the point of integrity. And that is the point of integrity. We shouldn’t be doing things to get to the point of interference.

Then I say to you, “And by the way, give me 120 bucks so that you have the privilege of telling me that you still have insurance, that you have the privilege of telling me that the car is still on the road and you’re going to be able to drive it.” What we’ve done is we’ve said, “Why?”

The member opposite this morning stood up and said, “This is the worst possible thing that we could ever do.” My goodness. We’re telling people that they shouldn’t be giving money to the government. How dare we do something like that? How dare we tell the people of Ontario the money that they earned is their money and they should keep it? How dare we do that? It’s a horrible thing that we’re doing as a government. Imagine that.

To the member from Sudbury: You don’t have to pay us 60 bucks anymore because you live in northern Ontario. I can’t believe he’s saying to me, “That is the worst possible thing that has ever happened. Please don’t do that. That is the worst possible thing that you could ever do.” That I just can’t imagine.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): While I’m sorry to interrupt the member there, it is now time for members’ statements.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Government’s record

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: Four years ago this Conservative government promised to make life more affordable. Promise made, promise broken.

Many people in Windsor can’t buy a home. A single-family home has increased almost 32% in just one year. Because of blind bidding, my constituents have to bid hundreds of thousands of dollars over asking, and young families aren’t able to buy a home of their own.

This government cut rent control, allowing rental costs to soar. The average one-bedroom unit has jumped from $700 to $1,200 a month—a 71% increase. The cost of child care, groceries and fuel have all gone up under this government’s watch. Hydro, which they promised to cut by 12%, has increased by 5%, and they refuse to sign the $10-a-day child care deal.

Ontario Works and ODSP recipients have been forced to live in legislated poverty, struggling to make ends meet, relying on food banks because they can’t afford food and rent. Workers from our casino, bingo halls, auto assembly and parts plants haven’t had steady employment in almost two years. They’re struggling while this government supports their corporate buddies at Amazon and Walmart who are making billions of dollars in profits.

Nurses and other workers have their wages suppressed because of Bill 124. Inflation is 6%, yet the Conservatives believe health care workers are only worth a 1% pay increase. That’s equivalent to a 5% pay cut.

In 99 days, people can choose an NDP government that will take profit out of long-term care, repeal Bill 124, ensure everyone has a home they can afford, reduce child care and grocery costs, increase social assistance rates and support workers and small businesses.

Black History Month

Mr. Michael Parsa: Good morning, everyone. It’s great to be here in the Legislature with all of you.

Speaker, I know a lot of great initiatives and events have taken place since I last rose here in this chamber. Today, I’d like to highlight one important celebration that is taking place through the month of February. For this entire month, we are celebrating and learning about the contributions that Black Ontarians have, and continue to have, in our province and in our local communities.

This year, I was honoured to participate in the first flag-raising ceremony held in the town of Aurora, and attended an online, virtual event to kick off this month’s festivities. I’d like to give special thanks to my good friend Phiona Durrant, the president of the Aurora Black Community Association; Milton Hart and Michael Corniffe from the Aurora Black Caucus; and Mark Lewis from the Anti-Black Racism and Anti-Racism Task Force for their incredible work and leadership that they continue to provide in our community, which was on full display at these events.

At the virtual Black History Month event that was hosted by the Aurora Black Community Association, it was an absolute pleasure to hear from the event’s main guest speaker, the Honourable Jean Augustine. She explained to us her experiences as a member of Parliament in Ottawa and the journey in creating and passing the legislation which officially recognized February as Black History Month. Along with all the participants, we were captivated and inspired by her relentless pursuit in achieving this goal.

As I mentioned at the event, I believe learning and celebrating Black history in our province and in our country should go beyond just the month of February. Now, it’s important to recognize that we have made significant progress over the years, but there’s still so much we can do, and there’s always room for improvement.

Northern health services

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: There is a crisis in health care in the north. One person in eight across the north does not have access to primary health care. In northwestern Ontario, we have a shortage of hundreds of physicians. Facts like these represent the failure of this government to make sure northern Ontario gets the health care it deserves.

Equitable access to health care is a right under the Canada Health Act. We need to encourage more physicians and health care professionals to work in northern communities. We must retain those we have and work to help with their burnout. The provincial government needs to take action to build a better and more resilient health care system for the north.

The Northern Ontario School of Medicine—NOSM—has done an excellent job training the next generation of physicians who will work in communities across the north. But this government needs to immediately expand the Northern Ontario School of Medicine’s capacity to meet the needs of northern Ontario. There are other solutions that need to happen immediately. It must work with stakeholders and communities to address shortages of physicians, nurse practitioners and the health care professionals that form our teams. The people of northern Ontario deserve to have equitable access to health care.

Flooding in Brampton

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: I would like to begin by sending my thoughts and prayers to the families impacted by catastrophic flooding in Brampton. The Churchville area has dealt with an incredible amount of flooding and many residents were forced to evacuate their homes. It has been estimated that around 100 homes have been impacted by the floods, and the water in some areas has risen up to six feet deep. I want to thank all first responders for all of the hard and necessary work they’re doing to help residents get to safety.

This is devastating news, and I pray for the safety and well-being of many Bramptonians impacted by the flooding. If you have friends or family living in the area, I recommend checking up on loved ones.

Once again, this natural disaster has caused pain and suffering for many Bramptonians in the Churchville area, yet it is truly heartwarming to see the community come together to help one another.

