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

December 1, 2021

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 2021-Dec-01 vol. A (PDF)

L027A - Wed 1 Dec 2021 / Mer 1er déc 2021

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Wednesday 1 December 2021 Mercredi 1 er décembre 2021

Orders of the Day

Supporting People and Businesses Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 visant à soutenir la population et les entreprises

Members’ Statements

Beyond the Streets Welland

Little Canada

Blastomycosis outbreak

Community services

Employment standards

Cumberland Heritage Village Museum

Volunteers

Treaties recognition

Local business

Annual report, Auditor General

Visitors

Question Period

Small business

Hospital services

Hospital services

Northern Ontario development

Highway tolls

Electric vehicles

Mental health and addiction services

Child care / Garde d’enfants

COVID-19 response

Electric vehicles

Minimum wage

Small business

Climate change

Land use planning

Introduction of Bills

Vos Food Store Equipment Ltd. Act, 2021

Making Northern Ontario Highways Safer Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 visant à accroître la sécurité des voies publiques dans le nord de l’Ontario

Safe and Healthy Communities Act (Addressing Gun Violence), 2021 / Loi de 2021 pour des collectivités saines et sécuritaires (traitant de la violence armé

e) Murray Whetung Community Service Award Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 sur les prix Murray Whetung pour services à la collectivité

Fairness for Road Users Act (Contraventions Causing Death or Serious Bodily Harm), 2021 / Loi de 2021 sur l’équité envers les usagers de la route (contraventions ayant causé un décès ou des blessures corporelles graves)

Cootes Paradise Water Accountability Act, 2021 / Loi Cootes Paradise de 2021 sur la responsabilité dans le domaine de l’eau

Awenen Niin Act (Who Am

I) Respecting Identity Documents, 2021 / Loi Awenen Niin (Qui suis-je) de 2021 concernant les pièces d’identité

Brunt and Kendall Act (Ensuring Safe Firefighter and Trainee Rescue Training), 2021 / Loi Brunt et Kendall de 2021 (formation sécuritaire des pompiers et des élèves pompiers en sauvetage)

Petitions

Post-stroke treatment

Environmental protection

Post-stroke treatment

Special-needs students

Dog ownership

Climate change

Dog ownership

Dog ownership

Dog ownership

Long-term care

Special-needs students

Order of business

Orders of the Day

Supporting People and Businesses Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 visant à soutenir la population et les entreprises

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Supporting People and Businesses Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 visant à soutenir la population et les entreprises

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 30, 2021, on the motion for third reading of the following bill:

Bill 13,

An Act to amend various Acts / Projet de loi 13, Loi modifiant diverses lois.

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

Mr. Paul Miller: Good morning. The government bill we are discussing today, Bill 13, or the Supporting People and Businesses Act, seems to be less about support and more about regulation and changes around the edges. While the people and businesses of this province can all agree that red tape and time-wasting bureaucratic runarounds are frustrating, and in many cases defeating, there are common concerns that are being brought up in my office that we may be throwing the baby out with the bathwater as the government looks to modernize.

I’d like to start with going digital. While I can admit that I have become pretty handy with a smartphone, I can also freely admit that I’m not the first person to call when the computer won’t boot up or if the online order didn’t go through properly.

It is clear to everyone, especially since the start of the pandemic, that online is the future. It might be the direction we, as a society, are inevitably headed in, but we have to be careful about the speed and insistence of the process.

As members of provincial Parliament, it can easily be taken for granted that the computers, their Internet connections and all of the devices that run off of them are paid for with public dollars and are operated by staff who have great knowledge of how to use them. We forget that when something goes wrong with the system, there is a service desk worker who is ready to fix our problems. We know that if there is a question, it is normally Google we turn to or, failing that, a more tech-savvy person who is a little more up to date.

We rarely, if ever, stop to think about the privilege we have when moving around our environment, as everything generally runs smoothly and tasks can be accomplished without too much effort.

So when government says that they are going to make life much more efficient for the people and businesses of Ontario, do they say this from a position of digital privilege or from the perspective of many of the constituents who do not have a computer, who do not have access to the Internet and those who, through no fault of their own, don’t have the capacity to understand how to use a web browser online? There is also the ongoing issue of people who live in rural areas or in northern Ontario who, to this day, do not have equal access to broadband technology, let alone a reliable Internet connection.

Recently, a local business operator contacted my office looking for help. He is an honest, hard-working business person. He pays his taxes, has a few workers and helps people out in his community. He was informed by a ministry that he owed a fee associated with his business. While he was prepared and willing to pay this fee, he was stuck with how to actually proceed with the payment. The business owner does not and has never owned a computer or smartphone. He is in his mid-sixties and was a steelworker for much of his life.

There was never much need for computers and high-tech communications technology when he was hauling steel products around the yard. He was informed by ministry staff that to pay the fee he needed an online account with them. He also required a credit card to pay the nearly $2,000 fee. This was not a possibility and no referral to the local library was going to assist him.

While our office with the help of some ministry staff were able to assist this person with their payment, the solution was not what we had thought. The preferred option would have been for the business owner to send a certified cheque or money order to the ministry. We were informed that online was the only way he could pay. We were forced to comply with the new way or to hit the highway, so to speak.

This is going to be a problem. If digital solutions are going to be the way our people interact with their government, it has to improve. I am not opposed to digital options to renew a health card or to update your new address, but there still needs to be an option to fill out the form and deliver it in person to a brick-and-mortar location for processing or by email, if it’s permitted.

There should not be a cost associated with interacting with your government, but we seem to be moving in that direction at an incredible speed. If we are going to support people and businesses, as is suggested in this act, then we need to educate, inform and subsidize people to have access to the digital world. Internet should be classified as an essential service and a subsidized one if our government plans to move all interaction into the digital realm.

We must also continue to remind ourselves that not everyone has the ability to surf the web like we do. We have to make sure that the options and supports are there or we will be leaving people behind in the Dark Ages of letters, phones and fax machines that may no longer connect to their leaders or service providers.

Speaking of leaving people behind, I need to take some time to talk about the support small businesses in my riding and around the province are still in desperate need of. Many are still hurting from the lockdowns and continued lack of customers, and many are still wondering if they can keep the lights on as the supports dwindle away. Hospitality, personal services and entertainment seem to be the areas that have really been struggling to catch up to the rest of the economy. The vaccine passport has been helpful in encouraging people to venture out more to their local restaurants, hair salons and live music venues, but it is clear that the world is not back to where it once was.

I was speaking with a local restaurant owner and he reported that during the lockdown period, when he could not have anyone in his restaurant and before patios were a thing, he had lost nearly $1.5 million in revenue. He is doing his best to recuperate but it is hard to come back from such an overwhelming deficit. While much of his operational costs were reduced, and many of the government programs were helpful, they are still a drop in the bucket compared to what he lost.

This experience is also being noted by a local tattoo parlour that has not yet received a response to their application for grant programs, as the owner’s mental health was too poor to ensure all of the relevant i’s were dotted and t’s were crossed. Ministry staff have been somewhat helpful in many of these types of cases but there are many people and businesses that have fallen through the cracks and are still suffering.

Some of these concerns go back to my first comments about digitization. While business owners are typically assumed to be more organized than the general public, it’s wrong to assume that all of them were set up with scanners, printers and webcams when their pre-COVID business was conducted with cash in hand and paper receipts. There is little reason a tattoo parlour would need a commercial-grade printer and a scanner prior to the pandemic. And with much of the equipment hard to come by during the rush to work from home, it can be determined that much of the online application processes were out of reach of many.

What was needed and still is needed are more staff members willing and able to guide these small business owners through this process with patience and understanding.

Then there are the major concerns being raised about the Ontario Business Registry and its many failings, with recent statements from concerned legal groups that the people have experienced “system shutdowns, technical glitches and substantive problems associated with the new OBR.”

I have never heard a complaint in my office about the business registration process in the past, but now I’m hearing about it on a weekly basis. The push to new and online services needs to keep in the mind the human element of business. Not all businesses have a team of lawyers, IT specialists and government relations communications strategists to deal with all of the changes that are confusing. We’re also all at risk of being—

Interjections.

Mr. Paul Miller: Speaker, I’m having trouble. That’s a lot of distraction going on.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I would ask the other members to please respect who has the floor and try to keep the noise down or take it outside.

Mr. Paul Miller: Thank you.

The push to new and online services needs to keep in mind the human element of business. Not all businesses have a team of lawyers, IT specialists and the government relations communications strategists to deal with all the changes and confusion.

We hear all of this talk about being open for business, but it’s starting to look like there are only certain types of businesses that are desired by our government: businesses with deep pockets that are willing to scratch a back or two; businesses that employ thousands, but manage to avoid taxes while collecting subsidies; and businesses that see collective agreements as barriers to profits and see paid sick days as a nuisance, despite being one of the best ways to prevent the further spread of illnesses in our province.

Small businesses are the ones that have always been the backbone of our economy. Small businesses have always been the avenue for those among us who still believe that hard work and following the rules is the way to succeed. Small businesses have always been the gateway to a decent and honest middle-class life. But it is small business that is bearing the brunt of our economic reality. That is why small businesses still need to be supported financially.

Despite the NDP’s constant reminders that more direct financial support is needed, there has not been any talk about a potential third round of grants for businesses that are still struggling. There has been little talk about helping people with the transition from paper and pens to the glitchy and unforgiving government portals that are online.

Nothing has been said about the potential of information going online and its exposure to hackers or scammers. How does the average business owner tell the difference between a government of Ontario email and a scam artist looking for information that can be sold on the open market at a hefty price? What guarantees are out there that the various ministries with whom companies interact will be willing to work with people on an individual level to ensure that the paperwork is filed on time and accurately?

In the past, a paper trail was simple to follow up on. A tracking number on a parcel or envelope could be used as confirmation that a form or item had been submitted at a certain time and date. If there is a dispute over whether a form was submitted on time or not, how are the government officials going to go back to see what the error might have been?

To do this right, the government is going to have to look beyond efficiencies and begin to look at how the business sector of our economy is going to function in the future. Life is becoming more and more complex every day, and people are becoming frustrated with the constant need for newer, better and faster.

Believe it or not, there are many in this province who do not want to live their lives on a cellphone or in front of a monitor. One of the most missed parts of life that we have lost over the pandemic has been face-to-face interaction. While the long line at ServiceOntario locations has always been the butt of a joke, it’s still the efficient and helpful staff who work there who have been able to guide people through their paperwork and explain the reasons behind the many forms and ID checks. I’m sure that many of the helpful service staff can still operate from home, but the business of living or working in Ontario cannot be done entirely online unless there’s real and significant support.

The more complicated we make our system, the less resilient it becomes. While we like to think that the lights will always come on when we hit the switch, sometimes they don’t. We all remember the northeast blackout of 2003, and we also know that unheard of things can always come out somewhere to haunt us.

