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

April 16, 2018

41st Parliament, 3rd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2018-Apr-16 (PDF)

L013 - Mon 16 Apr 2018 / Lun 16 avr 2018

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Monday 16 April 2018 Lundi 16 avril 2018

Introduction of Visitors

Oral Questions

Government accounting practices

Hospital funding

Hospital funding

Gasoline prices

Automobile insurance

Employment standards

Automobile insurance

Hospital funding

Poverty

Executive compensation

Hydro One

Access to justice

Government spending

Employment standards

Indigenous relations and reconciliation

Hospital funding

Visitors

Deferred Votes

Correctional Services Transformation Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la transformation des services correctionnels

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Mark Bottineau

Gasoline prices

Advance care planning

Consumer protection

Propane industry

St. Vincent de Paul

McMaster University

Vietnamese heritage and freedom flag

Introduction of Bills

Protecting Vulnerable Persons in Supportive Living Accommodation Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la protection des personnes vulnérables dans les logements supervisés

WSIB Coverage for Workers in Residential Care Facilities and Group Homes Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la protection à accorder aux travailleurs dans les établissements de soins en résidence et les foyers de groupe par la Commission de la sécurité professionnelle et de l’assurance contre les accidents du travail

Supporting Wine Jobs and Growth in the Niagara Region Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 visant à soutenir les emplois dans l’industrie du vin et la croissance dans la région de Niagara

Petitions

Employment standards

Anti-smoking initiatives for youth

Health care funding

Casinos

Voting age

Dental care

Long-term care

Voting age

Anti-smoking initiatives for youth

Casinos

Orders of the Day

Access to Consumer Credit Reports and Elevator Availability Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur l’accès au rapport de solvabilité du consommateur et la disponibilité des ascenseurs

The House met at 1030.

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

Prayers.

Introduction of Visitors

Hon. Michael Coteau: It gives me great pleasure today to welcome my daughter Maren Audrey Coteau to the Legislature. Welcome.

Ms. Laurie Scott: I’d like to welcome Brianna Cairns and Reagan Coles, down today from Durham region. Thank you for coming in the weather, and welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Mike Colle: It’s my privilege to introduce special guests that have come to Queen’s Park from around the world. We have members of PROI Worldwide, which stands for Public Relations Organisation International. They represent 100 cities in 50 countries. With PROI are Darsha Jethava, who is account coordinator at Brown and Cohen; Nicola Nel from South Africa, who is the managing director of Atmosphere Communications; Elaine Chuah, who is the executive director of Priority Communications in Malaysia; Kim Cohen, who is the CEO of Brown and Cohen; and Howard Brown, who is here also from Brown and Cohen. I’d like to welcome all to Ontario and to Canada. Have a great conference.

Mr. Bill Walker: I’d like to do an introduction on behalf of my colleague MPP Sylvia Jones from Dufferin–Caledon, introducing the mother, Tove Schmidt, and grandmother, Dolores Schmidt, of page captain Dwight Gross. They’re in the members’ gallery. Welcome to Queen’s Park, and enjoy your day.

Mr. Bob Delaney: On behalf of the member for Ottawa Centre and page captain Rowan Watchmaker, I’d like to introduce Rowan’s guests today: her father, Prashant Watchmaker, her mother, Lisa White, and her brother, Aidan Watchmaker. They will be in the members’ gallery this morning.

Mr. Percy Hatfield: I arrived a couple of minutes late. I’m not sure if my friend Howard Brown has been introduced yet—a strong New Democrat. Howard Brown is over in the other gallery.

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: I want to thank my friend from Mississauga–Streetsville for introducing and welcoming my guests. It’s a great honour to welcome the parents of Rowan Watchmaker, our page from Ottawa Centre. Please welcome my good friend Prashant Watchmaker, Lisa White and their son, Aidan Watchmaker, to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I too would like to welcome the family of page William MacDonald: William’s mother, Samantha Baulch, and his father, Ian MacDonald. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Further introductions? Well, I have a couple of introductions myself.

In the Speaker’s gallery today, by surprise, are some guests—some surprises, some not. My sister, Roseanne; her dear friend Kelly is with her, lifelong friends; braving the weather all the way from Ohio, my brother Dan; not-so-braving the weather from Brantford, my brother Pat and his wife, Ida; and, of course, she-who-must-be-obeyed, my dear wife, Rosemarie. That’s only half of them. The other half didn’t come because they were smart. They didn’t travel.

Therefore, with no other introductions, it’s now time for question period.

Oral Questions

Government accounting practices

Mr. Todd Smith: Thanks, Speaker, and good morning. I’m glad to see you made it okay. My question is to the Minister of Energy.

After the Auditor General raised concerns about the government’s hydro scheme, which will end up costing billions and then jack up electricity rates to record highs in a few years, the Minister of Energy said, “Our plan has been approved by her peers,” speaking of the Auditor General, “at some of Canada’s top accounting firms like KPMG,” Ernst and Young “and Deloitte.”

The Auditor General has said, as of March 19, that “Deloitte LLP and Ernst and Young LLP have confirmed to us that they provided no formal opinions approving the accounting” of the so-called “fair hydro plan that the government planned to use for its consolidated financial statements.”

Who’s telling the truth here?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: As we’ve said all along, we know that families in this province asked for real and immediate relief on their electricity bills, and that’s what we delivered. We made a policy choice—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member will withdraw.

Mr. Randy Hillier: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Carry on.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: We made a policy choice to ensure that we continue to have a clean, reliable and affordable electricity system for the ratepayers of today and the ratepayers of tomorrow. The fair hydro plan keeps the cost of borrowing within the rate base, not the tax base, because that’s the logical thing to do. Electricity financing should remain within the electricity system.

So, officials from the Treasury Board, finance, OPG, the IESO and the Ontario Financing Authority, along with external advisers—that included Ernst and Young, KPMG and Deloitte—have worked on accounting related to the fair hydro plan. They, along with the Office of the Provincial Controller, ensured that this plan was in accordance with the public sector.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mr. Todd Smith: I know there’s a lot of ice across Ontario this morning, but the minister sure skated around that question.

The auditor said, “KPMG told us that it has not provided an opinion on the accounting of the fair hydro plan in the government’s consolidated financial statements.”

On March 26, the minister said this: “KPMG and Deloitte worked on the accounting related to the fair hydro plan. They, along with the Office of the Provincial Controller, ensured that this plan was in accordance with public sector accounting.” That was the quote from the Minister of Energy.

My question is: Is he telling the truth?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: The truth is this population have seen a reduction of 25% on their hydro bills. The truth is that they voted against it, Mr. Speaker. When it comes to telling the truth, it’s this government that makes sure that we’re transparent and we make sure that we bring forward everything on behalf of the people.

On that side of the House they vote against everything that we put forward to build Ontario up. Minimum wage: We make sure that we bring that forward to help the province of Ontario; they vote against it. A 25% reduction through the fair hydro plan? They vote against it. A 50% reduction on average for those families that are in Hydro One areas and six other jurisdictions? They voted against that as well.

When it comes to looking after the people of Ontario, we will take no lessons from that party, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Todd Smith: Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General, an independent officer of the Legislature, has said all of the accounting firms confirmed they didn’t formally approve the Liberal accounting. But the minister says that they did. Deloitte, Ernst and Young and KPMG offered no formal opinion supporting the fair hydro plan—and remember this Liberal unfair hydro plan spends millions and billions of dollars over the next 30 years in interest payments to get them through the next election period before rates soar to record highs, highs that we’ve never seen in Ontario.

Speaker, what the minister has said in the House is a direct contradiction to many of the minister’s statements. Why is he lying to the House?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. I’m standing. Not only will the member withdraw, but if this becomes a trend, I will skip questions. The member will withdraw.