Fire in Sandy Lake First Nation

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: This morning, I’m going to share the words and the notes of Cassandra Fiddler. She was the mom of Grant Meekis, nine, Remi Meekis, seven, and Wilfred Fiddler, four, who passed away in a tragic house fire on the night of January 13, 2022, in Sandy Lake First Nation. This is her note:

“All my kids were asleep and I went to check on them and had turned on the heaters in their rooms. I went to put two small logs in the wood stove and I went back to my room and after not even 15 minutes, I smelled smoke and saw flashes. I went to look and” saw “the fire on the ceiling. Right away I got my boys up, to take their blankets and go to the door. I ran to Remi and Wilfred’s room, got them up, and went towards the door. The boys couldn’t open it because it was already too smoky.

“I thought I had all my kids by the door so it opened and I ran back into my room to get my baby. I went outside and saw only Malaky and Brayden. I was going to go to back inside but when I turned, the fire was” already “getting bigger.

“Two people came to help but the fire was too big. I told them my babies were inside and the girl who came to help told me, ‘They’re knocking on the windows.’

“They broke it but” they “couldn’t see them inside and then we were taken to the nursing station because I had inhaled a lot of smoke and was burned.

“I cried so much for my babies. It made breathing hard and I was on oxygen until I was stable.”

That’s the end of her note. Cassandra, meegwetch for your words. We will always remember Grant, Remi and Wilfred.

Protest in Ottawa

Mr. Rick Nicholls: We’re all aware of what happened in Ottawa over the past three weeks. Blocking all lanes on bridges, inhibiting the flow of goods between Canada and the US and preventing people from getting to work, was problematic.

But why were the truckers there in the first place? Fighting for the reinstatement of vaccine exemptions? Initially, yes, but it became much more than that: defending individual rights and freedoms. To eliminate this peaceful protest, all that was needed was for the Prime Minister and the Premier to meet with the organizers. Sadly, that didn’t happen.

Civilian journalism came to light. Paul Harvey would say, “And now, the rest of the story.”

Were the people of Ottawa disadvantaged? Perhaps, but crime was down and people weren’t getting sick and being admitted to hospital. Actions of the many cannot be held responsible for the actions of the very few. Many question if those causing trouble were in fact associated with the convoy.

Truckers took care of things. They had rules of conduct, cleaned up garbage, stood guard around monuments, supported local businesses, were respectable and fed the hungry. Truckers and non-truckers from my riding provided updates. Ottawa citizens would come up to truckers, offer food and hugs. Negative reports were from the very few.

In

summary, I was offended by the characterization of the truckers by Trudeau and others. The use of such inflammatory language was unjustified, in my opinion.

Protests in Ottawa happen all the time. Calling this peaceful protest a siege, illegal or calling truckers and supporters terrorists and occupiers is so wrong. Now the Emergencies Act has been revoked. Why now did the PM change his mind? Paul Harvey would say, “It’s pure politics.”

Peterborough Police Service facility dog

Mr. Dave Smith: Usually when I rise in the House for a 90-second statement, I’m talking about something that’s going on in my riding or we’re talking about an individual who has made an outstanding contribution to the community.

I want to take this opportunity to talk about an individual who is quite possibly the best listener any of us will ever meet. She has won a number of awards over the last three years for her ability to support people who have faced trauma. Every day, she puts her specialized training to work to help others. But Speaker, she also has a dark side and knows exactly where the treats are held in the desks of those she can convince to give one of those treats to her when she tilts her head and flashes those puppy dog eyes. I’m talking about the Peterborough Police Service’s victim support dog Pixie.

Pixie is a black lab who has the most calm demeanour of any dog you will ever meet. She’s never in a hurry to get anywhere and frequently requires a good scratching behind her ears. Pixie has proven to be a great support for many individuals in their time of trauma, and she has also been a fantastic addition to help an officer when they’ve had a particularly difficult day on the job. Sometimes all you need is that unconditional, non-judgmental friend who wants nothing more than to sit with you and just listen. That’s exactly what Pixie does.

Pixie is a credit to the service of Peterborough, and I want to thank Alice Czitrom for all of her work in victim services with Pixie.

Social assistance

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Early on, I learned as a city councillor that you must be prepared to work with everyone—even today, in these chambers—to get things done. Often, I’ve worked with all political stripes to help the residents in St. Catharines. However, it is clear: Sometimes the vision of Ontario that this current government has is too far from my own. The disability programs in Ontario are an example of that.

One of the first acts by this Premier was to ensure disability programs received no more increases. Since 2018, this program has not seen an increase, even though Ontario’s annual inflation is over 5%. This is shameful. Last year, the average single-bedroom apartment in St. Catharines almost hit $1,500 a month. Our Ontario Disability Support Program’s shelter benefit covers about one third of that.

I’ve requested many times that, at the very least, this province review this program—nothing. Advocates have requested livable incomes for individuals on disability—nothing. The Auditor General has called it one of the worst job programs ever created—no change.

Premier Ford, you inherited the ODSP program from the past Liberal government. Under this government’s watch, it has gotten worse. We need to see increases in supports for disability programs in the upcoming budget, and if we don’t, we need a new Premier who will.