Let’s make sure that when we make the claim that we’re making things better, we are including everyone and taking all potential pitfalls, drawbacks and backup plans into consideration. If we are going to support business and people, we need to support all businesses and all people, no matter their level of technical savvy, no matter their type of business, their age or income, or how many lawyers and tech specialists they have at their disposal.

If a business cannot register in the province of Ontario, what faith is left in how our system operates? If a health card renewal cannot be completed online unless you are also fortunate and privileged enough to have a driver’s licence, then what are the other options?

We have to be careful when people begin to feel like they live outside of our system. When they finally shrug their shoulders and say enough is enough, while the march of time is inevitable and the progress of technology is unstoppable, we need to remind ourselves of who is being left behind. In this case, it is the poor, the elderly and those who do not possess the capability to be a 21st-century citizen like their government expects them to be. This is not a pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps scenario. I’m sure that in time the people of Ontario will become comfortable with the new digital age, but we cannot drag people into it if they do not have the ability to adapt quick enough.

People across the world are tired of the phrase, “We are living in unprecedented times.” Every day, the news has something else to worry about or something new that has to be done to protect ourselves and others. People need to know that the carpet has not been pulled from beneath them and they will not be denied the ability to obtain OHIP coverage or a health card or register their new small business without being told to go online or call a new 1-800 number and wait on hold for an hour or more before being connected to a voice or a person.

Cutting red tape can be an effective tool to smooth out the many bumps of getting something accomplished, but it should not be about putting up barriers in front of those who are not able to keep up with the rest of their peers. Let’s ensure that we all move forward together, and that people who need the support, whether it’s financial or personal, need to receive it with patience, understanding and with no strings attached.

Speaker, I, for one, in my riding, daily have people coming in for whom we have to fill out the forms for various reasons. They may have a language barrier. They may have some mental issues so that they can’t handle it. Every day, I get it. And there’s no way that this government can expect people in those situations—and some can’t write. Believe it. I couldn’t believe it: The illiteracy rate in this province is very high. I couldn’t believe it. It’s like 12%, in an educated province. What do these people do? Not only are they not able write or read, they can’t even operate a computer. It’s no good to them. Has the government got a contingency plan to deal with these people?

Yesterday, one member stood up and said, “Oh, well, you know, my office handles everything. They can just come in there.” That’s not how it works; trust me. A lot of them don’t have computers, and sometimes the offices are closed on weekends. They’re open usually from 9 in the morning until 4:30, with an hour for lunch—usually, our offices are. People have lives. They go about their lives. They have jobs. They work shift work. They do all that. They may be held up a week or two before they can get to the office to be able to even do it. So that’s a poor argument, to say the least.

I know for a fact that—I’ve got stacks of files in my office from people who have issues, who have been dealing with the government under normal conditions in the way they used to be able to do it: paper, pen, sign their name. But the computer world? It’s great. I’m for moving ahead, technology. We have to compete. We have to be worldwide competitive.

I understand that, but you also have to remember there’s a good chunk of our population that’s not ready to convert that quickly, and to have the time to run down to their MPP’s office every time they want something signed or put through a computer—because there are lots of things going on in the world that don’t even really have anything to do with our offices, but we help people if we can. My office even does tax returns for people who can’t even do their tax returns.

So I don’t know if the governments take this under consideration when they’re deciding to move ahead quickly. Yes, we have to compete. Yes, we have to be able to have our businesses compete worldly and throughout North America, but we also are losing a lot of people who probably would want to contribute, would want to compete, but they can’t, because they don’t have the technology or the wherewithal or the ability to use the new technology.

So yes, move ahead, but move ahead cautiously, and don’t leave those people behind, because our offices and this building will be inundated with people if we don’t handle this properly. So I’m hoping that the government is going to have a really strong contingency plan to deal with these types of situations, because they are going to crop up very quickly as we move ahead in the digital world.

In closing, I never heard, for a lot of these things in the presentation or in the bill, how they were going to deal with it. They had all these great ideas of what they’re going to do, and that’s fine, but I didn’t see anything where they’re going to help the hundreds of thousands of people in this province who will have difficulty with this process, until they get to a point where through help, through training—even their relatives can help them to get through this phase.

What the member forgets is that we have an aging population. By the year 2025, 40% of our population will be seniors—40%. Are they going to be able to live in this Ontario the way they want to, feel free and not have to worry about filing stuff or getting stuff in on time because they can’t use a computer? I hope not, because that’s a scary situation.

I hope this government takes into consideration all the people out there who don’t have the privilege or the ability to have the equipment in the offices in this building, which most people don’t even have a clue about or have a chance for, or can’t afford that situation. They need help. Thank you.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): Questions and responses?

Mr. Will Bouma: I have to say, I so much appreciate engaging with my friend from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek. I think that’s the reason why I appreciate my friendship with him so much: because he has a way of expressing the real needs of the people of Ontario in a way that can bring us all together. You have my pledge in my small role here in the back corner to work with you, to make sure that we take care of people that way, and thank you for bringing that forward.

I wanted to ask him, in the spirit of that: We have such a housing crisis in the province of Ontario and, as I’m sure the member knows, we’re moving to give councils the ability to delegate more responsibilities to staff—qualified staff—so that we can get more good projects moving forward faster in the province of Ontario. I was wondering if the member could provide the same wisdom that he has given on these other issues that he has spoken about today to that topic of how we can move forward on building housing faster and delegating those responsibilities, instead of meeting after meeting.

Mr. Paul Miller: I thank the member from Brantford–Brant. That’s a good question. Certainly in the housing situation, as we know, we’re short affordable housing all over the province and we have to move in that direction. I think that the way to do that is to work hand in hand with the developers and the builders, and try to come to an agreement through the government and the funds that are put out by the government, to work equitably to get these projects going and under way. It benefits the economy, it benefits the trades and crafts, and it benefits a lot of labour work.

It’s very important to move ahead, and I’m glad to see that you’re very concerned about that housing situation, because I’m sure in Brant they have situations similar to Hamilton, too; we’re very close neighbours. So yes, I hope we can move in that direction.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): Questions and responses?

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: Good morning. I appreciated the comments from my colleague from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek. I very much appreciated your emphasis on equitable access, because I think the stretch goal is that by 2025, we hope that everyone will have access to the Internet. But I think you really nailed it when it was—those are issues in Thunder Bay: affordability, persons with disabilities, literacy. Those are all issues that we need to ensure that this government has a handle on and that we help people navigate the system.

My question to you is: I believe that we need to create navigator positions if we’re going to digitalize, because there are many people who will fall through the cracks. What do you think of that idea?

Mr. Paul Miller: I like that question from my colleague. It’s a really strong question. Obviously, we certainly have to navigate. We certainly have to set up networking for people who are facing these challenges.

What I find, and what I have found over the years, is that here in Toronto we kind of live in a bubble; we have the ability to have the technology support from our staff and the people in this building. It makes life easier for us as MPPs, but I also know that once we step out, it’s not the reality for a good portion of the population. And so when we make decisions in this House, we also have to put our shoes on the other person’s foot so that they understand about why we made the decision and how we can help them get to the point where we would like to see them. Until that happens, we’re going to have a bit of a pushback, I think.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I recognize the member from Markham–Thornhill.

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: Thank you to the member from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek for your presentation. Mr. Speaker, the infrastructure deficit is a huge problem in Ontario. I was a municipal councillor, and we were sitting around and talking for years and years about how we could fix the infrastructure deficit, not only in small municipalities but in major, larger municipalities as well.

I strongly believe we should find every avenue possible to speed up the approval process, which would allow us to tackle this shortage. This would allow for more affordable housing to be built in many cities in the province. Does the member opposite support the proposed changes to the Planning Act that would give councils the ability to handle some of the approval process and speed up the building of this much-needed infrastructure?

Mr. Paul Miller: I thank the member for his question. I had the fortunate experience to have sat on city council for many years. We dealt with engineering, planning, and parks and recreation, so I’m very familiar with the Planning Act and I’m very familiar with the OMB. I know that we have to work with them to get things accomplished, projects and that. But also, when we are doing the planning, we have to take into consideration the green space, we have to take into consideration all the other impacts environmentally that it will have on the areas where we’re going to build the housing. That has to be an important thing.

With all due respect, I think the present government and the last government were very weak in the environmental area, as far as fines and going after polluters and that. We let them off far too long. It certainly causes problems and cuts down the choices for housing, where we can put them, because of these situations. I think you have to work in hand with the municipalities as well in the Planning Act.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I recognize the member from Mushkegowuk–James Bay.

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: I thank my colleague from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek. I like your speeches, because you bring the reality that I think all offices have dealt with, what you talked about this morning. But you also mentioned how small businesses are struggling. I believe that in all ridings they are, and yet we on this side of the House have been calling for a third wave of funding.

We heard recently that they gave $1 billion on Highway 407; that money could have been used to bring in a third wave of funding. I’d like to hear your thoughts on this.

Mr. Paul Miller: I’m not going to stand in the way of progress. I’m sure we certainly need transportation in some way or form, no matter how it is, because we have to move goods and things through the province. But if the roadway that is being put in is equal beside the other roadway that’s already there that we don’t own, I have a concern about that, moving east and west. They have made huge profits on the 407, which a former government gave away, as far as I’m concerned. Billions in money that could have gone towards other projects—homelessness, building affordable housing, and all the other things.

The argument this week about giving a couple of billion dollars back to manufacturers on the backs of injured workers—$2 billion. You have to look at the priorities and get them straight. Some of that money that’s being given back has to be put towards the things we need.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I recognize the member from Niagara West.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: My thanks to the member from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek for his commentary. One of the things, I think, that the member always speaks about quite eloquently when he refers to government regulations is the need to ensure that there’s a balance for not just cutting regulations that are going to protect the health and safety of Ontarians. What we’ve very intentionally done as a government is reduce the unnecessary duplication or replication of government regulations that don’t serve to protect the health and safety of Ontarians, while also maintaining those which do.

Perhaps the member opposite could speak a little bit about the importance of maintaining some regulations, good regulations, which protect the health and safety of workers and families and job creators in the province, but then also the need for balancing that with not having duplicative or unnecessary burdens.

Mr. Paul Miller: The member has a good point. I’ve always been one to complain about duplication, and regulations certainly play their role. But the member should know that, over the years, I’ve witnessed that regulations can be changed by a cabinet decision without any discussion, but if it’s a bill or a law, it can’t be changed without discussion in here. So some of the regulations that are changed could be questionable as to who it’s helping or who it’s suited for.

Regulations, yes, are needed, but you can’t cherry-pick what kind of regulations you’re going to do for development, or at the expense of the environment or other organizations in the province; you have to bring everybody under the umbrella when you do that. Unfortunately, that hasn’t happened for many, many decades in this place.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): We have time for a very short question.

Ms. Sandy Shaw: Thank you to my colleague from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek. This bill is entitled Supporting People and Businesses Act, and it’s my opinion that there’s very little in this bill that actually helps people, and this bill is coming in the context of a government budget that’s cutting money from education, cutting money from our public schools and giving forgiveness of a billion dollars to the 407.