Mr. Todd Smith: Withdraw, Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Minister of Energy.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When it comes to the fair hydro plan, it’s this government that brought forward the plan to make sure that we reduce rates right across the province for all ratepayers. On that side of the House, they voted against it. But the interesting thing is that the People’s Guarantee, which they once all signed and once all agreed with, actually kept the fair hydro plan in it. So talking about hypocrisy, Mr. Speaker, that is something—

Interjections.

Mr. John Yakabuski: Wow, the nerve, the nerve. He tells a direct lie and he calls us hypocrites.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member will withdraw.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I will withdraw, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke will withdraw.

Mr. John Yakabuski: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke is warned and I’m skipping a question.

You may finish.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We will continue to work to keep our system clean, reliable and affordable in this province. We will make sure that we work together with the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change to make sure we’re meeting our Climate Change Action Plan goals and keep our system clean and affordable.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): We are now in warnings. The member from Nickel Belt.

Hospital funding

M me France Gélinas: Ma question est pour la première ministre—ou celle qui pourrait la remplacer.

Does the Premier believe hospital overcrowding is a normal thing that should be happening in a First World health care system?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: To the Minister of Education on behalf of the Minister of Health.

Hon. Indira Naidoo-Harris: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the member opposite for this question. Our government knows that everyone in Ontario deserves high-quality care when and where they need it. That’s why we are designing a system that absolutely puts patients first. I want you to know that we’re doing this in a number of ways. We’re doing this by increasing operational funding. We’re doing this by increasing capital funding.

We’re doing this by increasing the supports we are building into the system in terms of mental health, in terms of long-term care and in terms of across-the-board funding when it comes to ensuring that our people and our patients are getting the care they need.

So let me just tell you: We’ve made a historic investment in terms of an additional $822 million in Ontario’s publicly funded hospitals. This is a 4.6% increase in operational funding. We’re also, of course, increasing what we’re putting into capital funding: $19 billion over the past two years. We’ve increased operational funding to hospitals by almost $1 billion.

So, absolutely, we’re building—

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

Supplementary?

M me France Gélinas: Has the minister seen a hospital where people are being treated in hallways? Does she believe that it is real?

Hon. Indira Naidoo-Harris: I just want to point out a couple of things. First of all, I want to say that ensuring that we are doing the best we can when we deliver health care is a top priority—and it turns out that we’re on track. In fact, just recently, just last week, once again a third party has validated our health care system as being one of the best in the country. In fact, recently, CIHI, the Fraser Institute and the Wait Time Alliance have all agreed that we are the best for wait times in Canada.

Here’s what we’re doing: We’re constantly investing to improve and to make sure that we’re putting patients first. Wait times for cancer surgery are better than the national average for lung, breast, colorectal and prostate cancers. Ontario has the best wait times in the country for lung cancer surgery. Our wait times are better than the national average for hip and knee replacement. And we outperform almost every other province for hip and knee replacement surgery. All of this is to say that we’re on track—

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

Final supplementary?

M me France Gélinas: Has the minister ever talked to any of the hundreds of people who have gone to a hospital, only to be admitted and treated in a shower room, a TV room, a broom closet or a bathroom?

Hon. Indira Naidoo-Harris: Let me just talk a little bit about our capital investments. Just so you are aware, we’re investing $19 billion over the next 10 years to improve and expand hospitals. Just think about that. That is a massive investment in terms of hospitals and in terms of capital care. We are actually ensuring that we’re building hospitals, renovating them and taking care of additions.

Let me just talk about where some of these capital investments are going. We’re fortunate enough to have SickKids, one of the world’s largest and most respected pediatric hospitals in the country and in the world—$2.4 billion for design and construction as part of that massive redevelopment. The new patient care centre will bring vital services, including emergency and critical care. There’s a facility at Health Sciences North, in northern Ontario, and a new health campus for WAHA.

All of this is to say that we’re investing across the province and we’re building that infrastructure that is needed.

Hospital funding

M me France Gélinas: Ma question est pour la première ministre.

When the Premier reads the newspaper, hears New Democrats and listens to people who are telling her there is a crisis in our hospitals, who does she think is responsible for that crisis?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: The Premier and this government are very much committed to investing in our public health care system. This is something that we’ve been doing from the beginning, making sure that we bring our wait times down in our hospitals and making sure that there are new capital investments to be made all across the province so that there are better facilities available in all communities.

In my hometown of Ottawa, I see that every single hospital in Ottawa has grown exponentially. We’ve got a state-of-the-art regional cancer care centre at the Ottawa Hospital on the General campus. We just built a new cardiac care unit at the Ottawa heart institute. We just announced $1.8 billion to build a new Civic hospital in my community of Ottawa Centre.

These are all important investments to ensure that we provide quality care to Ontarians across this province.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

M me France Gélinas: Global standards say that the safe level of occupancy for a hospital is 85%. But all across our province, hospitals are running at over 100% capacity.

Why does the minister think that hospitals are running at unsafe levels of capacity and are overcrowded? Why, Speaker?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Just in this year’s budget, which I hope the NDP will support, we are investing more than five billion additional dollars over the next three years to provide more and better access to health care services. Our investments will also help reduce the time and stress associated with caring for our loved ones.

This includes $2.1 billion in new funding for better and faster access to mental health and addictions services for hundreds of thousands more children, young people and adults. That is the single largest investment in mental health care and addictions services ever in the history of our province and which is part of budget 2018.

We are also expanding OHIP+ to make prescriptions completely free for everyone up to the age of 25 and over 65. Once again, we are the first province in the country to actually provide universal pharmacare, something we hope the NDP will support—not to mention that we are introducing the new Ontario drug and dental program and reducing wait times—

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

Final supplementary.

M me France Gélinas: The Premier and the Liberals created this crisis in our hospitals, and now people want to know what’s next. We know that with Doug Ford, he will cut and privatize. For health care, that means more hallway medicine.

But today my leader, Andrea Horwath, is announcing a plan to fix the crisis in our hospitals. There is going to be hope, Speaker. We won’t just stop the damage; we will fix it.

We know that the Premier says she cares, but is she sorry she let things get so bad?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: One thing the NDP and we agree on is that Doug Ford will cut health care services. It’s very clear from the $10-billion cuts that they have as part of their platform that they are going to be firing teachers, nurses and personal support workers all across our province. That’s something that we will not stand for.

But we have continued to make investments in our health care system all across the province. The NDP should come forward and support this very important budget that is investing over $5 billion over the next three years to provide better access to health care services across the province, including services for mental health care and addictions services.

Just talking about reducing wait times, we are investing an additional $822 million in our Ontario hospitals. It’s the largest single government investment in hospitals in almost a decade—not to mention, as I mentioned earlier, that we are investing billions of dollars in new hospitals and expanding hospitals, so that Ontarians have state-of-the-art care available right in their community.

Gasoline prices

Mr. Monte McNaughton: My question this morning is to the Minister of Finance.

Experts are predicting the price of gas will jump to more than $1.40 per litre in Ontario this summer. This government has already said that their cap-and-trade carbon tax has pushed prices up by at least 4.3 cents per litre. It’s just another example of how, every day, the Liberals are making it more expensive to live and work in this province.

There are millions of people in Ontario who can’t get to work or run an errand without gas in their tank. Why is this Liberal government kicking these people when they’re down?

Hon. Charles Sousa: I appreciate the question, because the member opposite makes reference to a commodity price that is traded globally. Recognizing that prices have been going up in the commodity price all around the world, it affects us.

But, Mr. Speaker, he also references cap-and-trade, a market that has been created with the Western Climate Initiative with Quebec and California—and we have Jerry Brown here this week—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Is my signal not strong enough?

Carry on.

Hon. Charles Sousa: We have the governor here in town talking about the merits, because the state of California has been increasing their GDP and they’ve been growing, as has Ontario.

Furthermore, there is an alternative. The alternative that the opposition is proposing is a carbon tax, ultimately, which is going to cost taxpayers and the residents of our province more money taken out of their pockets.