Sauble Family Health Team

Mr. Bill Walker: I rise today to recognize

an act of incredible generosity in my great riding of Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound. Recently, Sauble Area Medical Clinic Inc. donated a total of $1 million to the foundations of Grey Bruce Health Services to purchase equipment for hospitals in Wiarton, Owen Sound and Southampton. Close to 20 years ago, community-minded citizens in Sauble Beach began working on the concept of establishing a new medical clinic in the town. After a lot of hard work and a lot of fundraising, the clinic on Main Street became a reality, and the Sauble Family Health Team was born. Today, there are 2,800 patients rostered using this clinic.

There are two doctors, two nurse practitioners, three nurses and a social worker who are all working at the facility.

The clinic is an amazing success story for the community, and it would not have happened without the hard work of many people, including the late Marj Lipka—a dynamo, Mr. Speaker; and let me tell you, never underestimate the power of butter tarts and perogies, because she got a lot of stuff done with that—Carl Noble; Dr. John Van Dorp; Gena Van Dorp; Tracy Jones; Joan Williamson; Dr. Shazia Ambreen; nurse practitioners Kevin Linnen and Kathy Babin-Niven; Cathy Goetz-Perry from VON; Sheila de Winter; Drs.

Leeson, McNay and Barker; Cecil Groves; and everybody that continues to make the clinic such an important community facility. Currently, Dr. Sue Gundrum, Dr. Larry Schmidt, and nurse practitioners Emma Lustig and Hailey Shapiro continue to provide service.

Speaker, the owners of the building that is home to the clinic actually sold it to be able to give back. There are plans to spend $400,000 for the Wiarton Hospital to purchase an X-ray machine, $350,000 for the Owen Sound Hospital to purchase a new C-arm for the operating room and an ultrasound machine, and $250,000 will go to the Southampton hospital foundation’s CT scanner campaign.

Speaker, this is fabulous community work that’s providing community benefits forever and a day. Thank you so much to those individuals who have been involved.

Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m very pleased to inform the House that page Kristian Tanuwidjaja, from the riding of Etobicoke Centre, is one of today’s page captains. We have with us today at Queen’s Park his mother, Shinta Tanuwidjaja, and his stepfather, Peter Tricarico.

We’re also joined today by the parents of our other page captain, Lucia Wei, from the riding of Richmond Hill: her mother, Jing Yu, and her father, Xiaoning Wei.

Welcome to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. We’re delighted to have you here.

Invasion of Ukraine

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m informed that the government House leader has a point of order.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to allow members to make statements in response to the Russian Federation’s invasion of the sovereign country of Ukraine, with five minutes allotted to Her Majesty’s government, five minutes allotted to Her Majesty’s loyal opposition, and five minutes allotted to the independent members as a group.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Agreed? Agreed.

I recognize the Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: There are certain dates that will be forever printed in our history books, dates that will be forever etched into our memories: June 28, 1914, the beginning of World War I; September 1, 1939, the beginning of World War II. We must pray that February 24, 2022, isn’t next. Last night, we witnessed a violent attack on a sovereign nation by a despot, a thug. We witnessed Vladimir Putin’s war of aggression begin in Ukraine.

The bonds between Ukraine and Canada run deep, for without the Ukrainian people, their resilience, their bravery, their strength, their willingness to fight for their family and friends, the Canada we know and love today would not be the same. The food that feeds our families is farmed by grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Ukrainian immigrants who left aggression and poverty to settle the Canadian west.

Our greatest athletes, like Gretzky; our greatest entertainers, like Trebek; our greatest voices, like Bachman; and our greatest scholars and scientists, like Dr. Bondar: Ukrainian Canadians. We’ve cheered them on. We’ve laughed and sung along together. We’ve touched the heavens. They left a permanent mark on Canadian history. They left a permanent mark on our society. For again, without Ukraine, the Canada we know and love today would not be the same, and because of that, we will forever be tied together as two nations an ocean apart, but forever one. Canada shall never waver in standing against tyranny. Canada shall never waver in our support of Ukraine.

As Putin’s aggression lights up the skies of Kiev, they will see the strength of the Ukrainian people emerge from the darkness. We must ensure the Ukrainian flag flies high above the skyline. The blue and yellow must be the last colours the invaders see.

Slava Ukraini. Glory to Ukraine. Glory to the heroes.

Thank you and God bless the people of Ukraine.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The leader of Her Majesty’s loyal opposition.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: This morning we stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine, all Ukrainians who call Ontario and Canada home and Ukrainians worldwide—folks who fear for their loved ones overseas and are deeply worried about the lives, safety and sovereignty of the Ukrainian people during this dark time.

I join global leaders and peace-loving people around the world in condemning this unprovoked attack by the Russian federation and the violent invasion Putin is using to drag people into the horrors of war. We all call for diplomacy and the immediate de-escalation of military actions.

Speaker, as Ontarians, we know the vital role Ukrainian Canadians have played in building this province and our country—the Premier just spoke of exactly that. Cities and towns across Ontario are steeped in Ukrainian history and culture. And as Canadians, we are so fortunate to share a strong bond with Ukraine.

The official opposition NDP has always been proud to stand side by side with the Ukrainian community. From working closely together to make September 7 Ukrainian Heritage Day to recognizing Holodomor Memorial Day every November, to celebrating Ukraine’s 30th independence day this past fall, we will always stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine’s efforts to strengthen their democracy and institutions. And we will always reject the path of aggression, the path of stoking the flames of division and imperialism for political gain, and the path of threatening world peace by attacking the sovereignty of others and their democratic right to choose their government.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly reaffirm our commitment to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders, to its economic and financial stability and to the well-being of its people.