Should there be something more concrete in a bill that says it’s supporting people in this bill?

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): A very short answer from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek.

Mr. Paul Miller: I agree with you.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): Further debate?

Mr. Will Bouma: Speaker, it’s so good to be here this morning. I really appreciate the back and forth today, and I’m sure that’s because of your strong will here in the House.

I wanted to start, actually, by thanking everyone who works behind the scenes so that we can actually make these things happen. I’m sure the members who are speaking this morning—we’re all dependent on our staff to make sure that we have something to say here in the House. We all have that, so I wanted to just take a moment this morning before saying anything else to thank all of the people who make this possible. To Milan, thank you for this here today and for working with me on making this come forward.

I’m so pleased to be able to rise and speak about this next version of our red tape reduction bill here in the House today. It has been such a pleasure, especially, to hear the supportive comments on the concept of getting rid of duplication, making things easier, with reminders to not leave people behind in the province of Ontario.

I also want to acknowledge that this is the first proposed legislation that has been raised by my friend and colleague the Honourable Nina Tangri, the Associate Minister of Small Business and Red Tape Reduction, since she has assumed that role, and I’m very pleased to be able to play a small role in that.

For the second year in a row now, our government has tackled the COVID-19 pandemic head-on, and residents and business in my home riding of Brantford–Brant and, indeed, across all of Ontario continue to contend with the effects and yet unknown challenges, but we are strong, we are resilient, and we are united in this.

Ontario has been moving forward in a way that protects the safety and health of people while supporting the economy on which we depend to feed our families and to keep them warm. I am particularly pleased to be part of a government that has a dedicated team in place for reducing red tape and removing odious regulations that have been piled on by successive governments in the past.

That’s not to cut down previous governments; what I’ve learned in my short time here is that, very often, new things come forward with the best of intentions, but a lot of the old things don’t automatically disappear. These things just naturally seem to pile up and build on each other. Consider it like with the weather we’ve been having; like a snowball, you start rolling and, before long, it gets difficult to move. These regulations contributed to the loss, though, of over 300,000 well-paying manufacturing jobs during the last provincial government, jobs that New York, Michigan, Ohio and Indiana profited from.

The origin of the word “red tape” in the Western world is generally believed to include the practice of binding important documents in red ribbon. In many cases, it was difficult for people to obtain these documents for various reasons, including filing for pension benefits, and therefore the term “red tape” has been a common part of our vernacular to describe overly complex and needlessly cumbersome government policies and procedures.

That being said, Speaker, outdated and duplicative requirements are burdens that no business or individual needs, especially in today’s busy lifestyles. It’s not just a waste of time but a waste of real dollars that could be spent elsewhere, strengthening and protecting our economy. Constituents in Brantford and Brant have described to me the outdated paper processes of starting a small business and completing paper forms only to have to prove the same requirements have already been fulfilled several times over.

This bill does more than eliminate needless regulatory compliance requirements. It also makes huge strides in modernizing Ontario’s regulatory system. If passed, this bill would introduce changes that will expedite, streamline and digitize how businesses and individuals interact with the province of Ontario.

Speaker, let me give you a few examples of how this bill, if passed, will streamline and simplify a seemingly easy endeavour for businesses but that is anything but easy. In Ontario, for a licensed restaurant, bar or hospitality business to create or even extend outdoor patio spaces, it’s a patchwork of bylaw, regulation, rules and process. In one municipality, business owners are required to apply for a road occupancy permit and enter into an encroachment agreement, where applicable, which is subject to the approval of the public works commission.

The criteria include location, design standards, structural standards, visual standards and several additional criteria. Then, application requirements that include drawings complete the on-street patio licence and enter into a licence agreement with the municipality.

The approvals process includes submitting five copies of the required plans and drawings; submit to the planning department and revise the application in response to staff comments, if necessary; clear conditions set, if any, and install the on-street patio; then contact the municipality for inspection and then obtain the final approval from the said planning department.

Speaker, I’m sure you know in your own community, these things can take months. How do you take advantage of that during a pandemic, when you’re just trying to keep your business going? This bill, if passed, says yes to restaurants and other licensed establishments and will create a groundwork that will allow for the creation and extension of outdoor patio spaces.

I remember talking about something similar when I was on council and we wanted to make businesses on our main streets in the county of Brant more accessible. You can get these little ramps that will go in. I remember saying to staff, “We have to make this easy.” So, with a simple one-page form, a business can put in their insurance so that we have the liability coverage, proof of insurance, what they’re doing and where they’re doing it, and sign it off; and, boom, stamp, it’s approved and you can put it in.

I remember it taking months, and then back to council and back, which is why I’m so excited to see some of this delegation happening. These don’t need to be planning committee approvals and then weeks later going to the council, and then if something happens, it gets delayed by a month. We need to be able to do these things more responsively, and I’m pleased to see that we’re making some of those changes.

Another part of this bill, if passed, will be simplifying the Building Opportunities in the Skilled Trades Act, 2021. Our government is simplifying Ontario’s skilled trades and apprenticeship system to make it easier for apprentices, tradespeople and employers. Speaker, in my entire time on county council, private practice as an optometrist and as a member of provincial Parliament, I have yet to meet a tradesperson or business owner who has said “Well, I love the Ontario College of Trades. They really helped me achieve my goals.” I never heard that.

A new crown agency called Skilled Trades Ontario will replace the Ontario College of Trades. It will release a new online portal that will allow tradespeople and apprentices to access services in one place, in one window, including registration, the issuance and renewal of certificates and trade equivalency assessments, with many services being offered online and self-paced.

This bill also speaks perfectly to our government’s foreign credentials strategy that was announced recently.

For some context, Speaker, here are some facts: Nearly one in three journeypersons are aged 55 or older, while the average age of a new apprentice is 30. In construction alone, the province needs 100,000 more skilled workers over the next decade. The current system is difficult to navigate because of the maze between the Ontario College of Trades and the Ministry of Labour, Training and Skills Development.

In early 2020, the Ministry of Labour, Training and Skills Development received approval to move forward with a skilled trades strategy which is focused on breaking the stigma and attracting more young people to the skilled trades, simplifying the system, and encouraging employer participation in apprenticeships.

On May 6, 2021, the Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development, my friend and colleague the Honourable Monte McNaughton, introduced new legislation entitled the Building Opportunities in the Skilled Trades Act, which would incorporate the Skilled Trades Panel recommendations and our government’s prior commitments.

In September 2020, Minister McNaughton committed to keeping whole trades, not breaking them into skill sets and restricted activities. This received broad support across stakeholders.

Phase 1, September to December 2020: The panel provided recommendations on a new service delivery model to replace the Ontario College of Trades, the functions which should be retained and delivered by the ministry or delivered through another entity, and the functions which could be eliminated. The panel put out an open call for ideas. They received 67 written submissions and held 24 meetings with stakeholders. The panel’s phase 1 report was made publicly available on May 6.

Skilled Trades Ontario, as Ontario’s training authority, would be the agency that would promote the skilled trades as a career of choice, develop industry-informed training standards, and deliver client-facing services in one window. This would also include apprentice registration; development and maintenance of apprenticeship training and curriculum standards; development, maintenance and administration of examination and exams; as well as the issuance of certificates and licences.

Administration of hearings relating to registration, certification and licensing decisions would also be included if passed, Speaker. The assessment of non-apprenticeship stream applicants trade and equivalency assessments would be part of this.

Skilled Trades Ontario would maintain the public register and maintain the digital portal. The responsibility of the ministry would include system oversight and regulatory decisions. This would include agency oversight; legislation and regulatory governance; compliance and enforcement, including the ability to establish an advisory committee; promotion and oversight for labour mobility for Canadian and international tradespeople; program design and administration of skilled trades and apprenticeship funding programs and supports.

The minister would continue to approve and fund in-class training providers, prescribe trades for the purposes of apprenticeship training, and classify trades as compulsory and therefore mandatory training and certification. The ministry would continue to make regulatory decisions like ratios and exemptions.

If the proposed legislation is passed, implementation would begin immediately and would include consultation and development of proposed regulations, which happened in summer to fall of 2021.

Skilled Trades Ontario leadership recruitment was to be initiated over the summer so that board and CEO appointments could be made by December 2021. Existing college service delivery would be transitioned to Skilled Trades Ontario in December 2021. Integration of additional agency functions, such as registration and exams, would take place over three years.

Further, to make the process more streamlined, if passed, all prescribed trades would be legally defined as trades. Trades could further be classified as compulsory or not. Regulation based on full scopes of practice would be restored to support system stability and provide for increased interprovincial alignment and labour mobility, i.e., Red Seal.

An apprenticeship program would be required to correspond to a trade’s scope of practice, which may include on-the-job training standards, in-class curriculum standards, examinations and other requirements. Prohibitions would include requirements that individuals may not engage in the practice of a compulsory trade and persons may not employ them to do so unless the individual is a registered apprentice, holds a certificate of qualification or a provisional certificate of qualification, or is exempted by regulation. Current exemptions include those enabling the Ontario Youth Apprenticeship Program to legally operate.

Further improvements would include the public register maintained by the agency and would focus on individuals authorized to practise in compulsory trades and would indicate Red Seal endorsements where applicable.

Trade equivalency assessments would be well-supported by the agency. Timely and accurate verification of non-Ontario prior learning and job experience would be a priority area for the agency, including harmonizing Red Seal more efficiently and training protocols for exemption of tests.

Digital service delivery improvements initiated by the ministry would be continued by the agency. It is anticipated that the agency would be well positioned to be responsive to and ensure continued alignment with industry needs. The digital system would improve the registration process, accessing information about financial supports, scheduling of in-school training, digital logbooks, exam booking and certification. Sponsors also want more access to their apprentices’ progress.

If the proposed legislation is passed, implementation would begin immediately and would include consultation and development of proposed regulations in the summer and fall of 2021. Skilled Trades Ontario leadership recruitment would be in initiated over the summer so that the board and CEO appointments could be made by December 2021. Existing college service delivery would be transitioned to Skilled Trades Ontario in December. Integration of additional agency functions, such as registration exams, would take place over three years.

Speaker, we are continuing to reduce red tape and streamline the process that will support Ontario’s hard-working families and the economy as a whole. That being said, people who come to Ontario with foreign experience and qualifications often face multiple barriers to employment, particularly in regulated professions. These barriers include multiple costly language assessments, as immigrants have to complete multiple tests for the purposes of immigration and professional licensing.

Other barriers also include lengthy credential recognition processes. Licensing time in some regulated professions takes up to 18 months or more, while workers wait in limbo, wasting valuable time when they could be contributing more to our economy and providing for their families.

Often cited as the most odious and burdensome barrier are the requirements for Canadian work experience. These requirements mean that in many cases, someone who has been practising their profession for years in another jurisdiction cannot do so in Ontario, simply because they have not worked in Ontario. If passed, we are addressing the issues that my constituents face in obtaining a job that matches their level of qualification.