In this budget, we have provided measures for affordability. They should be supporting us.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Monte McNaughton: Back to the minister: When the price of gas jumps, it raises the price of almost everything that people buy. The terrible energy decisions made by this government have already forced too many families to face a choice to heat or eat. Now, new fears are rising about being able to afford fuel to get to work, groceries to put on the table and other basic necessities. The price of the Liberal cap-and-trade carbon tax is only making this situation worse.

What does this Liberal government have to say to the thousands of people worried that this government’s policies will once again force them to make heartbreaking decisions for their families?

Hon. Charles Sousa: Minister of the Environment.

Hon. Chris Ballard: Thank you for that question. You know, Speaker, it appears that the member opposite and the members of the PC Party care about the regular folks of Ontario, but in fact, their opposition to fighting climate change, their opposition to our cap-and-trade clearly demonstrate they really don’t care about folks here in Ontario. I can tell you, Speaker, their attack on climate change, their attack on our cap-and-trade process is an attack on the health of Ontarians. It is an attack—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Haldimand–Norfolk is warned. And the member from Niagara West–Glanbrook can put his hand in front of his face all he wants; I still recognize the voice.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I’ve been around; right?

Finish, please.

Hon. Chris Ballard: Let me continue that the PC attack on climate change, the PC attack on our cap-and-trade program is an attack on Ontario business, an attack on Ontario residents, and we won’t stand for that.

Automobile insurance

Mr. Wayne Gates: My question is to the Acting Premier. Acting Premier, in 2013, you promised the people of this province that they would see a 15% reduction in their auto insurance rates. Here we are, in 2018, and not only have we not seen that reduction, but last Friday, we found out our insurance rates were actually going to go up yet again—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Ancaster–Dundas–Flamborough–Westdale is warned.

Finish, please.

Mr. Wayne Gates: That money comes out of people’s ability to pay for their food, pay for the rising costs of gasoline and pay for these out-of-control hydro rates.

Premier, you admitted in this House that lowering auto insurance rates by 15% was a stretch goal. Will you now admit that it was never a goal at all and that you’re unwilling to act as these rates continue to climb yet again?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Minister of Finance.

Hon. Charles Sousa: The member opposite does make reference to the fact that auto insurance rates have been challenging, and we have taken many steps to try to maintain and reduce. When you rate it for inflation, rates have actually gone down, on average, by 11%. But more importantly, all across Canada, rates have been going up while in Ontario they have not.

What we must do, however, is continue to be diligent. That’s why we’ve taken measures with the fraud office and measures to provide for additional programming to reduce those costs and claims, thereby reducing premiums over time.

More importantly, there is some fraud that needs to be eliminated. We’re taking those steps, and we’re working hard to do so.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mr. Wayne Gates: Anything you’ve done to correct auto insurance has hurt victims.

Back to the Acting Premier: Last year, a report found that Ontario had the most expensive auto insurance premiums in Canada, and yet, compared to other provinces, Ontario has one of the lowest levels of collisions. We asked you to end postal code discrimination, and you won’t do it. We asked you to lower auto insurance rates by 15%, and you won’t do it. When is enough going to be enough, and when are you going to seriously look at actually lowering people’s auto insurance rates instead of watching them skyrocket?

Hon. Charles Sousa: As noted, we did take steps, numerous steps, and that is why in Ontario the rates have not been going up.

More importantly, in our Ontario auto insurance plan, we have created independent medical examination centres. We’ve provided improvement for victims by creating a standard treatment plan for those minor injuries. We’ve established the Serious Fraud Office—which is currently costing the system up to $1.6 billion in bogus claims. We’re working with the law society for contingency on fee reforms.

We’ve given FSCO greater teeth to conduct a postal code review so that we can be certain that we’re not penalizing rural communities and northern communities that don’t have this instance. We have to be mindful of that as well.

FSRA, the new oversight body for auto insurance, and its regulatory power have provided for increasing innovation and consumer protection mechanisms. More importantly, we created that expert panel to provide proper guidance throughout this process.

Employment standards

Mr. Lou Rinaldi: My question is to the Minister of Labour. Minister, over the past number of years, I’ve spoken with countless families about how the nature of their work has changed. These families are working hard to put food on their tables and take care of their children, but they were finding that the money runs out before the month is over.

While this opinion may not be shared by those across the aisle, I firmly believe that everyone who works 35 or 40 hours a week shouldn’t have to struggle to get by. That is why I’m so pleased that our government has made substantial changes to our workplace laws. These include, of course, the increase to a $14-an-hour minimum wage.

Minister, can you please inform this House about how these changes came about and what employees can expect as a result?

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Thank you to the member for that question. The conversations that the member outlines that he’s had in his community echo what we’ve all heard across this province over the past three years. When we embarked on that very extensive and comprehensive review of our employment laws, we knew that things had changed in the province of Ontario since we’d looked at them last.

What we heard loud and clear from the people of Ontario was that it was time to make some changes. That’s why we’ve moved forward with our plan to create the Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act. We made the following changes, Speaker:

—increased minimum wage;

—two paid personal emergency leave days;

—increased vacation;

—equal pay for work of equal value; and

—domestic and sexual violence leaves.

Speaker, we didn’t have support from everybody in the House, which is disappointing but not surprising, but I’m very proud of the work we’ve done to increase the lot of ordinary people in the province of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Lou Rinaldi: Thank you, Minister. We know our economy is doing well. It has led the G7 in economic growth for over three years now. Since the recession, we have created over 820,000 new jobs and our employment rate is at its lowest point since 2001. Our businesses are expanding and creating wealth, and I believe that everyone deserves to share in that prosperity.

Yet there are those who believe it is still not the time for these changes. They believe it’s too soon. They believe $15 an hour is too much. They believe the working people of this province should wait, although they won’t say for how long.

I know the families in Northumberland–Quinte West simply cannot wait. Those who are earning minimum wage deserve a wage that helps them make ends meet and save to get ahead. Minister, in your plan, can Ontario expect a $15 minimum wage? Is that subject to change?

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Thank you again for the supplementary. Speaker, it’s very, very simple. We’re going to be increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour as of January 1, 2019. We know the party across the aisle plans to cancel the increase to $15, to take money away from minimum wage earners. That’s money they rely on for food, for rent, for transit, for living expenses. We on this side of the House don’t think that’s fair, Speaker. We don’t think it’s right. We don’t think Ontarians should have to wait any longer.

We’ve phased the minimum wage in over 18 months. It’s going to be tied back to inflation after the January 2019 increase. What that means is it ensures that more workers are benefiting from Ontario’s economic growth. You add that to free tuition, to rent control, to OHIP+. It’s just another step towards increasing fairness and creating more opportunities. Speaker, we’re standing up for workers. We have their backs. The PCs should come along with us.

Automobile insurance

Mr. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: This question is for the Acting Premier. The headline in this morning’s Toronto Sun reads, “Biggest Fraud in Auto Insurance Is Liberal Promise to Lower Rates.”

Acting Premier, under the Liberal government’s watch, auto insurance rates have increased 29%, much higher than the inflation rate. Yet Ontarians already pay 55% higher than the Canadian average, and remain the highest car insurance rates in Canada while having one of the lowest claims. Despite your previous promise, why are the people of Ontario paying the highest insurance rates in Canada under your leadership?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Minister of Finance.

Hon. Charles Sousa: Mr. Speaker, let me correct the record there. The member opposite makes reference to the inflation-adjusted term of auto insurance rates. He’s absolutely wrong. If he takes that measure, rates have gone down, on average, by 11%.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: Mr. Speaker, through you to the Acting Premier again: The provincial election is just around the corner. What kind of election promises are you going to make to fool the people of Ontario this time?

Hon. Charles Sousa: Let me see if I get this right: The member opposite has referenced the fact that auto insurance rates have gone up, but they actually have gone down, and then he says what action should we take—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Last test. I won’t fail.