In closing, Speaker, I ask the Prime Minister and the federal government to ensure that we welcome Ukrainian refugees, commit to family reunification and provide humanitarian aid to the people of Ukraine to our best and highest ability.

Remarks in Ukrainian.

We stand with the people of Ukraine.

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

Mr. John Fraser: We stand with the people of Ukraine and our Ukrainian friends and neighbours in condemning the illegal actions being taken by Vladimir Putin in Ukraine this morning.

There is evil in the world and it’s kind of a shock to all of us this morning and last night. Think about the children in Ukraine who are going to be children of war. Think about how we explain it to our children who are afraid. How do we give them confidence? What is it we need to do? What we need to do is stand united, not just on this, but on everything. We have to put aside our differences. That’s what our children need. That’s what the children of Ukraine need. If we’re going to stand up for them, we have to stand up for them together.

We’ve seen recently in Ontario, in Ottawa, something similar to what we’re seeing in Ukraine—not nearly as bad, not nearly as dangerous. But we have seen how hate and anger and division can tear a society apart. Make no mistake, what’s happening right now in the Ukraine is hate and anger and division.

Ukrainian Canadians are such a big part of our history—arts, science, sports. They’re our neighbours. They’re our friends. Many of us have Ukrainian Canadian communities inside our ridings. We go to the festivals. It’s about family and community.

It’s really hard, sometimes, to figure out what you can do. How do you change the things that you can’t change? How do we stop the thing that’s happening right now? What do we do? The only thing for us to do is to be united, to bring ourselves together, to put aside our differences, because that’s what the people of Ukraine need. That’s what our children need right now. It’s a scary time in the world, and I know for them that it’s scary. It’s scary for all of us.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Member for Guelph.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I rise today to unequivocally condemn the military invasion and bombing of Ukraine by Russia. War is never the answer. Violence is never the answer. Launching bombs at innocent civilians is never the answer.

We, as Ontarians, stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine and Ukrainian Canadians to denounce the senseless act of aggression by Russia. We, as Ontarians, have a duty to stand in solidarity with Ukraine and our fellow Ukrainian Canadians.

Speaker, last night, I watched in horror as I saw our neighbours to the south having a debate about which side they were on. So I want to say to the Premier, thank you; I want to say to the official Leader of the Opposition, thank you; I want to say thank you to the House leader of the Liberals—that in this House, in this province, we stand united for democracy. Democracy must always trump authoritarianism.

We may have our differences in this House, and we’ve had a lot of back-and-forth, but the one thing we stand united on as Ontarians is our respect for democracy, our respect for international order and our respect for peace.

So I want to thank every member of this House today for standing in solidarity with the people of Ukraine and for denouncing this senseless act of Russian aggression.

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

COVID-19 deaths

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Leader of the Opposition has a point of order.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I seek unanimous consent for the House to observe a moment of silence for the 2,262 Ontarians who have succumbed to COVID-19 since this House last honoured the victims of the pandemic on December 9, 2021.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Leader of the Opposition is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to observe a moment of silence for the 2,262 Ontarians who have succumbed to COVID-19 since this House last honoured the victims of the pandemic on December 9, 2021. Agreed? Agreed.

Members will please rise.

The House observed a moment’s silence.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. Members, please take your seats.

Question Period

Manufacturing jobs

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Before I ask my first question to the Premier, I just want to acknowledge that it’s RNAO’s lobby day today at Queen’s Park. I am sure we’re all looking forward to hearing the advice of the RNAO in terms of how we fix our health care system and our nurse shortage.

But my first question is on a different topic, Speaker, and it’s to the Premier. We all know that we’ve heard of the devastating layoffs that are happening in Thunder Bay this week, so it’s now more important than ever to commit to investing in manufacturing jobs and trades in our province. Ontario has had a long-standing 25% Canadian content policy for transit vehicles, which has created thousands of good jobs and protected thousands of good jobs in our province over the years. So my question to the Premier is: Will he commit to maintaining Ontario’s 25% Canadian content policy for transit vehicles and will he rigorously enforce that commitment?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, our government has always championed made-in-Ontario solutions. No government has ordered more Canadian-made vehicles ever than our government.

We’re going to play a little game: fiction and fact. Now I’m going to tell you the facts. Over 75% of the Ontario Line will be Canadian content, with almost 90% occurring right here in Ontario, Mr. This project alone will generate more than $11 billion in local benefits. During the construction, it will support over 4,700 jobs per year, with more employment afterwards for the operations and maintenance of the line.

And do you know what’s a shame, Mr. Speaker, with all the investments we’ve put into Thunder Bay and Alstom? The Leader of the Opposition voted it down, the leader of the Liberals voted it down and the leader of the Green Party voted it down. They had no interest—

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

The supplementary question.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Unfortunately, the Premier’s actions don’t match his words. The fact is that there used to be a 25% requirement for Canadian content in transit vehicles here in this province, but I’m going to read from a recent RFP for one of the largest transit projects in the history of this province that the Premier was just talking about. I quote from the Ontario Line Subway Rolling Stock, Systems, Operations and Maintenance Project RFP: “‘Canadian content’ means a minimum of 10% of the final value of a car” supplied by Project Co under the project agreement, which must be contracted for by Project Co Canada, as calculated in accordance with this

schedule 38. I ask the page to send this over to the Premier.

The question is, why has the Premier put at risk so many good-paying jobs and dropped Ontario’s long-standing 25% commitment to Canadian content in transit vehicles?