Because of this, many immigrants are not able to fully apply their skills and contribute to the economy. I know first-hand that many employers in my home riding of Brantford–Brant are literally desperate to hire workers from all skill levels, and these changes will certainly help in this regard.

Also, this bill, if passed, will bring a brighter future for Ontario’s youth. First, we’ll be providing better access to skilled trades, as I previously elaborated on. Then, we’ll be providing Second Career streamlining. The Second Career program helps unemployed workers who are older to gain the skills they need for good jobs that are in high demand. This program will fill jobs that are critical to Ontario’s economic strength and growth. Thirdly, we will provide more options for advanced learning, i.e., an applied masters degree.

In addition to this, we are considering increasing college degree caps. This would give students more opportunities to access high-quality education and ensure they graduate with skills, expertise and credentials that meet labour market demands. The fourth point: If passed, we will propose increasing tuition transparency, which will be a great boon to all of our students.

Fifth, and something that is near and dear to me as an active volunteer firefighter in the County of Brant Fire Department, will be, if passed, making it easier to volunteer in general. We are proposing to eliminate the processing fees related to criminal records checks for individuals applying for volunteer positions.

Mr. Speaker, volunteerism is such an integral part of our communities all across Ontario. For example, the volunteers of our four cadet corps in the Brantford–Brant area air, sea, army and navy league keep hundreds of youth off the streets, away from shopping mall parking lots and out of trouble while learning basic skills such as respect, hard work, drill and giving back to the community. And I know first-hand several cadets that have aged out of the program and credit the cadet program for encouraging them to stay in school, out of trouble—and kept them occupied for six to eight hours a week. None of this would be possible without the dedication of volunteer officers.

To any cadet, cadet parent or cadet officer watching this, I want you to know that our government is here to support you and promote the work that you are doing with our youth, and it’s so much appreciated. I remember seeing the top two cadets from all four corps here in the Legislature before COVID, and it was with so much pride, wearing their uniforms and having the opportunity to be appreciated here.

Mr. Speaker, I suddenly have more speech than I have time left, and so in the closing seconds, I just wanted to thank everyone here for the opportunity to talk about red tape and red tape reduction. Everyone here is on the same page. We need to take care of our people, but we need to make their lives less burdensome so that they can enjoy everything that our incredible province has to offer for themselves, for their work careers and for their families.

That’s why I’m so pleased that these bills keep coming forward, and I look forward to seeing this passed in the House with unanimous support.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): It is now time for questions and responses.

Mr. Paul Miller: I’d like to thank the member from Brant for his presentation. He spent a good portion of it on trades, and that’s kind of right down my alley. I have a couple of trades. I was an industrial mechanic/welder/fitter in heavy industry for 32 years.

I’m well aware of the College of Trades and when it first initially started, there were some difficulties because of the fees they were charging to certain elements of our society that didn’t—some of the trades made a lot more money than other ones they were calling trades, whether it was a hairdresser, and they weren’t making the kind of money an electrician did, and they were charging them the same amounts for their yearly fees. That caused a lot of aggravation in our offices because people felt that you have one mechanic in a garage and he’s paying the same.

So would the member be including some fee structure that’s going to be fair to all the other classifications in his presentation?

Mr. Will Bouma: I appreciate the question. My third son is in grade 12. He actually has enough credits that he can do his co-op this coming winter, and he wants to be an electrician.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I recognize the member from Parry Sound–Muskoka.

Mr. Norman Miller: Thank you to the member for Brantford–Brant for an excellent presentation. He covered a lot of ground, talking about outdoor patios and changes there, Skilled Trades Ontario, foreign credentials, volunteers. But I want to ask him about the justice system.

COVID has required government to make many adjustments to how we provide services across many sectors. It has also shown us some major issues in legislation and regulation that were outdated and in need of modernization. And I do feel that our Attorney General has done a great job. He has been making major improvements through our government’s mandate with several bills and initiatives.

One of those initiatives, amending the Barristers Act, is included in this bill. Can the member talk about the changes the government is making to the Barristers Act and elaborate on why we have to keep Ontario’s justice system up to date, please?

Mr. Will Bouma: Just to the member from Parry Sound–Muskoka, thank you for the question and thank you for your wisdom and insights in being here, teaching us new kids on the block how to get through this. But I have to agree: The Attorney General has done an excellent job of modernizing Ontario’s justice system.

Through Bill 13, our government is proposing to repeal a

section of the Barristers Act to remove an outdated courtroom procedure that prioritizes cases of senior lawyers and does not recognize licensed paralegals. That’s difficult to understand, that in the 21st century we would still be doing that, but this is just another great example of how simple changes can make a big difference. And some of them do have to be legislative; they’re not just all regulatory that could be made inside of a ministry. To see these types of changes and a whole philosophy across government in order to bring these good changes about is so pleasing to see.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I recognize the member from Thunder Bay–Atikokan.

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: I thank member from Brantford–Brant for his presentation. I, too, appreciated the comments about the trades, something that I worked in, in establishing apprenticeships.

There are certain things that I would like a comment from the member on. One is that we stripped the funding for trades out of our high schools. Some of us are of an age where we saw that transition, and many people believe that that was a more direct employer relationship that was created very young and was a mistake from governments past.

The other is the underfunding of colleges, because employers are telling me and colleges are telling me that they can’t have those specialized trades programs because they don’t have the money to fund them. And in this day and age, it’s important. I would like to hear the comments from the member on those two things.

Mr. Will Bouma: I really appreciate that question from the member from Thunder Bay–Atikokan because it’s so absolutely true. We need 100,000 of the trades to come into the province of Ontario over the next decade. I’m right there with you.

To see those things get stripped out of—and I remember having tours of our high schools and seeing the 60-, 70-year-old equipment that they’re still using to train some of their students, and the lack of interest. I believe that we need a cross-government approach in order to encourage that, and I am so pleased that at least in my riding, I’ve been able to put together the schools and industry and the colleges in order to bring that full, wraparound service, not just to make the trades attractive to our students—because quite frankly, it should not be a job of last resort. The trades are so good.

We need all kids interested in the trades and we need to start that from kindergarten all the way through grade 12 to get them in there.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I recognize the member from Whitby.

Mr. Lorne Coe: Many of us in the Legislature have journeyed here through serving on municipal councils and we understand that there’s a long-standing challenge with the planning and development processes within municipalities, whether it’s upper tier or lower tier. This legislation—you’ll know from your own presentation yesterday, Speaker—makes significant changes, and those changes are designed to address the significant deficit that we inherited related to affordable housing and infrastructure.

Could the member for Brantford–Brant speak to the effect of those legislative changes and the impacts on allowing us to build more much-needed infrastructure?

Mr. Will Bouma: Thank you to the member from Whitby. I really, really appreciate that question, because you’re right: A lot of us have spent years on our local councils.

I don’t know, maybe I’m just dreaming, but as I speak to my municipal councils, as I speak to my mayors, I think we all realize the intense necessity of an incredible working relationship between the province and our municipalities to serve our people well. And I think the changes that we’re making in this bill in order for municipal councils to delegate some of the authority to make decisions to qualified staff inside so that these things can just be done in-house, because the cycles of meetings—I’m sure the members across the way that have spent time too, just the endless cycles of meetings. And you’re dealing with something with three months—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): Response.

Mr. Will Bouma: What does that add to the time frame to getting our people into attainable housing in their communities? These simple changes, again, across government make a big difference.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I recognize the member from Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas.

Ms. Sandy Shaw: This government has—every time they bring a bill forward, there’s a poison pill in there. This bill is no exception. Often the poison pill is an attack on the environment. We saw them bury in a bill the

schedule 6 to gut the conservation authorities. We saw them bury in a broadband bill a thing that would give the minister extreme powers with MZOs, making illegal MZOs legal. Now again we see in this bill that’s purporting to help people something that is again another attack on the environment.

You’re giving more broad powers to a minister who is undermining our environmental protections in this province. You’re exempting yourself from environmental assessments. The Bradford Bypass, your six-lane highway through the Holland Marsh, is exempted from an environmental assessment. Really, what does this government have against the environment?

Mr. Will Bouma: I appreciate the question from the member from Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas, but respectfully, I have to disagree. I think we’ve crafted this bill in a way that it can receive support from everyone. This is not a poison pill whatsoever.

We are proposing a minor amendment to the Environmental Assessment Act to clarify the authority to make changes to the types of projects covered by a class EA. The proposed amendment will not have any effect on existing class EAs until the minister uses his authority. Any proposal to move a project type from an individual comprehensive EA to a class EA would require additional public consultation.

I understand the opposition needs to find a way of voting against this legislation, but it’s simply not the case. Because I’ve seen that take too much time—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): Thank you. Further debate?

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: It’s always an honour to rise in this House to represent the people of Mushkegowuk–James Bay and to speak on the Supporting People and Businesses Act. Avec un

titre de même, on est un peu resté sur notre faim, ça va sans dire, quand ça vient aux besoins des commettants ou des Ontariens.

Speaker, this bill is the seventh of the government’s red tape reduction package, with 25 schedules and just 30 accompanying regulation changes. The people of Ontario deserve better than this bill. Les Ontariens méritent beaucoup mieux que ce que ce projet de loi dit, surtout avec un

titre où on dit supporter le monde et les entreprises.

The government states that this bill will protect and offer support for business and people. Speaker, we all know COVID-19 has been hard. Families and business were hit hard. This bill does nothing to help people get through the pandemic, and it does not do anything to help everyday people recover.

Malgré le fait que ce gouvernement dit avoir supporté les familles et les entreprises, je ne vois pas le même résultat qu’eux, monsieur le Président. Le gouvernement est fier de dire qu’ils ont fourni 3 milliards de dollars en prêts pour supporter les entreprises. Mais, comme vous le savez, un prêt reste un prêt. Un prêt aide peut-être dans le moment même, mais n’aide certainement pas dans le long terme.

Plusieurs petites entreprises dans mon comté n’ont pas fait demande pour votre prêt puisqu’elles ne voulaient pas être obligées d’ajouter à leur longue liste de factures et de paiements.

Speaker, let’s talk about other programs that this government claims help small businesses: the small business grant. They claim their program is working. I say this is not reality—well, maybe the reality in their buddy program, but certainly not for those who are not.

When you look at the bigger picture and what small businesses have been put through during the pandemic, offering programs that don’t deliver on their objectives is not very useful. If this small business grant was so successful, why is the program delivery so flawed, and why have so many businesses had to close their doors?

Dites-moi pourquoi une petite entreprise de mon comté qui a appliqué pour la subvention en mars 2020 attend toujours pour une réponse à sa demande. Pourquoi, mais pourquoi, est-ce qu’elle attend encore? Ceci ne fait pas de sens et n’est certainement pas une façon de montrer du support aux petites entreprises.