Hon. Charles Sousa: And then he makes reference to the steps that are being taken, but then he says they’re not—which, in fact, they are, like the fraud office, like the work we’re doing with programs to reduce the overall cost of auto insurance, which is too high in Ontario. We acknowledge that. That’s why we’ve taken the steps that we have to eliminate some of the fraud. Mr. Speaker, they voted against those very measures that are helping Ontarians.

We will continue to do what’s necessary to establish that fraud office to ensure that minor claims are immediately attended to, and ensure that we get rid of the fat that’s in the system that’s taking abuse. We need to reduce that. They should support us on that issue.

Hospital funding

Ms. Peggy Sattler: My question is to the Acting Premier. Speaker, I’d like to refer the Acting Premier to a document from London Health Sciences Centre called the “hallway transfer protocol” that was approved on January 31. The protocol sets out the rules for the transfer of patients from the emergency department to the hallway, from critical care to the hallway, and from the post-anaesthetic care unit to the hallway. The rules include that stairwells are not to be used; stretchers are to be lined up on just one side of the hallway; and patients should be regularly assessed for sleep deprivation in order to prevent incidents of violence.

Speaker, will the Acting Premier accept responsibility for his government’s chronic underfunding of our health care system that has allowed hallway medicine to become normalized at London Health Sciences Centre?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: The Minister of Education, on behalf of the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

Hon. Indira Naidoo-Harris: I want to thank the member opposite for that very important question.

We recognize that our growing and aging population is facing increasing pressures and that we need to ensure that we are building a solid health care system. And so I want to talk about some of the things that we are doing. In our budget, we are making deliberate choices to invest in care for the people of Ontario, by investing not just in one place and in one sector but across the board. We’re investing in hospitals, we’re investing in home care, we’re investing in mental health and we’re investing in long-term care. Why? Because we recognize that we are investing in the people of Ontario because it means a better quality of life.

But you know what, Speaker? I want to talk a little bit about what happened under the NDP’s watch. Let’s just talk a little bit about their track record. After all, the NDP’s plan will cut 9,645 hospital beds, like they did in the past. Is that what’s going to happen with your new plan?

Our plan—

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

Ms. Peggy Sattler: Again to the Acting Premier: Speaker, last Thursday, the London and District Academy of Medicine held a patient care forum for Londoners to share their experiences with our health care system. In 2014, David Cameron-Teixeira waited four days in a London Health Sciences Centre hallway. Earlier this month, Dawn Warren waited five days in a London Health Sciences Centre hallway.

Speaker, hallway medicine has been a reality in London for years and this Liberal government has done nothing to fix it. Does the Acting Premier think that a hallway transfer protocol at LHSC is an acceptable solution to the years of budget cuts that have led to people lining the hallways of London Health Sciences Centre on a regular, ongoing basis?

Interjections.

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

Minister?

Hon. Indira Naidoo-Harris: Again, Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about the investments that we are making. Absolutely, we are doing everything we can to ensure that we are building a solid health care system: $822 million in operating funds. That’s a 4.6% overall increase to increase capacity, decrease wait times and improve access to care for families. This funding is definitely going to benefit the people of Ontario, whether it translates into 26,000 additional MRI operating hours, 14,000 more surgical and medical procedures, or 3,000 more cardiac procedures.

In addition to all of this is $19 billion in capital grants to ensure that our world-class hospitals will be there to support our province in the future, including $2.4 billion, as I mentioned, for SickKids and $1.9 billion over three years to make life more affordable for millions of Ontarians who use prescription drugs in OHIP+ and our Ontario drug and dental program.

Poverty

Mr. Han Dong: My question is to the minister responsible for the Poverty Reduction Strategy. On this side of the House, we recognize that empowering individuals and families to reach their full potential is the right thing to do. We know that a fair Ontario is one that builds every one of us up, no matter who you are or where you were born. That’s why our government chooses care and progress instead of cuts.

We also know that there is more work to be done in this area. Last week, the minister released the Poverty Reduction Strategy annual report for 2017. This annual report details the province’s progress on targets like the reduction of child poverty and the reduction of the depths of poverty in Ontario. Could the minister highlight the progress shown in this year’s annual report?

Hon. Peter Z. Milczyn: I want to thank the member for Trinity–Spadina for the question. Mr. Speaker, I’m so proud to say that Ontarians are really seeing the results of our poverty reduction initiatives.

The number of children living in poverty has decreased by 19,000; that’s a decrease of 24.2% from 2012. We’ve made investments in full-day kindergarten for 260,000 four- and five-year-olds. The Ontario Child Benefit is being delivered directly to individuals and families with low and moderate incomes. The OHIP+ pharmacare program is providing free prescriptions to Ontarians 24 and under, and we’re raising the minimum wage to $15 to ensure that working Ontarians can make ends meet.

We know that our economy is strong. Not everyone is benefiting from that, but we’re doing everything we can to lift Ontarians out of poverty and provide them with more opportunity, more care and more fairness.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Han Dong: I would like to thank the minister for the answer. I’m happy to say that my constituents are feeling the benefits of this government’s investment in them.

Through the Local Poverty Reduction Fund, the province has funded the Scadding Court Community Centre in my riding of Trinity–Spadina. The Scadding Court Community Centre offers programming targeted to underserviced and culturally diverse groups, bringing in 500 to 600 visitors daily.

We also know that there is more to be done. It has become clear to my constituents and all those living in Ontario that, come June 7, a stark choice is to be made. Speaker, how how will my constituents know what stands to be lost, given the $9.6-billion fiscal hole resulting from the PCs’ decision to walk away from the cap-and-trade program?

Hon. Peter Z. Milczyn: Mr. Speaker, I spent four years on Toronto council with Doug Ford. While his brother had the common touch, Doug Ford is out of touch. Whether it’s the $9.6-billion fiscal hole—does he understand what that means? While he was spinning Ferris wheels and shopping malls on city council, he had no idea about the services that Torontonians depended on from government, and he has no idea what Ontarians depend on.

Just $1 billion of the cuts that he would put in place would roll back all of our housing initiatives in this province. It means cutting our programs to help those who are homeless. It means taking away the basic income pilot. It means cutting real dollars away from our social housing retrofit. The person who claims that he cares about the little people and the ones in social housing: He’s going to cut the money that’s going to fix their homes. Doug Ford is out of touch.

Interjections.

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

New question.

Executive compensation

Mr. Todd Smith: My question is for the Premier. Does the Premier believe that a $6-million salary is acceptable for the CEO of Hydro One?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Energy.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Once again, we talked about this last week. But first I’d like to start off with the weather that we’ve had over the last couple of days. I want to thank all of the Hydro One workers and the utilities right across the province for making sure that they get us back and connected so we can have power right across the province.

As well, moving forward, we recognize that salaries are hard to imagine for many families right across the province, but we make sure that the board will continue to monitor this. They need to ensure that they are bringing forward savings for the ratepayers. Last year, the executive at Hydro One was able to find $114 million in savings that led to lower bills for customers.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Todd Smith: Back to the Premier: It’s actually shocking to see the Liberals defend the six-million-dollar man and the salary of the CEO at Hydro One when people across the province are struggling to pay their electricity bills. They’re having to choose between heating and eating. Under the Liberals, we’ve seen the cost of electricity rise by 300%.

My question is for the Premier. Does she believe that a $6-million salary is acceptable for the CEO at Hydro One?

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Advanced Education is warned.

Minister.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Once again, do the people of Ontario find it acceptable that that party votes against giving them a 25% savings? Do the people of Ontario find it acceptable that that party votes against anything to do with climate change?

On this side of the House, we make sure that we continue to act in the best interests of the people of Ontario. The Conservatives will do nothing to lower electricity bills for Ontario families. By talking about firing the CEO of Hydro One—that doesn’t take anything off of anybody’s bills.

Let’s see what the well-respected business journalists who are talking about Mr. Ford’s reckless plan—he said the Ontario Progressive Conservatives “have been obsessed with” the broadening of ownership, “spreading misinformation about the company.” He also pointed out that the opposition parties—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Excuse me. Withdraw.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: My apologies, Mr. Speaker. I do withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): That’s all you have to say—just “withdraw.”