Hon. Doug Ford: For 15 years, northern Ontario was ignored and was put at risk through the previous Liberal government, propped up by the NDP government. They were totally ignored, Mr. Speaker.

The facts are, if it wasn’t for this government, the Alstom plant wouldn’t even exist as of today. We invested over $171 million for 94 refurbished GO rail coaches. In May, we made a $180-million investment for new streetcars for the TTC. Those investments are supporting over 300 good manufacturing jobs at the facility alone, as I said earlier.

The shame is, the Leader of the Opposition voted against this, voted against the people in Thunder Bay, voted against the people at Alstom, the hard-working people, has never showed up to their plant in a few years, while we’re there. We’re listening to the people, we’re always going to have their backs, and we’re going to continue to invest in the people of Thunder Bay and Alstom.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, the Premier cannot just ignore the facts, Speaker. In fact, I’ll ask a page to send another copy. Maybe he can read what’s highlighted in yellow on this document.

It’s very, very clear, Speaker. This RFP is for the Ontario Line, and it clearly states, I will say again: “‘Canadian content’ means a minimum of 10% of the final value of a car” supplied etc. Speaker, this Premier has abandoned the 25% content requirement. Why on earth would this Premier do that without telling anyone, without consulting anyone? Why would he put thousands of good-paying Ontario jobs on the line and get rid of a long-standing 25% content policy for transit vehicles in our province? Shame on him.

Interjections.

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

To reply, the Associate Minister of Transportation (GTA).

Hon. Stan Cho: I agree, there is some clarity necessary here, so I will clarify for the leader of the official opposition exactly what is already outlined in a letter from Minister Mulroney on this matter just last week. To be clear, there have been no changes to the existing Canadian content policy. And in case the leader did not receive that letter, I’d like to send, through a page, a letter from the minister outlining exactly those details.

What we are talking about here is $11 billion from the construction of the Ontario Line that will go right back into the economy and support those great jobs in Thunder Bay. At the end of the day, 75% of the project will be manufactured in Canada, 90% of that in Ontario. Speaker, it’s called the Ontario Line for a reason. We are investing in transit and transportation across this entire province, and that includes the great people of Thunder Bay.

Manufacturing jobs

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier. But I have to say, with all due respect, it means squat what’s in the Minister of Transportation’s letters. What matters is what is in the RFP. That’s what matters, and this government has abandoned the 25% content requirement. Can you send this over to the Premier, please? I don’t care about the minister’s letter. The letter has to have legs by being included in the contract, and it is not. He secretly changed the contract, Speaker, after he promised the Unifor workers very recently the exact opposite.

In fact, last August this Premier said in Thunder Bay, “We will make sure anything bought in Ontario should be produced in Ontario.” So what manufacturing organization, what municipality, what union asked the Premier to put thousands of good-paying jobs at risk and risk millions of dollars in investments by changing the content requirement for transit vehicles, perversely reversing this policy?

Interjections.

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

The Associate Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Stan Cho: I guess it’s worth repeating to the Leader of the Opposition that there have been no changes to the Canadian content requirement for manufacturing here in the province, Speaker. I will repeat: 75% of the Ontario Line will be Canadian content, with almost 90% occurring right here in Ontario. This is in addition to the fact that there is $180 million we committed to in May to support the purchase of 60 new TTC vehicles; in addition, $171 million to refurbish 94 GO Transit rail coaches; 60 new electric streetcars.

The layoffs in Alstom—we know those are temporary, because our government, our Premier, has reached out to the leadership team there, who have assured us that their intention is to bring back their workers in June of this year. They have to, Speaker, because this is unprecedented growth on the way for this province and for Thunder Bay.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: What is unprecedented is that for almost 15 years we’ve had a Canadian content policy that required 25%. It’s unprecedented that this Ford government would stand up and pretend that they didn’t reduce that content to 10% in the RFP for the Ontario Line. I will send this over to the associate minister, if he doesn’t know the facts of what’s in their own RFP.

This Premier told Unifor workers in Thunder Bay, “Please don’t be looking for other jobs because we will make sure we have contracts to keep you going.” But he secretly changed the long-standing policy that created great jobs for years. There won’t be contracts without a 25% requirement. It’s not just Thunder Bay, Speaker; it’s the entire supply chain, which will impact the entire province.

Will this Premier, right now, then, today, if he is committed to that 25% policy, stand up and commit that not only will we continue to have a 25% content policy, but he will make sure that that is included in all RFPs going forward and he will—

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

Interjections.

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

To reply, again the Associate Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Stan Cho: Speaker, we will clarify for a third time that there have been no changes to the existing Canadian content policy—no changes. Our government will continue to say yes to deals that make sense for taxpayers and transit riders, especially when it creates good-paying private sector jobs. Nowhere is this more evident than in the Ontario Line, a massive undertaking that will support over 4,700 jobs per year during the years of construction, while generating more than $11 billion in local economic growth.

Speaker, I know the opposition is used to propping up the Liberals when they were in power: 300,000 manufacturing jobs left from 2004 to 2014. We will not take lectures from the members opposite on this issue. It is our government that is building back the manufacturing sector and transforming Ontario’s transit network, after the Liberals doing years of nothing.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: There’s no doubt that that policy had been in place for 15 years and that it created great jobs. It was supported by manufacturers. It was supported by workers and unions. It was supported by municipalities. The Premier, I think, gave some false hope to the Unifor workers up in Thunder Bay, because he has now betrayed them and abandoned that policy. It is in black and white. I’ve run out of copies. I guess the government side doesn’t know how to read or doesn’t pay attention to the policies that they embed in their RFPs.