In fact, I want to continue to point out how your claim of helping people and small businesses is inaccurate. Our office received numerous calls from small businesses concerned about their application status for the small business grant. We asked your ministry if it was possible for applications for this program to still be under review. The response: “Absolutely. We are still going through applications.” How is this helping small businesses? How are they supposed to survive when the funding is not coming through? Well, the answer: Some of them can’t, and some did not.

We hear the members of government talk about their success and how they support and help businesses. But oddly enough, you don’t hear them talking about the ones that didn’t make it, the ones that fell through the cracks, the ones who couldn’t apply.

Durant cette pandémie, non seulement les entreprises en ont arraché, mais parlons des organismes à but non lucratif, des organismes communautaires : étiez-vous là pour les aider? Oui, il y avait des possibilités de programmes, mais comme vous l’avez bien dit vous-mêmes, certains qualifièrent et d’autres non. En plus, ces organismes n’avaient pas d’autres sources de revenus.

Les entreprises sont le coeur des communautés, mais plusieurs n’ont pas été capables de survivre et ont dû fermer. Malheureusement, les programmes n’étaient pas là pour les aider. Elles méritent un gouvernement à l’écoute de leurs besoins, un gouvernement qui ne prend pas un an à compléter des demandes de programme qui pourraient assurer leur survie.

Based on the number of complaints my constituency office has received regarding small business grants, this government is not making it easy for businesses.

Pourquoi est-ce que ce gouvernement n’offre pas une troisième vague de financement pour ces petites entreprises qui souffrent encore, ce qui pourrait potentiellement assurer leur survie? Je suis certain que plusieurs entreprises pourraient en bénéficier, non seulement dans mon comté, mais les comtés de tout le monde qui est assis dans cette Chambre.

Parlons des entreprises dans mon comté : je suis certain qu’une troisième vague de financement serait bénéfique pour les entreprises qui ont souffert énormément des fermetures liées à la COVID-19. Des entreprises comme les salons de coiffure, les spas : ces entreprises essaient encore de se remettre sur pied étant donné qu’elles ont été fermées le plus longtemps. Ça, c’est sans mentionner aussi les « outfitters », les camps qui amènent les touristes. Ils ont souffert; ils souffrent encore.

Dans mon comté, j’ai une propriétaire de salon de coiffure qui a fait demande pour le programme de subvention pour les petites entreprises. Elle a attendu des mois sans nouvelles de sa demande. Nous avons essayé de communiquer avec le ministère sans succès. Ça semble être l’histoire qui se répète : pas de réponse de ce gouvernement.

J’aimerais aussi me pencher sur les enjeux des restaurants et des petits motels. Ce gouvernement n’arrête pas de dire que les personnes, les entreprises ont su s’adapter durant les temps difficiles. « S’adapter », c’est un grand mot. Je sais que pour bien des restaurants dans mon comté, ils ont dû fermer leurs portes parce que faire du « takeout » n’est pas assez rentable. Il faut réaliser, monsieur le Président, que dans les petites communautés, la population n’est pas grande comme une ville de Toronto, Mississauga, et la liste s’ajoute. Leur dire de s’ajuster n’est pas la façon de faire les choses.

La survie des petits motels : personne ne pensait à eux. Dans mon comté, il y a plusieurs motels, des non-affiliés. Si on dit que les grosses chaînes de motels en ont arraché, imaginez-vous les petites. Celles-ci criaient au loup pour survivre.

It seems to me that this government is just thinking about reducing red tape with this bill and not thinking about supporting businesses and people. If you want to “improve efficiencies,” you need to understand underlying issues. Looking at the surface of this issue and reducing red tape doesn’t give you solutions, and it does not solve issues.

Let’s talk about improving efficiencies, which your government is proposing to do in this bill when it comes to

schedule 1. It is a known fact for everyone that the number of matters on the list in criminal court has drastically increased during COVID. The government talks about improving efficiencies. How can they talk efficiencies when new protocols are being put in place that add to the workload of the crown and their offices? Let me explain: For example, the new bail protocol is now in place. The result of this new bail protocol is even more work for the crown. Let’s be clear: There’s more work but no additional funding resources for putting it in place. Crowns are being asked to do more and more with less and less.

We’re asking them to make the impossible possible. Improving a few efficiencies does not answer to the larger problem of the crisis in our court system due to insufficient staff who are asked to do more.

What about bail? It is one of the most important parts of the entire legal system. We need a good bail system to allow our detainees to get bail in a timely manner. But also, we need more funding. We need more duty counsel, but duty counsel needs more resources to ensure a good bail system. We need more crowns to be able to cover additional bail courts. Without proper funding, without looking at the underlying issues and needs of our system, we won’t get better efficiencies, but we will keep seeing delayed justice for both the accused and the victims of crime.

The north needs more resources. We need more staffing. Also, let’s talk about coastal communities. Do you think by amending

schedule 1, our coastal communities will see better results? I don’t think so. In my riding, the coastal courts have not yet resumed. Can you imagine how long it’s going to take to get those moving again? Of course, it’s complicated. COVID-19 complicated things even more. How will counsel travel to those communities? As we know, each community has their own restrictions. Furthermore, transportation to get there—we’re talking staff, transportation staff, counsel. All of them will for sure have their own COVID protocols to follow. How do we address this?

Looking at the current state of our court system and the insufficient staff and resources, I would assume we are not going to get back on track. This is our court system. It’s—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I apologize to the member of Muskegowuk–James Bay, but there will be time for the rest of his speech later on.

Third reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Beyond the Streets Welland

Mr. Jeff Burch: It’s an honour to rise today to speak about a great initiative that volunteers created and led in my riding of Niagara Centre. It’s called Beyond the Streets Welland.

The volunteers at Beyond the Streets have a mission statement: “Nobody gets left behind.” Together, they serve at-risk low-income seniors and the homeless population of Welland.

I met Deanna, Cindy and Jade of Beyond the Streets at the pilot of the new breakfast program at Holy Trinity church, where Beyond the Streets has undertaken the important work of finding those experiencing homelessness in our community and connecting them to the new program. Every Thursday night, Beyond the Streets provides a free, hot meal at the Welland Farmers’ Market. They also hand out fresh produce, donated by Small Scale Farms.

But there’s a reason behind the name. These volunteers undertake important outreach work in hopes of connecting those in need to other services. These passionate volunteers teach us that homelessness is more pervasive and complex than people realize. They tell me that many of the people they serve are experiencing invisible homelessness, where an individual only occasionally has a place to stay. Unfortunately, this leads to situations where the person is so desperate to have a roof over their head that they stay in extremely dangerous situations. Those at risk of homelessness are often neighbours who have to choose between groceries and paying the increasingly unaffordable cost of rent.

Beyond the Streets runs on volunteer time and donations alone. Anyone who would like to volunteer or donate can contact them on Facebook or through their email at beyondthestreetswelland@outlook.com.

I hope this House will join me in thanking the team from Beyond the Streets for their vital work with the homeless, and the invisible homeless, in our community.

Little Canada

Mr. Stephen Crawford: It’s great to rise in the Legislature today to bring attention to Little Canada, which is an experience unlike any other. We are truly fortunate to live in the best country of the world, and Little Canada provides the opportunity to connect and see every part of this vast nation. You can visit towns, cities and special landmarks and journey through the spectacular landscape on a miniature scale.

This special attraction offers a chance to gain a deeper understanding and appreciation for our great country. Located at Yonge-Dundas Square in Toronto, I had the honour of touring this attraction, and it is truly impressive. Over 200,000 hours of work have been put into constructing and building this facility to date, and the work continues. So far, over 5,000 trees cover the landscape and 300 autonomous cars move around Little Canada.

In Little Canada, you can see locations such as Little Toronto with a 14-foot CN Tower, Little Niagara with its majestic Horseshoe Falls, and our nation’s capital, Little Ottawa, with a replica of Parliament Hill, and much more.

The president and founder, Jean-Louis Brenninkmeijer, is an Oakville resident. Of course, downtown Oakville is also in the miniature replica. Our charming downtown offers different cuisines, stores and waterfront parks. Whether you stop for food at one of our great restaurants, such as Seasons, Piano Piano, Pasquale’s or Justino’s Wood Oven Pizza, or visit one of the many great storefronts in our downtown, there’s something for everyone.

I encourage everybody to visit Little Canada to see our whole country in miniature, and also, of course, my home riding and beautiful downtown Oakville.

Blastomycosis outbreak

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: I am always honoured to rise in this House to speak on behalf of my constituents, and even more so when it’s to bring attention to a very important issue happening in my riding. Mr. Speaker, I want to bring our attention to the community of Constance Lake First Nation, which declared a state of emergency last Monday because of a suspected outbreak of a lung infection known as blastomycosis.

We have been working closely with the community, the public health unit and local partners to ensure their needs are met and supports they require are in place. The community is working hard to identify the source, but unfortunately, they have yet to identify it.

Our thoughts and prayers go out to the community, friends and families affected by the outbreak. We will continue to support them as they go through this state of emergency.

With that being said, I understand that the government has reached out to the community and are working with them. I am encouraging the government to continue to be there for the community, to maintain the support and make sure that the resources are in place as required.

We must ensure the community gets through this crisis safely, and gets the answers they need. Our prayers and thoughts are with the community.

Community services

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: This pandemic reminds us of the fundamental human values that we should embody as a community. We should respect one another, love one another, and more than anything else, uplift one another.

As we continue in our fight against COVID-19, these values and Ontario’s spirit and resilience are shown through the work of the organizations of Markham–Thornhill. In my riding, many organizations have stepped up to support their community members during this challenging time. Mr.

Speaker, today I am proud to recognize some of these organizations: Famed Star group; Carefirst; the Centre for Immigrant and Community Services; the Markham Federation of Filipino Canadians; the Buddhist Association of Canada Cham Shan Temple; the Vedic Cultural Centre; Sanatan Mandir Cultural Centre; Across U-hub; the Taiwan Merchants Association of Toronto; the Federation of Chinese Canadians in Markham; Ahmadiyya Muslim Youth Association; Chabad Lubavitch of Markham; and Milliken Gospel Church.

Mr. Speaker, now that we are in a new phase of the pandemic, these organizations and many others continue to provide programs and services to help the community. They are committed to meeting the diverse needs of the people of Markham–Thornhill. Thank you to these individuals and organizations for your compassion, hard work and valuable contributions to our community.

Employment standards

Ms. Jennifer K. French: Everyone understands how important paid sick days are to keeping folks healthy—everyone except this government, that is.

The Ontario NDP has shown leadership since the start of the pandemic and has constantly been championing paid sick days in Ontario. We are listening to people who are desperate.

This Premier and government have voted consistently against paid sick days and workers, choosing 27 times to stand against workers and their health. Most recently, they voted against Bill 8, the Stay Home If You Are Sick Act, introduced by the MPP for London West and opposition members.