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Withdraw.

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

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: He also pointed out the opposition party seemed to forget, or leave out every single time, that “Hydro One doesn’t set the rates.... It must get approval for any rate changes from the Ontario Energy Board, which factors in issues such as employee compensation when making its decisions.”

Hydro One

Ms. Cindy Forster: My question is to the Premier. For almost two years, my constituent Norm Fowler and his 92-year-old wife, low-income seniors, have been fighting with Hydro One to get full compensation after hydro crews accidentally blew up their appliances at their rent-geared-to-income residence in Thorold. That’s right, Speaker; 220 volts went through their building at 61 Ormond Street in Thorold instead of the intended 110 volts, destroying the appliances. Hydro One is refusing to pay the full compensation of $1,100 to them.

Ontario New Democrats have been warning about the privatization of Hydro, and here we are cutting corners and seniors are left in our community to bear the brunt. Why is the Liberal government allowing vulnerable, low-income seniors in our communities to pay the expensive price for this government’s short-sighted decisions?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Energy.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I want to thank the member for the question. I can say that there are other customers from this complex who are coming forward as well and submitting claims. Hydro One will be reviewing every single one of those claims and assessing them on their individual merits, and I understand that Hydro One is working hard to resolve this matter, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Cindy Forster: Well, Speaker, it’s been two years that these low-income seniors have been waiting for their restitution. This error was made at the hands of Hydro One at a residence in my riding that houses low-income tenants, most of them seniors. They now have been forced to pay $1,100 to replace their own appliances. Meanwhile, under the Liberal government’s watch, Hydro One executives received $11 million in compensation last year.

Again, I ask the Premier: Why does the Liberal government continue to allow vulnerable seniors in my riding to bear the brunt for short-sighted and ill-informed decisions?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Once again, as I said earlier, I understand that Hydro One is actively looking into this customer’s concerns as we speak, Mr. Speaker. They’re also working with the complex where there are other claims being submitted.

That said, since the broadening of the ownership of Hydro One, it has become a better-run company. Under new management, Hydro One is improving on a number of service metrics, Mr. Speaker. The first one Hydro One has indicated is that it has improved the quality of their call centre interactions through improved training for staff in performance management. Additionally, since the broadening of ownership, management has found $114 million in savings, which helps keep ratepayers’ bills low, Mr. Speaker.

I know the biggest idea that the NDP has when it comes to energy—to buy back shares of Hydro One—will, again, do nothing to reduce bills. Hydro rates continue to be regulated by the Ontario Energy Board, who have the mandate to protect ratepayers.

Access to justice

Mrs. Cristina Martins: My question this morning is to the Attorney General. Access to justice is a key issue that many people across Ontario face daily. I know that our government has made record investments into improving access to justice, but there is always more that can be done, specifically for our most vulnerable. These people are often low-income and often marginalized and racialized. They need our support the most because, as we know, the justice system can often be a lengthy and costly process. I can guarantee that all of the members in this House have heard stories about how constituents, in going through their cases or trials, cannot afford a lawyer. They then turn to legal aid.

In my own riding of Davenport, the West Toronto legal clinic and Legal Aid Ontario overall have been instrumental in supporting those who most need the support. But they need more help. Can the Attorney General please detail how our government intends to bolster legal aid?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: I want to thank the member from Davenport for the question. Speaker, we know how important access to justice in Ontario is. That is why Ontario is providing more people with affordable access to legal services by increasing the financial eligibility threshold for legal aid by another 6%. As of April 1 of this year, about 140,000 more people are now eligible to receive the legal services they need, regardless of their ability to pay. This is because of our province’s investments in Legal Aid Ontario—also known as LAO—to increase access to legal aid services for low-income and vulnerable people province-wide.

This is part of Ontario’s 2014 commitment to expand access to legal aid services provided by LAO to an additional one million Ontarians in 10 years. With more than 500,000 additional people who will be eligible for legal aid, Ontario is now more than halfway to this very important goal.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mrs. Cristina Martins: I would like to thank the Attorney General for his answer. That is excellent news and I’m sure that this funding will be a lot of help in not only my riding of Davenport, but across the province in every member’s riding.

Despite this major investment, I have heard that there are certain communities or groups who have unique needs and whose services need to be tailored towards them. For instance, in my riding of Davenport, and in fact across Toronto, there is a large LGBTQ2 community, many of whom have very specific needs. This community has a significantly higher rate of sexual and domestic or intimate partner violence and very low rates of reporting. As many of us have heard, they also have a strained relationship with the justice system.

Can the Attorney General please explain how we are going to invest in supporting the LGBTQ2 community?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: The member from Davenport asks a very important question. Speaker, as I have stated, supporting our most vulnerable is a major priority for our government. In our recently announced gender-based violence strategy, we announced a $242 million investment that commits our province to providing further supports for survivors and those who are at risk of gender-based violence.

We also announced a new pilot, Speaker. Our government is piloting Canada’s first-ever LGBTQ2 community legal clinic right here in Toronto. This clinic will be made to meet the need for specialized legal support within this community, work to address the high rate of sexual assault and, hopefully, encourage people to step forward and improve reporting of abuse. Because of our government’s understanding, these sorts of investments are crucial to building an inclusive and supportive province.

Government spending

Mr. Steve Clark: My question is for the Premier. In the last two weeks, how much money have the Liberals spent campaigning on the taxpayer’s dime?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I understand why the member opposite would not want us to talk about the budget plan that we brought in. I understand that they don’t want to talk about child care, and they don’t want to talk about investment in home care or long-term care. They don’t want to acknowledge that, right now, people in this province—even though our economy is growing, even though our unemployment rate is the lowest it has been in 20 years, not everybody is feeling the benefit of that.

We need to step up as a government and provide the care and the tools that people need to be able to care for themselves and care for their families. I understand why this party would not want to talk about that, because they have no idea and no plan for how they would meet those needs and how they would help people to care for themselves. So I get why they don’t want us talking about our budget, as we do every year.

Interjections.

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

Supplementary?

Mr. Steve Clark: Back to the Premier: The Liberals have held no fewer than 25 campaign-style events over the last two weeks. This comes at an incredible expense to the taxpayer. Will the Liberal Party pay back the taxpayer for their campaign-style events?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Let’s talk about what we have been saying as we have been talking to the people of Ontario since we brought the budget in.

As we do every year, we talk about what is in our budget so that people will know what it is we’re debating in the Legislature and what they can expect as we implement the budget, should it pass in the Legislature.

We’re talking about investing more in seniors’ care and, in fact, giving caregivers some support when they’re looking after an older, loved relative, giving them some money to actually be able to keep up the house.

We are talking about providing free preschool child care for two-and-a-half- to four-year-olds. One of the interesting things that the Leader of the Opposition talked about was that that was a ridiculous policy because it was for unborn children. Government exists to put in place the conditions for all children—

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

Interjections.

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

New question.

Employment standards

Ms. Jennifer K. French: My question is to the Premier: We just updated Ontario’s employment standards, and then you and your government secretly threw in an exemption to limit the personal emergency leave and bereavement days of auto workers. You specifically set your sights on auto workers. This isn’t right and it isn’t fair.

The minister has said that this exemption will help to keep Ontario competitive in the global market. Ontario should not be competing in a race to the bottom; we should be setting the standard when it comes to workers’ rights.

Why does the Premier think it is okay to give auto workers fewer leave days than everybody else?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Labour.

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Thank you to the member for that question. On January 1, 2017, after we had had consultations with the industry, with stakeholders and with others involved in the auto industry, we put in place a personal emergency leave pilot project in the auto sector. What it required was that auto sector employers with more than 50 employees provide each employee the use of up to seven personal emergency leave days as well as up to three days for the unfortunate death of a family member, should that occur. It was a very specific recommendation of the special advisers of the Changing Workplaces Review.