The letters from ministers mean nothing, and the drivel coming from the associate minister means nothing. What means something is embedding the policy in the RFPs, and this Premier decided not to do that. So why would he secretly ditch that policy? He has to stop making excuses, Speaker. He has to stand up for workers—some claim that he makes all the time, which is absolutely not the case and we see it right now.

Buck up, do the right thing, pull that RFP and fix it to make sure there’s 25% embedded in that—

Interjections.

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

To reply, the Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: I find it ironic and hypocritical by the Leader of the Opposition—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. The Premier will take his seat.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Okay. The House will come to order.

The Premier must withdraw his unparliamentary comment—

Hon. Doug Ford: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. He may continue the response if he chooses to do so.

Hon. Doug Ford: Mr. Speaker, I find it ironic that the Leader of the Opposition has the gall to say what she’s saying when they have voted against it. They voted against the funding for Alstom. They voted against the people of Thunder Bay. For 15 years, northern Ontario was ignored by the Del Duca-Wynne-Horwath governments. They were propped up. They didn’t worry about the people in the north. They were worried about their downtown Toronto elites. That’s what they were worried about. That’s what their concern is about.

I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, this project alone will generate over $11 billion. There’s no government in the history of this province that has invested more into transit than what we have.

Manufacturing jobs

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: My question is for the Premier. The workers at the Alstom plant in Thunder Bay deserve better from this government. I want to talk specifically about the workers because they do great work. They produce excellent vehicles. We are proud that Thunder Bay produces transit vehicles that are used by people all over Ontario—actually, all over North America. Every time I come to Queen’s Park, I walk past many Thunder Bay vehicles, and it makes me proud of my city and of those workers.

When this government began their time in office, we had 1,200 staff at the then-Bombardier plant. Soon there will be only 75 unionized employees. It could have been avoided. We knew the problems. We were talking about it in this House in 2018.

Premier, why didn’t this government take action sooner to stop the layoffs at the Alstom plant?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Associate Minister of Transportation (GTA).

Hon. Stan Cho: I, too, like the member from Thunder Bay–Atikokan, have immense pride when I see our fine TTC fleet vehicles being manufactured right here in Ontario, in the Thunder Bay area, and our government is also proud of that. That’s why we’re investing in those good, homegrown jobs in Ontario.

When it comes to the layoffs in Thunder Bay, I want to be clear: These layoffs are temporary. Alstom’s leadership team has spoken with our government and said exactly that—that their intention is to bring these workers back in June of this year. Speaker, they have to, because there is a lot of construction happening when it comes to transit in our province. There are contracts that have been signed with our government in May of last year—$180 million for 60 new streetcars.

This investment is part of a contract with the Thunder Bay plant to supply streetcars, with vehicle delivery starting as early as 2023—and another $171 million for 94 GO Transit rail coaches at the Alstom facility in Thunder Bay.

Speaker, there is a lot of work on the way to Thunder Bay and Alstom, and we are confident that they will be up and running again in June, very soon.

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

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: My question is for the Premier. Last year, this government announced an order for 60 streetcars and refurbishing 94 bi-level cars, but the contracts were signed so late, and now the work won’t be able to begin till this fall. If this government had planned ahead, we wouldn’t be facing layoffs.

This government needs to realize that you can’t turn on and off manufacturing capacity with a light switch. Uncertainty means we might lose workers to other regions and other industries, because this government chose to take its time. We need to make an in-Ontario transit vehicle procurement policy.

Premier, when will you commit to a made-in-Ontario policy for transit vehicles?

Hon. Stan Cho: Well, to answer that question very directly, the Premier committed to creating those jobs a long time ago. That’s why, at the Alstom plant in Thunder Bay, 60 new streetcars are on the way, 94 GO Transit refurbishments are on the way, 60 new electric streetcars are on the way. And here’s the greatest part of all of this: This means jobs in Thunder Bay.

Now, of course, the plant has to be retooled to create all that capacity. That’s why it is temporarily shut down. But the fact of the matter is, those vehicles are on the way. And that’s despite the best efforts of the opposite members as well as the Liberals, who voted against every single one of them. They voted against the 60 new streetcars, against the 94 refurbishments, against the 60 new electric streetcars.

Despite the best efforts of the opposition, we are going to support jobs in this province and in Thunder Bay.

Infrastructure funding

Mr. Bill Walker: My question is for the Minister of Infrastructure. For far too long, Ontario’s small, rural and northern communities have struggled to keep their public infrastructure up to date, due to chronic underfunding and neglect from previous governments. This neglect has led to the infrastructure backlogs in communities across our great province.

For 15 years, the Liberal government failed to address infrastructure needs, continued to cut investments in crucial infrastructure and ignored calls for further funding. The people of Ontario, no matter where they are in this province, deserve to reap the benefits of new, modernized and updated public infrastructure that will help the town they call home be safer and more accessible.

Mr. Speaker, through you to the Minister of Infrastructure, what is the government doing to provide Ontario’s municipalities with the funding they need to upgrade and renew their critical infrastructure?

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

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: I want to thank the member from Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound for this great question. I also want to thank him for his years of service to the people of Ontario.

Our government is stepping up and investing in infrastructure and saying yes to building Ontario and providing municipalities with the funding they need to provide residents with the safe and reliable public infrastructure they need and deserve.