Our office is hearing from workers, parents, teachers and health care workers across the region about the continued need for paid sick days, because they are choosing between taking care of their health and keeping a roof over their head; because they’re choosing between staying home with sick children and putting food on the table; because they’re seeing COVID-19 and other seasonal illnesses spread through their classrooms; and because they are working non-stop taking care of patients who might not have been there in the first place if they had had paid sick days.

My constituent Lyle Hargrove writes:

“Far too many people have died preventable deaths during the pandemic for us to learn nothing.

“I’m asking as your constituent that you keep up the fight to legislate 10 days of job-protected, employer-paid, permanent sick days for all workers regardless of employment status.

“Protecting the lives of workers shouldn’t require a second thought. This government has a duty to protect its citizens.”

Speaker, this pandemic is not yet over. Instead of sitting back and waiting for things to get worse again, this government needs to listen to workers, parents, teachers, nurses and their own science table and implement 10 permanent paid sick days now.

Cumberland Heritage Village Museum

Mr. Stephen Blais: It’s an honour to rise today to highlight a gem in east Ottawa, the Cumberland Heritage Village Museum. The Cumberland Heritage Village Museum is a living museum that provides an immersive and educational experience by showcasing life throughout the Roaring Twenties and the Great Depression in the 1930s, with dozens of true-to-the-era buildings.

During the Christmas season, this live museum is turned into the Vintage Village of Lights. The Vintage Village of Lights always offers a unique experience that encourages you to play in the past and make memories for the future. The village is lit up tastefully with over 30,000 lights, and there are festivities for the entire family to enjoy.

Families can enjoy the vignettes highlighting traditions of days gone by, see the portable printing press in action, and travel back in time, with a festive soundtrack from the interwar years. Children can have the chance to meet Santa Claus, decorate a gingerbread house, partake in tree-lighting ceremonies, and much, much more. It provides a wholesome evening out on the town for the entire family.

Safety has always been the number one priority, so last year, staff and volunteers worked tirelessly to transform the village into a drive-through experience.

I’m very happy to say that this year, with the help of Ottawa Public Health and local community leaders, the Vintage Village of Lights is back in full swing, with proof-of-vaccination in place. It starts this weekend.

It’s a wonderful tradition in east Ottawa, and I’m so proud that I had a small role to play in getting it started about a decade ago. I encourage everyone to go check it out and partake in this important Christmas tradition.

Volunteers

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: Today I rise to speak about some of the most important people in our communities: the volunteers. December 5 is International Volunteer Day. This day was established to shine a light on the impact of volunteers’ effort and promote volunteers’ work.

In the past 18 months, with the pandemic, we have seen so many people step up in our communities to help their next-door neighbours, share letters of gratitude and so much more. I’m truly humbled to have met so many dedicated volunteers in my riding of Scarborough–Rouge Park, whether through the Spread Kindness campaign, where volunteers help to deliver groceries to seniors who need them; or my volunteers who helped out with shoreline cleanup at Port Union Waterfront Park and the Great Lakes Waterfront Trail near Beechgrove; or the volunteers who have helped me from day one; or those who participated in summer and fall volunteer programs.

I’m so proud to have met so many talented and committed young volunteers and young community leaders in Scarborough–Rouge Park. You all continue to inspire me and motivate me every single day. I want to take this opportunity to thank you for all your efforts.

Treaties recognition

Mr. Joel Harden: It wasn’t that long ago that we were all wearing orange T-shirts in Canada and remembering the horrors of our colonial past and present. But sadly, the unrelenting push for new fossil fuel development has made us forget that. The Wet’suwet’en people have become a target on their own territory, a pristine area in the north of British Columbia.

As our friends in British Columbia deal with the real-time impacts of climate change—massive floods and horrendous fires—somehow millions of dollars can be found to send the RCMP into Wet’suwet’en lands with snipers and police dogs, and today, 30 people have been arrested, including land defenders and journalists.

My friend Premier John Horgan has said, “Free prior and informed consent is what everyone would expect of their neighbour and what we expect from those who want to do business in BC.” I agree, Speaker, but consent is meaningless if “no” is answered with the barrel of a gun. As the member for Kiiwetinoong has said, the law is very clear: Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs are the title holders of their land. They have a right to refuse development on their lands despite agreements signed by other parties.

Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs and grassroots people are actually giving Canada an opportunity right now. We can right now reinforce our unequivocal support for Indigenous rights and title. We can truly meet the challenge of the climate emergency by declaring an end to any massive expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure—and that is what we are talking about, sadly, with this project in BC. So, Speaker, through you I call upon my friends in the British Columbian government and the federal government to respect the Wet’suwet’en people and do better.

Local business

Mr. Norman Miller: I rise today to remind everyone that “Local Is the New Black.” I have to admit that when my staff first suggested that slogan, I asked them what they were talking about. Of course, it means that local is the new fashion, the new trend. As we do our Christmas shopping, I hope this is a trend we will all follow, whether buying gifts, food or a treat for ourselves.

I encourage residents of Parry Sound–Muskoka to support the many businesses that make and sell local products. I can’t list them all, but one example is Middle River Farm in McKellar, where Katy and Cameron Ward carry not only their own locally grown products, but they also carry other local food products and gifts.

I also want to recognize our local chambers of commerce and BIAs that are promoting local shopping. For example, last weekend the Downtown Huntsville BIA hosted Santa and other special guests at its inaugural Muskoka Market: Huntsville Holiday Edition. This event brought families back to the main street businesses after a long summer of construction.

And it isn’t just about local products; for those people who are hard to buy for, consider a local experience. This could be dinner at a local restaurant or tickets to a local attraction, or taking advantage of the staycation tax credit and treating someone to a weekend retreat at a resort here in Ontario.

Check your list and check it twice. I’m sure we can all find local gifts that will put a smile on the faces of our loved ones this Christmas. Give a gift to your community. Shop local.

Annual report, Auditor General

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that I have laid upon the table the 2021 annual report of the Auditor General.

Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I am very pleased to inform the House that page Elinor Carter from the riding of Parkdale–High Park is today’s page captain, and we have with us today at Queen’s Park her mother, Dr. Erin Carter, and her grandmother, Brenda Carter. Welcome to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. We’re delighted to have you here.

Question Period

Small business

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My first question this morning goes to the Premier. Today’s Auditor General report shows what we already know: The Premier was not ready to support Ontario through the pandemic. When it comes to business supports, the government failed to plan and had to scramble as a result. The AG’s report says that small businesses that needed support didn’t get it, and many others got support that shouldn’t have, or that didn’t need it.

The AG goes on to raise serious conflict-of-interest concerns as well: “The chief executive officer of a company that was awarded a $2.5-million contract was a member of the ministers’ COVID-19 vaccine task force.”

Can the Premier explain how his buddy, a CEO on the minister’s own vaccine task force, got $2.5 million in contracts when struggling small businesses were turned away?

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

Hon. Paul Calandra: Just the opposite, actually: The small business support grants—which, I remind the Leader of the Opposition she voted against not once but twice—actually were instrumental in helping many small and medium job creators across this province get through the pandemic. We know that there is still a lot more work to do for them, but the small business grant, on top of the other supports that were put in place with respect to property taxes, with respect to education taxes and with respect to hydro relief, were all part of helping our small and medium job creators get through the pandemic.

We know that there is still, obviously, a lot more work to do, and that is something that we continue to be focused on. Obviously, the Minister of Finance has brought forward an economic statement with the goal of continuing the economic growth that the province of Ontario is seeing as we come out of the pandemic. But again, I remind the Leader of the Opposition she voted against these supports for our small businesses not once, but twice. As I say, we have a lot of work still to do on it.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I’ll remind the government House leader that the Auditor General’s report is not about spin; it’s about the facts. She looked at the Facedrive contract. The company that was in crisis and virtually dysfunctional, reporting millions of dollars in losses while the CEO literally walked out the door just two months ago, in September, got $2.5 million for contact-tracing beepers. The contract was extended, but no one—still, right now—knows whether Ontario even got the trackers that we bought. The auditor says the government “assessed the project as ‘low risk’ with minimal follow-up questions.”

The Premier and the minister did a promo video. They actually even did a promo video for this company. How could the Premier’s buddies at Facedrive get millions in contracts when small businesses were abandoned and turned away by this government?

Hon. Paul Calandra: If anybody abandoned small and medium job creators in the province of Ontario, it was the Leader of the Opposition and her party. We were faced with a global health pandemic, which turned into an economic crisis, obviously, and when we were rushing to get supports out the door for our small and medium job creators, the NDP were very busy voting against those supports. We worked very quickly to ensure that our businesses had these supports.

And it wasn’t just monetary support. We understood that we had to work with our federal partners and we did that, Mr. Speaker. In many instances the federal government was able to step forward and ensure that there were financial supports for job creators and for our essential workers while we focused on other areas, including health care. That’s what we did, and we will continue to do that because we understand that you cannot have a proper economic recovery in the province of Ontario unless you support the very people who are creating those jobs: our small and medium job creators.

If you look at what the finance minister has brought forward, if you look at the work that we’ve done since before the pandemic—since being elected—the result was thousands of jobs being created, opportunity across the province. That’s good news for the people of the province of Ontario.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The Auditor General also says that the committee advising the Premier on the business grants left no paper trail—nada, zilch, no official minutes whatsoever. That’s very curious, Speaker. The report says “no official minutes were taken at meetings.” Forty meetings took place and not a single note or minute was kept. Many small businesses, as I’ve already identified and as we all know, asked for support, needed support, and got nothing. Yet, “Over $210 million was paid to roughly 14,500 ineligible recipients.” Many got more cash than they even said that they needed and no effort whatsoever has been made to get that money back.

How could the Premier shovel out millions in grants to companies without any paper trail of how those decisions were made while abandoning thousands of small businesses in their absolute time of need?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Well, I’m glad the Leader of the Opposition now realizes that supporting small and medium job creators in the province of Ontario is a good thing, because she will remember that she not only voted against reductions in cost for these small businesses, small business tax reductions, but she also voted against the very same supports that she now says were so essential. We knew they were essential. That’s why we brought a program very quickly to support those small businesses.

And when I look at main streets across this province, Mr. Speaker, I know, as all members will, we were very frightened of what this pandemic would do to our main streets and how it would affect our small businesses. The grants that we brought forward quickly—yes, absolutely quickly—in addition to the supports through energy relief, in addition to education tax relief, in addition to supports to ensure that essential workers had paid sick days—that’s what kept our small businesses going, and we’re very proud of that. Were some mistakes made? Obviously, Mr. Speaker.

But that’s what happens when you’re trying to get supports out as quickly as possible and you have an opposition voting against it.

Hospital services

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier.

The Auditor General’s report also shows very clearly that wait times for surgeries are getting worse and were getting worse even before the pandemic hit. It was bad enough under the Liberals but, of course, it has become much, much worse under the Conservatives because this government, really, I don’t think supports public health care.