As a result of the actions we took on Bill 148, as of January 1, 2018, the 50-employee threshold was removed and, for the first time ever, all employers in the auto sector are required to make personal emergency leave available to each employee.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Ms. Jennifer K. French: Again to the Premier: You put a specific target on auto workers; however, in my community of Oshawa, cleaners in the GM plants are finding they are being redesignated to “auto worker” so their leave days can be limited, too.

When this House was reviewing Ontario’s employment standards, both the Liberals and the Conservatives voted against the NDP amendment that would have ensured that everybody had access to the same leave days guaranteed in the new Employment Standards Act. Now we can see why you voted against the fix. This government now can unfairly target any workers in the whole auto industry.

I know the minister has been meeting with Unifor on this issue, and I know auto workers in our communities want to know, will you commit today to amending the Employment Standards Act to ensure that all workers get the same access to leave days?

Interjections.

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

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Thank you to the member for that supplementary. With the auto strategy we have in the province of Ontario, we’re committed to the success of this province’s auto sector. It’s a very highly competitive global economy. We’re going to make sure that that success is shared with the employees who work in the sector.

As the labour reforms work out, we continue to engage with stakeholders. This is a pilot project, Speaker, that was put in place. In some ways it has improved and in some ways it has had a neutralizing effect on personal emergency leave.

Last week I was able to sit down with Unifor, with a number of people who work in the domestic markets, with those who work at Toyota, at Honda. We’re working towards a resolution of this issue. We said we would do an evaluation of the pilot project. We’re keeping our word. That’s exactly what we’re doing.

Indigenous relations and reconciliation

Mr. Arthur Potts: My question is to the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation. Reconciliation with indigenous peoples is a top priority for our government. It’s important to recognize that reconciliation is not just an event or an apology; it’s a journey that we have committed to taking together with our indigenous partners.

In Beaches–East York, I am so proud to go to my local schools and during the morning announcements hear the acknowledgement we make to indigenous people, because I know the next generation is growing up better understanding their responsibilities to work together.

Speaker, I understand that last week the minister was joined by indigenous partners and former ministers to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the creation of his ministry. Will the minister please tell us more about this event, the work that the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation has been doing in his tenure, and what the ministry over the last 10 years has been doing together with our indigenous partners?

Hon. David Zimmer: Speaker, the story of the Ministry of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation begins with the tragic Ipperwash Provincial Park actions. For eight years following that, the then-Harris government ignored calls from indigenous peoples for an inquiry into the Ipperwash crisis. But within a month of taking office in 2003, then-Attorney General Michael Bryant commissioned an inquiry. The inquiry report recommended, among other things, that the Ministry of Indigenous Relations be established.

Last week I was joined by indigenous partners, former ministers, civil servants and other stakeholders to celebrate the 10th anniversary of this ministry. The ministry closes gaps and removes barriers. It supports cultural revitalization. It’s a meaningful source of resolutions to the historic grievances of indigenous peoples.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Arthur Potts: I want to thank the minister for not just his answer, but for the stalwart work that he puts into his ministry and building bridges with our indigenous partners.

In the story of the ministry’s creation, I hear of a government that listens, that cares and that takes action, realizing positive social change can take a long time. We’ve seen a great deal of good come from the work that this ministry has done across government over the past 10 years. In fact, in just the past four years, I’ve seen our government officially apologize for Ontario’s role in the residential school system and make a historic $250-million commitment to reconciliation through The Journey Together.

We’ve also committed $108 million to take action to end violence against indigenous women, and we passed the Treaties Recognition Week Act, making Ontario the first province to officially celebrate this week in November. Finally, Speaker, we’ve made indigenous history and culture a mandatory part of Ontario’s curriculum and Ontario’s culture.

Can the minister tell us more about these incredible steps that we are taking together with our indigenous partners moving towards reconciliation?

Hon. David Zimmer: Speaker, last week we heard from indigenous partners who joined us for this celebration just how significant the work of the ministry was. As we mark the first decade of this new ministry devoted to indigenous issues, it is important to look back and take stock and rededicate ourselves.

But, Speaker, I am worried. I am worried that this ministry is at risk if a Conservative government is elected next fall. We’ve seen time and time again that indigenous issues are at the bottom of the Progressive Conservatives’ agenda. They voted against our $250-million commitment to reconciliation twice, not to mention our $1-billion commitment to the Ring of Fire infrastructure.

Reconciliation is more than words. It’s action; it’s commitments. This government has shown that. The official opposition has not, and will not.

Interjections.

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

New question.

Hospital funding

Mr. Jeff Yurek: My question is to the Premier. Premier, surgery wait times in Ontario have reached catastrophic levels. Last week, Ottawa resident Ruth Mackenzie witnessed first-hand your government’s health care failures when her surgery was cancelled moments before going under the knife.

My question for the Premier is, does she think it’s acceptable to cancel surgeries moments before a scheduled surgery is to take place?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I don’t know the specifics of that situation, and I am sure that the member opposite will share it with the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. But, again, I hope that this concern that the member opposite is expressing will encourage him to vote for the budget in which we have included a significant investment of $822 million to hospitals, including more funding for home care and more funding for mental health care.

I hope that this member sees it is imperative that we continue to invest in our health care system. Every year, we have included an increased funding to our hospitals, to home care and to health care across the province, but we recognize that there is more we need to do. So I hope the member opposite will be supporting us as we bring forward our budgetary changes.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Back to the Premier: It’s interesting that the Premier answers that question as such, considering it was her government that froze hospital funding for five years, it’s her government that attacked our doctors and it’s her government that built the infrastructure bureaucracy reducing the funds reaching our patients in the front lines. Mr. Speaker, this government has been a failure in managing health care and is only promising the world as a last-minute game in order to gain votes.

This is the second time the surgery for Mrs. Mackenzie has been cancelled because of this government’s failures. Last month it was cancelled because of overcrowding in the hospital, because the government failed in supporting the hospitals during the flu season. Two cancelled surgeries in one month. But it’s becoming the norm in this province. Last month, a London patient had to have their bypass surgery cancelled at the last moment for the fourth time. It’s unacceptable, the level of care this government is providing to the people of Ontario.

Will the minister call the Ottawa hospital and ask that that surgery be rescheduled ASAP?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Again, I don’t know the specifics of the individual case that the member opposite is raising, but I know that he will share that information with the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

But it’s interesting what the member opposite said about the budgets from year to year. We have increased funding every year to hospitals and across the health care system. It’s interesting that an organization like the Fraser Institute—which I think the member opposite can agree is not exactly an organization that is friendly to our government—has joined with CIHI and the Wait Time Alliance: They have all agreed that Ontario is at the very top, the best for wait times in this country. So that is the reality. That’s the truth of the situation, that we are leading the country in terms of wait times.

But even with that, we recognize that there is more we can do. Again, I call on the member opposite to support the budget because in that budget is a significant increase in funding specifically to hospitals, as well as to mental health and to home care.

Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Today in the Speaker’s gallery, we have some very special guests: the Honorable Edmund G. “Jerry” Brown Jr., the governor of California, who is also accompanied by Juan Alsace, the consul general of the United States, and the former MPP for the riding of Nipissing during the 38th and 39th Parliaments and currently Ontario’s representative in Washington, Ms. Monique Smith.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): And one more time: my wife, Rosemarie.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Point of order: the Premier.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Point of order, Mr. Speaker: I just want to add my welcome to yours to Governor Brown and to thank him. This morning, at MaRS, we had a terrific session on climate change and on the cap-and-trade system, because our markets are linked—California, Ontario, Quebec—and we are reducing pollution in our three jurisdictions and moving ahead and leading the world.

Interjections.