Earlier this month, our government released the 2021 Ontario Economic Outlook and Fiscal Review: Build Ontario. In it we reaffirmed our commitment to supporting small, rural and northern communities by increasing the amount of annual funding they are getting through the Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund, also known as OCIF. Over the next five years, we are investing an additional $1 billion in OCIF to help 424 communities to repair and modernize roads, bridges, drinking water, stormwater and waste water projects. That works out to an additional $200 million every year until 2026.

And we are not stopping there. To continue supporting the growth of our province and our communities, we have also gone so—

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

Mr. Bill Walker: Thank you to the parliamentary assistant—who is looking very GQ today—for his response and dedication to supporting critical infrastructure projects in my great riding of Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound and across the province. I am proud to be part of a government that is taking appropriate measures to ensure our small, rural and northern communities are getting the attention and the funding they deserve.

Municipalities in my riding are repeatedly expressing their concerns over infrastructure backlogs, and stress the need to address critical projects such as replacing water mains, upgrading water treatment plants, resurfacing roads and so much more. Ontario’s municipalities continue to face financial restraints when preparing their budgets and are concerned they will be forced to cut back on their infrastructure capital projects and reduce services to stay within their budgets. These municipalities are calling for further financial support to work through their project backlogs so they can provide their residents with infrastructure that is safe, reliable and more resilient.

Mr. Speaker, we have done a lot as a government and will continue to do so, but I ask the parliamentary assistant, through you: What does this investment mean for the people of Ontario?

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: Thanks again to the member for another great question. Unlike the repeated noes and flip-flopping on policies we have seen from previous governments, our government has created a detailed and comprehensive plan that supports infrastructure projects throughout the province. To provide additional support for our municipalities to address financial restraints during the pandemic, our government stepped up and created the COVID-19 resilience infrastructure stream of the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program.

From Kenora to Chatham-Kent and Essex to Glengarry, our government is ensuring the people of Ontario have access to the safe and reliable infrastructure they need and deserve.

When it comes to Ontario’s infrastructure, we are not leaving any stone unturned. We are investing $148 billion over the period of the next 10 years. We are building new schools. We are building new hospitals. Most importantly, we are connecting Ontarians, providing them with a high-speed Internet connection and making sure that every household in the province of Ontario will have access to high-speed Internet by 2025.

Long-term care

Miss Monique Taylor: My question is for the Premier. The Minister of Long-Term Care recently came to Hamilton and announced provincial funding for several for-profit long-term-care homes. The minister left out Macassa Lodge, which is in my riding, from his announcement—a municipally run not-for-profit home with a request to upgrade 44 existing beds. Only one not-for-profit home was included in the minister’s announcement. This is unacceptable and quite obvious of where this government’s priorities lie.

Seniors in my riding need access to upgraded, quality long-term-care-home beds now. Will the Premier commit to providing funding to Macassa Lodge so they can make the necessary upgrades to the 44 existing beds?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To reply, the government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: The member is right: Ontario seniors have needed access to quality long-term care for a very long time in this province—in fact, for decades. That is why we are endeavouring to ensure that over 30,000 new long-term-care beds are built across the province of Ontario, upgrading an additional 28,000 in what is the largest upgrade and building of new long-term-care beds in the history of the country.

She is quite correct: We were in Hamilton, making an announcement for a number of new and upgraded beds in Hamilton. We’ve built, are committed to building and are in the pipeline more beds in Hamilton alone than were built by the previous two Liberal administrations, and for a number of those years supported, of course, by the NDP. So there is good news for Hamilton, good news for Ontarians, and it’s long overdue.

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

Miss Monique Taylor: Speaker, Ontarians need access to quality, not-for-profit long-term care—which you have heard the government minister not deny—beds that are safe and of quality and that are good enough for our parents and grandparents. That is the only quality that we should be looking at, and that should not be lost on for-profit. It is shameful that this government continues to refuse to recognize this—although we shouldn’t be surprised, considering last year this government announced that over half of the new long-term-care homes being built in Ontario would be for-profit. They have a crusade against public health care, and this needs to end.

Can the Premier promise that his government will only fund not-for-profit long-term-care homes in Ontario from here on out?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Of course, we’ll work with providers to ensure that our seniors have access to the best quality health care and long-term care possible.

I do note, of course, that in the member’s riding, Macassa Lodge actually has been approved for additional beds. She might not have known that, because she missed the announcement—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. Member for Hamilton Mountain, come to order.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Grace Villa, 192 upgraded beds; Shalom Manor, a not-for-profit, 128 beds; in the member for Hamilton Centre’s riding, 128 new and 128 upgraded beds at Baywoods Place; 34 new and 126 upgraded beds at Parkview Nursing Centre; 160 redeveloped beds at Dundurn Place; in addition, over $2.4 million—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Hamilton Mountain must come to order.

Hon. Paul Calandra: I know they’re going to try to shut it down, but listen to this, Speaker: over $2.4 million in new funding for new staff in the Leader of the Opposition’s riding and $15 million more in annual funding on top of the $2.3 million in the member’s riding—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to remind the House that when the Speaker calls you to order, you must come to order. If you don’t, I’ll call you out by name, and if you still don’t, you’ll be warned. And if you still don’t, you might be able to go home early.

The next question.