But, nonetheless, I quote the auditor’s report: “Substantial wait times have not been addressed and have worsened in 2020-21.” For gallbladder surgery, for example, the wait time has increased by 57%—57%—under the watch of this Premier. The doctor and nurse shortage is making things even worse.

So my question is, why is this Premier leaving patients waiting in agony for the surgeries that they need while chasing nurses and other health care professionals out of Ontario with his low-wage policy?

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

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, you will recall that in the election of 2018, we made health care a priority. We made health care a priority by suggesting that we had to do something about hallway health care, and part of that was the immediate transition that we started to do with respect to Ontario health teams, creating a blanket of care for people.

In addition to that, it was about rebuilding and building out our long-term-care system, thousands of additional beds for long-term care because, too often, people who needed a different level of care were being put in or left in our hospitals. That was completely unacceptable. We’re starting to rebuild hospitals across the province.

Now, one doesn’t just build a hospital overnight, Mr. Speaker. Later on today, another amazing announcement of another new hospital, on top of the hard work that was done by our member for Niagara—an expansion there, a brand new hospital for the people of Brampton, expansions in communities and hospitals all across this province.

Now, the member is right. We are going to have to do something about health and human resources. That’s why we’re hiring 27,000 PSWs, hiring 2,000 nurses. There’s more work left to be done, but we’re getting it done.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, cutting public health units from 35 down to 14 is the disaster that this government brought to Ontario just as the pandemic was hitting.

Look, in the year prior to the pandemic—the year prior to the pandemic—one third of hospital operating rooms remained underused, says the Auditor General: “Available health care system capacity is not being fully used to help clear surgery backlogs.” That’s the facts, because this Premier, as I said, simply doesn’t support public health care. He doesn’t support making sure that patients have enough doctors and nurses to run operating rooms. It’s shameful.

How can the Premier let operating rooms sit idle and not hire more nurses and doctors in appropriate timelines—and pay them properly, frankly—to get Ontario patients the surgeries that they need, that they so desperately have been waiting for, for far, far too long?

Hon. Paul Calandra: It is worth noting that the Leader of the Opposition and her party have voted against every single investment that we’ve made in health care in this province.

We knew right from the beginning, in 2018, that we were going to be faced with a crisis in many sectors, including health care. The Premier campaigned on ending hallway health care. What we found almost immediately upon assuming office was that we had to rebuild and build out our long-term-care system, because too many people were being housed in hospitals who needed different levels of care.

We were left with an ICU capacity where 800 people in ICU brought this province to its knees. We inherited a public hospital testing system that could only do 5,000 tests a day when COVID-19 hit us, Mr. Speaker—5,000 tests a day; that has been ramped up to 100,000 tests a day. Incredible buildouts of new hospitals in Brampton, expansions in Mississauga, expansions in Niagara—these are all things that will help us on this.

And it’s not just about the billions that are going into health care and to ensuring our surgeries get caught up; it’s about a blanket of care through the Ontario health teams as well.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: There’s no doubt that the Premier campaigned on health care and then got elected and immediately started cutting health care, Speaker. That’s what really went on.

The Auditor General also found that there has been no oversight whatsoever of patients being billed by private health care clinics for publicly funded surgeries: “Patients complained about being charged after receiving a publicly funded cataract surgery because they were misinformed of their right to receive standard surgery, free of charge through OHIP, without any add-ons.” The auditor said that patients are being gouged with services they didn’t need by private surgical companies.

Public health care shouldn’t be treated like an opportunity for private companies to upsell vulnerable patients. That is disgusting and should not be happening in our province.

So why is the Premier okay with his buddies running private clinics and gouging Ontario patients when they’re trying to access basic health care needs like cataract surgeries?

Hon. Paul Calandra: It was a Progressive Conservative government that brought public health care to the people of the province of Ontario. It has been a Progressive Conservative government that has put additional resources into health care. When other levels of government and when other parties were cutting health care, we came into office and started increasing health care.

When we came into office in 1995 on the heels of a failed NDP government that cut thousands and thousands of beds across our health care system, that laid off nurses, that cut to the tune of billions of dollars, it was a Conservative government that started reinvesting in health care, despite the fact that it was a Liberal federal government that attacked health care unilaterally in the mid-1990s. And it is a Progressive Conservative government, under this Premier, that is making historic investments in health care.

Is there more work yet to be done? Yes. The best way to get that work accomplished is if the Leader of the Opposition would join us and for once vote in favour of the health care investments that we’re—

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

Hospital services

Ms. Sara Singh: My question is to the Premier.

Ontario families know all too well that years of health care underfunding from the Liberals and cuts from the Conservatives have left our hospitals on life support.

A new report from the Auditor General shows that when it comes to care for heart and stroke patients, things have gone from bad to worse. The Auditor General’s investigation found that under the Ford government, wait-lists are growing, expert practice and recommendations aren’t being followed, and worst of all, hospitals aren’t even able to provide quick-enough treatment for heart attacks. Speaker, the rapid treatment of a heart problem or stroke can literally mean the difference between life and death for someone waiting. This shouldn’t be happening in the province of Ontario.

When is the Premier going to stop making empty promises and start making the investments in health care we need to finally get the problems in this province under control?

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

Hon. Paul Calandra: Again, Mr. Speaker, I certainly am not going to deny that during a global health pandemic there have been some challenges in some areas of the health care system. That is why we recognized that very quickly and ensured that we put billions of dollars into the health care system to renew it; hundreds of millions of dollars to ensure that we could catch up on many of the surgeries. I agree with the member opposite: It’s not just about the money. People who are waiting for surgeries don’t care about how much money the government has put into systems to catch up. They just want to get that service done.

What the Auditor General’s report clearly highlights is that 15 years of Liberal government left our health care system reeling, despite the fact that they had a federal Conservative government that was transferring 6% a year and escalated 6% a year. They never spent that money on health care, Mr. Speaker. We are getting the job done. There is more work to be done, especially in those instances, but we are making the investments and we will get the job done for them.

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

Ms. Sara Singh: For families in Brampton, the Auditor General’s report confirms the problems they have been seeing for years. The hallway health care and wait times that skyrocketed under the Liberals have only got worse, and Conservative cuts in Bill 124 mean that overworked health care professionals like our nurses are leaving the sector and hospitals that were already understaffed have only gotten busier. That’s why the Premier’s decision to not build a brand new hospital and emergency room in Brampton is so shocking, and the Auditor General’s report proves it.

The Premier’s failure to invest in health care in our community and across the province is putting lives at risk. When is the Premier going to stop playing political games and start building the hospitals and health care centres that people in this province deserve?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, let’s be very clear. It is the two members of this caucus from Brampton who worked day in and day out from the day they were elected to ensure that Brampton got a new hospital. Let’s also be very clear that the members from Brampton on the NDP side of the House voted against that investment. They voted against that investment. But our two members from Brampton didn’t just stop at—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. Stop the clock.

Please restart the clock. Government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Again, Mr. Speaker, it was the NDP members from Brampton who stood in their place when an investment, an historic investment, was being made in Brampton, not just for a hospital but for new long-term-care beds. They voted against it. A new medical school: They voted against it. Transit and transportation: They voted against it. Thank God there are two members of the Progressive Conservative caucus from Brampton who will stand up for Brampton. You saw that for 15 years the Liberals didn’t, and now the NDP are abandoning Brampton as well.

Northern Ontario development

Mr. Norman Miller: My question is for the Minister of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry. Since coming into office in 2018, our government has invested heavily in northern Ontario. There is quite a contrast between our approach and the previous government’s inaction and indifference on northern development, an approach that was supported by the NDP.

The latest example of our investments in the north came last week with the launch of the Northern Ontario Resource Development Support Fund. Could the minister please share some of the details regarding this fund and why it is needed now?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The parliamentary assistant and member for Peterborough–Kawartha.

Mr. Dave Smith: I’m happy to rise in the House today to answer the question from the member from Parry Sound–Muskoka. The member is correct in saying that our government’s approach to economic development is vastly different than what the Liberals and the NDP have suggested, and as we consistently demonstrate, our approach is working. The NORDS fund is the latest outcome from that positive, collaborative, forward-looking perspective. NORDS will run for five years, making $15 million available annually to 144 municipalities across northern Ontario to support their infrastructure needs.

The fund is stackable with already existing program funding, and bankable, meaning municipalities can leverage this fund to plan for future infrastructure projects.

NORDS does not replace an existing investment stream. It’s an additional one. And it will make a noticeable, significant, positive impact throughout the region.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Norman Miller: Thank you very much to the member for that answer.

It is clear the NORDS program would be a much welcome initiative across northern Ontario’s municipalities. I know the municipalities in Parry Sound district have collectively been allocated more than $2 million, which I know will be put to good use to build infrastructure and create economic development.

Back to the parliamentary assistant: Can the PA explain how the ministry arrived at a budget of $15 million per year for five years, and why our approach with the NORDS program is different from the one taken by the previous Liberal government?

Mr. Dave Smith: We’ve continuously listened to the municipalities to understand their critical needs. The focus on collaboration and partnership is a cornerstone of our resource revenue-sharing framework and was central to the development of NORDS. We developed it with direct input from the municipalities.

But don’t just take my word for it. Listen to what Wendy Landry, president of the Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association had to say about this new program: “The Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association is overjoyed by Minister Rickford’s announcement.... This investment will have a significant positive impact on communities in northern Ontario.... I am so pleased that the Ontario government has taken action to help municipalities fund infrastructure projects across northern Ontario. We thank you for your continuous efforts and making this funding available to municipalities to better their communities.”

Mr. Speaker, our government ensured municipalities have the final decision on exactly how this new funding is spent. With this approach, we’ve created an equitable, needs-based program in which municipalities maintain their decision-making autonomy to improve their community infrastructure.

Highway tolls

Ms. Jennifer K. French: My question is to the Premier. Since the surprise decision by the last government to toll Highways 412 and the 418 that run through Durham region, community members from across the region have recognized the unfairness and problems with tolling of these regional highways, which should connect folks, workers and families and keep people and goods moving. Instead, they sit empty and underutilized.

Once upon an election, the now government PC members promised to make it a priority to remove the tolls. They even voted for my private member’s bill to go to committee and then refused to act on it.

So, clearly there is no political will, unless you live in the minister’s riding. The controversial Highways 413 and the Bradford Bypass have unexpectedly, and all of a sudden, been made toll-free, interestingly, after a lot of uncomfortable community pushback. How did the government make these tolling decisions and how are they making the decision about the tolls in Durham?

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

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: I thank the member opposite for the question. Affordability for Ontarians has been a priority for our PC government since day one. When the pandemic hit in March of 2020, Mr. Speaker, our government took action to freeze tolls on Highways 407 east, 412 and 418 to deliver more relief to drivers during the pandemic.

Mr. Speaker, we have been working hard to ensure that drivers get the relief necessary throughout the pandemic. As we have been looking at building new infrastructure, we’ve been concerned about that as well.