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

The member from Etobicoke Centre on a point of order.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I want to ask all of the members in the Legislature to help me welcome two leaders of the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance who joined us partway through question period. We have with us Stephanie Bellotto, who is the VP of university affairs at Wilfrid Laurier University and a member of the OUSA steering committee, and Landon Tulk, who is OUSA’s VP of finance. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Deferred Votes

Correctional Services Transformation Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la transformation des services correctionnels

Deferred vote on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 6,

An Act to enact the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Act, 2018 and the Correctional Services and Reintegration Act, 2018, to make related amendments to other Acts, to repeal

an Act and to revoke a regulation / Projet de loi 6, Loi édictant la Loi de 2018 sur le ministère de la Sécurité communautaire et des Services correctionnels et la Loi de 2018 sur les services correctionnels et la réinsertion sociale, apportant des modifications connexes à d’autres lois et abrogeant une loi et un règlement.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1142 to 1147.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): All members, please take your seats.

On March 27, 2018, Madame Lalonde moved second reading of Bill 6,

An Act to enact the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Act, 2018 and the Correctional Services and Reintegration Act, 2018, to make related amendments to other Acts, to repeal

an Act and to revoke a regulation.

All those in favour, please rise one at a time to be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Albanese, Laura

Armstrong, Teresa J.

Baker, Yvan

Ballard, Chris

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bradley, James J.

Chan, Michael

Chiarelli, Bob

Colle, Mike

Coteau, Michael

Crack, Grant

Damerla, Dipika

Del Duca, Steven

Delaney, Bob

Des Rosiers, Nathalie

Dickson, Joe

Dong, Han

Duguid, Brad

Fife, Catherine

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Forster, Cindy

Fraser, John

French, Jennifer K.

Gates, Wayne

Gélinas, France

Gretzky, Lisa

Hatfield, Percy

Hoggarth, Ann

Hunter, Mitzie

Kiwala, Sophie

Lalonde, Marie-France

Leal, Jeff

MacCharles, Tracy

Mantha, Michael

Martins, Cristina

Matthews, Deborah

McGarry, Kathryn

McMahon, Eleanor

McMeekin, Ted

Milczyn, Peter Z.

Moridi, Reza

Naidoo-Harris, Indira

Naqvi, Yasir

Potts, Arthur

Qaadri, Shafiq

Rinaldi, Lou

Sandals, Liz

Sattler, Peggy

Sousa, Charles

Taylor, Monique

Thibeault, Glenn

Vernile, Daiene

Wong, Soo

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Zimmer, David

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): All those opposed, please rise one at a time to be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Barrett, Toby

Cho, Raymond Sung Joon

Clark, Steve

Coe, Lorne

Hardeman, Ernie

Hillier, Randy

Martow, Gila

McNaughton, Monte

Miller, Norm

Nicholls, Rick

Oosterhoff, Sam

Pettapiece, Randy

Scott, Laurie

Smith, Todd

Thompson, Lisa M.

Walker, Bill

Yakabuski, John

Yurek, Jeff

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 55; the nays are 18.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I declare the motion carried.

Second reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Pursuant to the order of the House dated April 12, 2018, the bill is referred to the Standing Committee on Justice Policy.

There being no further deferred votes, this House stands recessed until 1 p.m. this afternoon.

The House recessed from 1150 to 1300.

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Ted McMeekin: I’m delighted to introduce two good friends of mine: Ryan Deshpande, the current vice-president of the McMaster Students Union, and the incoming vice-president, Stephanie Bertolo. They’re here in regard to a statement I’ll be making about McMaster momentarily. Welcome.

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

Members’ Statements

Mark Bottineau

Mr. Jeff Yurek: I rise today to speak about a constituent of mine who passed away last year, Mark Bottineau. I first met Mark Bottineau, when I was in grade 3 going into grade 4, at a basketball camp run by John Lavereau. What Mark was to me at that time was what he was to all communities—the fact that he took me in and made me feel welcome as somebody new to the sport and who hadn’t a clue what I was doing. Mark was there, always smiling—and quite an athlete, at that.

In his short life, he did make a positive impact on all who knew him. His zest for life and great love for family and friends were infectious and precious. Mark had a caring, warm nature and had a way of delivering knowledge and wisdom that sparked everyone’s attention, and always with a laugh—a laugh that was never forgotten, a laugh of strength. It was the light that came upon his face, even though he had a devastating diagnosis.

In August 2016, Mark was diagnosed with stage 4 carcinoma, undefined. It was devastating news to his family and friends, but Mark handled that the same way he dealt with life: with courage, strength, love and puns. Puns were a way for him to deal with the day-to-day challenges of living with a terminal illness. He shared a pun a day, and soon all his family and friends joined in. In true Mark style, he provided, laughter, love and hope to his family and friends during the most difficult time in his life.

If you’ll just indulge me for a few more seconds, Mark’s favourite puns—I thought I would read a few off:

I have a fear of speed bumps, but I’m slowly getting over it.

What’s the best thing about living in Switzerland? Well, the flag’s a big plus.

I might never get over this addiction of referencing the Beach Boys, but wouldn’t it be nice?

Seven days without a pun makes one weak.

I wanted to watch the world origami championships on TV, but it was only pay-per-view.

Mr. Speaker, we miss Mark in our province, and I hope everyone joins in on national pun day on April 19.

Gasoline prices

Mr. Wayne Gates: I rise today to talk about an issue I’ve talked about many times in this House before: gas prices.

Liberals voted down an NDP bill to regulate the price of gas in Ontario and bring some transparency to that market. I want them to see the results of that: Gas prices in Niagara Falls on Sunday were $1.30. We’ve seen the price go up, anywhere from eight to 12 cents, overnight. On long weekends or holidays, it’s even worse.

We’ve said this from the beginning. When the price of oil crashed, we didn’t see the same drop at the pumps. This meant that when oil started to rise again, we knew that gas prices were going up even higher. People are being gouged by the oil companies, and we have zero transparency in Ontario on how gas prices are being set. We are paying outrageous prices for gas, and that comes out of money that families need for a roof over their head or food on the table.

The government has refused to address gas price gouging in any substantial way. They should be ashamed that when they had the chance to act, they decided to do nothing.

When gas prices are this high, the hard-working people in communities right across the province of Ontario are reminded of how unaffordable this province has become every time they start their car.

I hope this Liberal government will address gas prices, and if they won’t, then we’ll do it on June 7, when we bring in an NDP government that actually puts people’s needs first.

Advance care planning

Mr. John Fraser: Today is National Advance Care Planning Day. It’s a day to think about who will speak for you when you can’t speak for yourself and who will make decisions for you when you are unable to.

Advance care planning is ensuring that your substitute decision-maker knows what is important to you. Thinking about the end of life is something that we don’t generally want to do. My grandmother used to say she didn’t want to die because she wanted to see how the story turned out in the end. But we all have to leave the party at some point, so talking about our wishes at the end of life helps to remind us of what’s most important in life.

So often the most important things are small and personal. They’re not grand gestures or big interventions. Speaker, it’s about living well until the end. Letting your substitute decision-maker know what is important to you will help you do that. Advance care planning is a way of supporting them when they’re called on to support you. It’s a vulnerable time for both of you.

Speaker, I’d like to take the opportunity to thank everyone in this province who works in palliative and end-of-life care in hospices and visiting home hospice, and all the work that they do, and for all the work that primary care practitioners do to try to advance advance care planning and help people at the end of their lives.

Voici la liste des membres distingués :

—Dyane Adam, présidente, comité technique de mise en oeuvre de l’université;

—Fété Kimpiobi, directrice générale, Solidarité des femmes et familles immigrantes francophones du Niagara;

—Frédéric Dimanche, professeur et directeur, Ted Rogers school of hospitality à Ryerson;

—Glenn O’Farrell, président et chef de la direction, Groupe Média TFO;

—Koubra Haggar, élève de 12 e année, École secondaire Georges-P.-Vanier à Hamilton;

—Marième Lo, professeure;

—Florence Ngenzebuhoro, directrice générale, Centre francophone de Toronto;

—Marie-Andrée Vermette, avocate, associée;

—Rodrigue Gilbert, leader, transports et logistique à PricewaterhouseCoopers;

—Jean Michel Beck, fondateur, président et chef de la direction, Groupe Aecon Inc.;

—Jacques Naud, premier vice-président, ventes et distribution, Knowledge First Financial; et, finalement,

—Normand Côté, vice-président, leadership, évaluation et perfectionnement, Optimum Talent.