Member’s conduct

If the government opposes the member’s actions, why don’t they stop sponsoring the political operations for him and all MPPs by cancelling the per-vote subsidy for all members in this Legislature, which has cost taxpayers more than $100 million in 10 years?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): And to reply for the government, the government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: I am sure you can appreciate that it is not my job, as government House leader, to monitor the attendance of the members of the House. This chamber sits most days from 9 o’clock till about 6:40, and it is the expectation that if members are interested in the proceedings of this House, they will attend to this House. I will endeavour to tell the honourable member that, in future, if the member is concerned about motions that may be coming forward or the work of this House, the best place to hear about that is in this chamber itself.

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

Mrs. Belinda C. Karahalios: In justifying the government’s most recent emergency measures and the Premier’s seal of approval for Justin Trudeau’s, the Premier called the Ottawa protest an “illegal occupation.” But those in Ottawa who were trying to lead a safe withdrawal of the protest and to safely negotiate with the city were hijacked by the government’s own agent provocateur, the member from Lanark.

It was reported by one of the leading protesters that the member from Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston encouraged the convoy to talk to the mayor of Ottawa, but once the talks became public, the member said they were abandoning the protesters, thus making the possibility of a peaceful withdrawal impossible. In fact, the Premier’s own first chief of staff was reportedly in the back talking to all leaders involved.

Can this government tell us how many other sponsored actors it has infiltrating peaceful protest movements, with the job of sabotaging the efforts, so the government can use the actions of its own agents as justification for imposing authoritarian measures on all Ontarians?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to caution the member on her use of language, and allow the government House leader to respond.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, we just talked yesterday about the importance of elevating the level of debate around this place, of people on both sides—the opposition and the government, frankly—better understanding what happened in Ottawa, what happened at some of these protests. We were all very clear. We spoke unanimously on the fact that the aims of the protest leaders to overthrow a democratically elected government were not something that any of us could ever support. In fact, they were idiotic, and we all stood up against that.

But within that protest movement there were other people who had other concerns: the cost of living, the cost of fuel, the carbon tax, other issues that impact some of the things that we are doing, the mandates. We all talked and we all said that we had to find a better way of communicating so that all people feel part of the decision-making process.

So I would ask the honourable member to reflect on the question that she just asked and ask how that can help elevate the level of debate in this place. This House spoke unanimously yesterday when it came to the member for Lanark, and I am proud of how this House reacted to that member and the nonsense that he has been spewing.

Women in science and technology

Ms. Natalia Kusendova: Before I ask my question this morning, I would like to add my voice in categorically condemning Putin’s unprovoked aggression and invasion of the sovereign nation of Ukraine. In speaking with my family in Poland this morning, I learned that the situation is extremely tense as Poland prepares humanitarian aid, shelters and resources to accept Ukrainian refugees. I believe I speak for members of this House in expressing our solidarity with the people of Ukraine and in calling on Putin to get out of Ukraine.

My question is to the Associate Minister of Digital Government. As you know, February 11 was the International Day of Women and Girls in Science, a day to recognize the crucial role of women and girls in advancing science and technology. In acknowledgment of this important day and being an advocate for women in the tech sector, I understand Minister Rasheed hosted a “helping women in tech to succeed” round table. Speaker, through you to the Associate Minister of Digital Government: What topics were discussed and what next steps will be taken to support women and girls in tech?

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

Hon. Paul Calandra: Speaker, I just wanted to reflect on the first part of the member’s question. Again, as the leader of the Green Party and each of the leaders in this place have highlighted, the actions that have been taken by Russia are completely unacceptable. We will continue to stand with the people of Ukraine, understanding how important it is to the Ukrainian diaspora here in Ontario and across this country that we continue to do that.

At the same time, I do reflect on the fact that the Minister of Labour and immigration just this morning also reiterated Ontario’s openness to working with and helping the federal government, looking at ways that we can better settle immigrants from Ukraine to Ontario as quickly as possible. I thank the honourable member for that question, and again thank all the members of the House for their statements earlier.

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

Ms. Natalia Kusendova: Thank you to the House leader for acknowledging the gravity of the situation.

Back to the Associate Minister of Digital Government: Recruiting and keeping talented people, especially women and girls, in Ontario’s tech sector is a priority for our government. As you know, Ontario is committed to being a leader in the tech sector, and I am interested in hearing the feedback participants provided.

To the Associate Minister of Digital Government: What information was gathered and how will the input received assist the government going forward? This round table was very informative and highlights just how important it is to continue building an inclusive and diverse workforce.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Associate Minister of Digital Government.

Hon. Kaleed Rasheed: Thank you to the member for Mississauga Centre for the question. Mr. Speaker, the member is correct. As a father of three daughters, I’m a strong advocate for not only women in tech but also about seeing women advance in the workplace.

I recently invited my colleagues Minister Dunlop and Minister McKenna, as well as Ontario’s chief digital and data officer, Hillary Hartley, to host a “helping women in tech to succeed” round table. Eight leaders in Ontario’s tech sector joined our virtual event. It was important to discuss how our government can partner with the tech sector to encourage even more women to get involved in the STEM field and build their careers right here in Ontario.

Pharmaceutical industry

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Ontario’s one and only local manufacturer of injectable oncology drugs is at risk in St. Catharines. This is because, unfortunately, hospitals in this province mostly buy their drugs through large group-purchasing organizations—huge entities that deal with billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money with no oversight. Last month, HealthPRO, the biggest of these groups, told Biolyse it could not bid to sell their products in Canada because of a contract dispute, effectively putting their 25 years of producing medicine in Canada and 25