What we did was we looked backward, Mr. Speaker, and we looked at what happened when Steven Del Duca, as Minister of Transportation, signed a contract to toll the people of Durham. Our government determined that we cannot do that going forward. Our government will never sign a contract like that because we believe in affordability and making life better for drivers across Ontario.

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

Ms. Jennifer K. French: Again, to the Premier: No one in Durham region is happy about this PC government’s flip-flop on tolling. From a letter the Premier and MPPs just received from John Henry, the chair of Durham region, signed by all of the region’s mayors:

“Highways 412 and 418 in Durham region are the only tolled north-south highways in Ontario.

“We have been consistent, and vocal, in our advocacy for fair and equitable application of tolls across the GTHA.... All Ontarians, including Durham region residents, contribute to the construction and maintenance of these highways. However, it’s only in Durham that residents pay to use the connecting links to the 407.

“We need provincial leadership and immediate action to remove tolls on the 412 and 418 to create equity and support economic recovery across the GTHA.”

How would the minister like to justify her Durham-only tolling policy to the regional chair, and to the mayors of Ajax, Brock, Clarington, Oshawa, Pickering, Scugog, Uxbridge and Whitby, all of their residents, and all of the businesses and folks across the Durham region?

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: I appreciate the question from the member opposite, but she should have directed it to the leader of the Liberal Party, who was Minister of Transportation and signed the contract to impose tolls on the drivers of Durham region.

That’s why we have frozen tolls. We suspended the collection of interest on unpaid toll fees for Highways 407 east, 412 and 418. We froze those increases because we know that we need to make life more affordable for Ontarians.

We will not sign a contract, as the leader of the Liberal Party did. We know that those contracts are bad for Ontarians. They make life more unaffordable. We will not do that going forward.

Electric vehicles

M me Lucille Collard: My question to the Premier: This morning, the government added to its long list of policy reversals by announcing their plan to install electric vehicle charging stations on all ONroute locations.

Let me remind this House that one of the first things this government did when it came to office in 2018 was to rip up the charging stations that had already been installed. In fact, the former government had committed to investing $20 million to build 500 charging stations across the province. Only 350 were built before this government stopped their development. Three and a half years later and less than six months before the election, this government is only now recognizing the importance of investing in EV infrastructure?

Mr. Speaker, my question is: Will the Premier explain why this government ripped up EV charging stations in 2018 only to partially replace them three and a half years later?

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

Hon. Todd Smith: Thanks to the member opposite for the question. The simple answer to her question is, because the equipment that the Liberals installed was substandard. It wasn’t working, Mr. Speaker. Moreover, because it was substandard, nobody was using it.

It was at GO stations across the province. Metrolinx made the decision—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Okay, stop the clock.

Hon. Paul Calandra: It’s kind of like the LRT in Ottawa.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader will come to order. The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing will come to order. The member for Ottawa South will come to order.

We’ll restart the clock. The Minister of Energy had the floor.

Hon. Todd Smith: I was very excited about this morning’s announcement that we’re actually going to put in world-class technology thanks to our partnership with Ivy Charging Network, which is a combination of OPG and Hydro One working together with ONroutes across the province on the 400- and 401-series of highways and Canadian Tire to install these fast-charging EV stations that people are actually going to want to use, not the junk that the Liberals signed up to put in places where nobody wanted to use it. This is going to be a program that the people of Ontario want and that’s going to encourage people to buy electric vehicles, Mr. Speaker.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock.

Let’s start the clock again and begin. Ottawa–Vanier, supplementary?

M me Lucille Collard: That was certainly not the answer I was expecting. I have to dwell on that.

Mr. Speaker, electric vehicle sales plummeted after this government cancelled the rebate put in place by the previous government. In fact, sales declined by 55% in the year following its cancellation. EV sales in Ontario lag behind those of BC and Quebec. Both provinces have EV rebates in place and are leading in total sales across the country.

Ontario was on par until this government cancelled the EV rebate. That’s why our party is committed to bringing in an $8,000 rebate for purchases of EVs and charging stations, making them more affordable for families to go green.

Mr. Speaker, my question is, similar to today’s announcement on charging stations, should Ontarians anticipate this government reversing course on EV rebates only to bring them back closer to the election?

Hon. Todd Smith: Thanks to the member opposite for this follow-up question. The one thing that actually is going to encourage more individuals to purchase electric vehicles in the province is convenience, which today’s announcement with Ivy Charging Network and the ONroutes does: It allows individuals to pull off the highway along the busiest highways in the province and charge at fast-charging stations so they only have to be there for 10 or 15 minutes.

But the other thing that I think people need to keep in mind is that, under this previous Liberal government—the policies that they brought in place under the McGuinty-Wynne-Fraser-Del Duca Liberals were to drive the price of electricity through the roof. And if there’s anything that’s going to discourage people from adopting electric vehicles, it’s continuing to drive up the electricity prices to the highest in North America. We’ve taken measures through the Ontario Electricity Rebate and many other programs—

Interjections

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. The member for Ottawa South will come to order. The member for York Centre will come to order.

I’ll remind the House that we refer to each other by our riding names or by our ministerial titles, as applicable.

Restart the clock. The Minister of Energy will conclude his answer.

Hon. Todd Smith: Because of the steps we’ve made to lower the cost of electricity and to make driving more convenient, in the last year, we’ve seen an increase of 210% in the number of people buying electric vehicles in Ontario. We’re on the right track; they drove this car off the road over 15 years.

Mental health and addiction services

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: My question today is for the Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions. Minister, in 2019, I invited you to the Pan Am centre in my riding of Scarborough–Rouge Park for a mental health and addictions round table with members of the community so we could learn more about the mental health and addiction challenges faced by my constituents. It was very clear that for too long, individuals and families in my riding could not access culturally appropriate and safe supports to meet their unique needs.

What is our government doing to address the issues around accessing culturally appropriate mental health and addictions care?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: I want to thank the member from Scarborough–Rouge Park for that excellent question. I’m proud to stand in this House today to share that last week, our government announced a brand new investment of $2.9 million in annual funding to expand and enhance the Substance Abuse Program for African Canadian and Caribbean Youth. This culturally sensitive program has been shown to improve health outcomes for Black youth while reducing stigma and barriers to care. The program also serves francophones, those in the LGBTQ2 community and youth impacted by significant trauma, including community violence.

Our government will continue to make investments that are culturally appropriate to provide individuals who have mental health and addictions issues with the care they need. It is a top priority of our government as we build a continuum of care over the lifespan, ensuring that we have a stepped care model and ensuring culturally sensitive services to all the people in the province of Ontario.

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

Mr. Vijay Thanigasalam: Speaker, I thank the minister for his response. For too long, we have known about the gaps in services and long wait times for mental health and addiction care but especially for culturally appropriate mental health care across the province.

I was pleased to join the minister in Scarborough last week as our government announced this important investment at the TAIBU Community Health Centre. I know my constituents will be pleased to know that their government is there to support them. It is very clear that our government is committed to protecting mental health for all Ontarians and reducing wait-lists and wait times for services. But also, we know that there is more to be done.

Mr. Speaker, through you: Minister, could you please explain how we are addressing the lack of access to culturally appropriate care, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Thank you again for that question. It was truly historical to be in Scarborough to make that announcement, and I am incredibly proud of this investment in the new SAPACCY program. For years, the parties opposite said no to expanding this program, even while demand for this program kept increasing each and every year. Last fall, our government said yes and funded the expansion of SAPACCY programs to four new satellite sites in Etobicoke, North York, Peel region and Scarborough.

While the $2.9 million we announced last week not only started and expanded this program, we’re enhancing the program as well, and we’re proud to expand it through the creation of new locations in Hamilton, Windsor and Ottawa.

Through the Roadmap to Wellness, we will continue to make the necessary investments in culturally appropriate services so they are always accessible and publicly available when and where the people of this province need it the most. This fulfills and continues to fulfill our $3.8-billion investment in providing the Roadmap to Wellness and a foundation to building a system of care for individuals throughout the province of Ontario that is culturally sensitive.

Child care / Garde d’enfants

Mr. Guy Bourgouin: Ma question est pour le premier ministre. We’ve heard over and over again that this government would invest in daycare. From what I’m hearing in my riding, it’s quite the contrary. In fact, I have a mother in my riding, Vanessa Lacroix, who cannot secure a place for her son in daycare. Because of this, she might not be able to get back to work.

Speaker, when will this government quit making promises they can’t keep and start securing affordable child care?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To reply, the Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: We appreciate that child care is too expensive for families in your riding and across Ontario. That, unfortunately, is the legacy of the former Liberal government that we are all contending with today. But we are resolved as a government to fix it. It’s why, in the first budget, the Premier announced a plan to reduce costs and increase affordability through the introduction of the Ontario Child Care Tax Credit. It’s also why we’ve invested $1 billion over five years to build 30,000 spaces.

There is much more work to do when it comes to child care and making it more affordable and more accessible, particularly in the more remote and northern parts of our province. That’s why we’ve dedicated the funding—$2 billion every single year—to deliver it. It’s why we’re at the table with the federal government, urging them to increase their investment, well beyond the 2.5% they currently contribute, to get a fair deal that brings costs down for families right across Ontario.

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

M. Guy Bourgouin: J’apprécie la réponse du ministre, mais vos excuses n’aident pas la situation.

Je reviens sur le point que le gouvernement devrait arrêter de se traîner les pieds, et se pencher sur ses obligations. Il devrait s’assurer qu’une entente avec le gouvernement fédéral soit signée immédiatement, parce que, entretemps, ce sont les familles—les femmes plus particulièrement—qui souffrent et qui sont les plus affectées de son inaction.

Monsieur le Président, quand est-ce que ce gouvernement va signer cette entente et arrêter de stresser les familles ontariennes?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: We absolutely are working with the federal government. We’ve met with them multiple times and presented our case, which I think is clear: We want to get to $10 a day. Families in this province deserve $10 a day. We are urging them to increase their investment and provide flexibility so we can support all parents in Ontario. That is what we are doing through our negotiations with the federal government in a constructive way, to deliver a deal that gets us to $10, delivers sustainable funding and supports all families in this province.

When it comes to what we can do in this province, what you can do is start voting for the budgets and the investments we’re making every single year to reduce costs and increase access. Unfortunately for that parent and for many others, they would be, I think, deeply concerned to know that when members of the New Democrats and Liberals had a chance, they voted against measures to make child care more affordable.

We’re going to continue to bring forth initiatives that reduce costs, increase access, and we’re going to make the case to the federal government to get this deal done so we can finally make child care affordable for all families in Ontario.

COVID-19 response

Mr. Roman Baber: My question is to the Premier.

Yesterday was one of the worst days in Canadian history. The federal government, the Premier’s new bestie Justin Trudeau, denied about 15% of Canadians from boarding a plane or a train. The Premier and I made a different choice, and we all agree that it’s still a choice. And if the vaccine works, then the Premier and I are protected. And if it doesn’t work, then why are