Consumer protection

Ms. Cindy Forster: I visited the home this week of 70-year-old Norm Cloutier of Welland, Ontario, who lost his wife last September and now has an Enbridge gas bill that will total nearly $1,000 a month for equipment he was scammed into buying.

Enbridge is assisting Mr. Cloutier by disputing current charges for all equipment still on his property, and some of it is sitting outside in his yard after he was told by one of these door-to-door reps that his furnace, air conditioner and water filtration system would have to be replaced because the company went bankrupt. The equipment was only six years old. Why would anyone like Norm think that he would be deceived?

We have four finance companies involved who make it clear they’re not responsible for how these contracts were obtained at the door. Two of them we’ve been in touch with, and of course, it’s gone to their legal department—interesting how they have lawyers to represent their best interests and seniors have no one to protect them when these devious reps come to their door.

We know the highly acclaimed door-to-door legislation that has already passed is already being worked around as people are now posing as service technicians and, of course, making prior phone appointments using the same questionable tactics as at the door to get into someone’s home.

All of these companies involved need to assist Mr. Cloutier with reasonable buyouts since he is on a government pension. These companies need to cancel contracts associated with them.

I have never seen anything like this, and ask the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services to help Mr. Cloutier through this nightmare.

The message out there for everyone is: There hasn’t been an honest door-to-door salesman since the Fuller Brush days. Don’t buy anything that comes to your door uninvited. In fact, don’t answer the door.

Propane industry

Mr. Lou Rinaldi: I rise today to bring to the attention of my colleagues the presence of representatives from the Canadian Propane Association, who are conducting their advocacy day here at Queen’s Park. Don’t forget their reception tonight in room 247 from 5 to 7. Some of them are here with us.

As I’m sure many of you know, the propane industry in Ontario is important both for our economy and the environment. The propane industry in Ontario provides good-paying jobs for over 3,000 Ontarians. It generates nearly $2 billion in economic activity and $253 million in tax revenues every year in Ontario. Approximately 100,000 households in Ontario rely on propane—including my own house—as their primary source of heating fuel, not to mention commercial, industrial and agriculture applications. In fact, 45% of Canada’s overall propane use occurs in Ontario.

Propane is also good for the environment. It’s a low-emission energy option that offers win-win solutions for both government and consumers. Propane is an especially important energy option for rural Ontarians, such as my constituents, in many of our ridings. In my riding, many residents opt to use propane as it’s an affordable and accessible method of fuel for furnaces, vehicles and, of course, barbecuing.

On behalf of my colleagues, I extend a warm welcome to members of Ontario’s propane industry. Welcome.

St. Vincent de Paul

Mr. Steve Clark: On Saturday, I was honoured to attend the Brockville conference of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul’s Spring Fling. This wonderful event raised over $19,000 so the society’s dedicated volunteers can continue bringing hope to those in need.

Like so many other charitable groups, they work very quietly, and their good deeds go often unseen. Last year alone, their core programs assisted 364 adults and 314 children. That’s over 600 lives made better because of their commitment to caring. The range of programs and services that they provide directly and with community partners is quite remarkable. Assistance includes food vouchers, help with rent and utility payments, transportation, and a Christmas program. They also operate a 24/7 helpline with volunteers taking turns monitoring a cellphone to connect people in crisis and give them help.

They even offer summer activity programs, allowing at-risk youth to participate in rowing, kayaking, swimming, gymnastics or dance.

They’re justifiably proud of their amazing weekender program. It fills the gap for JK to grade 6 students who rely on school breakfast programs by sending them home with nutritious food on Fridays. In just a few years, it has grown tremendously from three schools and 15 students to now feeding 209 students in 14 schools.

These volunteers are truly putting the society’s motto—“Helping Make a Difference”—into action.

On behalf of our community and the friends, families and neighbours whose lives you’ve brightened, I want to thank you.

I want to thank you, Speaker, for allowing me this opportunity to tell their great story here in the House.

McMaster University

Mr. Ted McMeekin: I’ve got a great story to tell about my alma mater, McMaster. A few years ago, a number of students there decided that they would intervene politically by writing letters to Minister Milloy and then-Premier McGuinty calling for the building of a new humanities building. There were some 400 letters that came in, all handwritten—no form letters. That money was provided, and the L.R. Wilson humanities building opened a couple of months ago. Ryan and Stephanie, who are here today, took the initiative to have postcards sent to the Premier, thanking her, the government and the Legislative Assembly for the investment. I’d like to read three quickly.

“Years ago, I was an undergrad student who wrote a letter to Minister John Milloy and Premier McGuinty. Now I am a PhD student in the institute for globalization.... Your investment transformed my life. Thank you.”

Second letter: “I’ve been on this campus for five years and seeing this building come to life has changed the fabric of campus and places a renewed passion for the arts right in the middle of campus.”

Finally: “Hello,” Premier. “Another student here to say thank you for our new amazing building! From the new social sciences lounge, to the new blackbox theatre, to the amazing space for indigenous students, we now have a building for us! We are eternally grateful for your” wonderful “contributions!”

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Further members’ statements?

Vietnamese heritage and freedom flag

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Seeing no further members’ statements, I believe the member from Leeds–Grenville is going to stand on a point of order, because he told me he might be.

Mr. Steve Clark: Point of order, Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Leeds–Grenville on a point of order.

Mr. Steve Clark: I am seeking unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding the Vietnamese heritage and freedom flag.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Leeds–Grenville is seeking unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice. Do we agree? Agreed.

The member from Leeds–Grenville.

Mr. Steve Clark: I move that the Vietnamese heritage and freedom flag be flown on the courtesy flagpole on April 29, 2018.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Leeds–Grenville is seeking unanimous consent to raise the flag. Do we agree? Carried.

Motion agreed to.

Introduction of Bills

Protecting Vulnerable Persons in Supportive Living Accommodation Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la protection des personnes vulnérables dans les logements supervisés

Ms. Forster moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 48,

An Act to establish a framework for the licensing of supportive living accommodation / Projet de loi 48, Loi établissant un cadre pour la délivrance de permis d’exploitation de logements supervisés.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member for a short statement.

Ms. Cindy Forster: The bill requires persons who operate a supportive living accommodation in specified circumstances to hold a licence issued by the minister. It provides for a framework, to be supplemented by regulations, governing applications for and the issuance of licences, the obligations of persons who operate a supportive living accommodation under the authority of a licence, inspections and complaints.

WSIB Coverage for Workers in Residential Care Facilities and Group Homes Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la protection à accorder aux travailleurs dans les établissements de soins en résidence et les foyers de groupe par la Commission de la sécurité professionnelle et de l’assurance contre les accidents du travail

Mr. Fraser moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 49,

An Act to amend the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 / Projet de loi 49, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1997 sur la sécurité professionnelle et l’assurance contre les accidents du travail.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member for a short statement.

Mr. John Fraser: The bill amends the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act to provide that all employees who work in a retirement home, a residential care facility or a group home receive mandatory WSIB coverage.

Supporting Wine Jobs and Growth in the Niagara Region Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 visant à soutenir les emplois dans l’industrie du vin et la croissance dans la région de Niagara

Mr. Gates moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 50,

An Act to amend the Alcohol and Gaming Regulation and Public Protection Act, 1996 with respect to Ontario wineries / Projet de loi 50, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1996 sur la réglementation des alcools et des jeux et la protection du public en ce qui concerne les établissements vinicoles de l’Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member for a short statement.

Mr. Wayne Gates: The bill amends the Alcohol and Gaming Regulation and Public Protection Act, 1996, to provide an exemption for certain wines to the tax set out in subsection 27(1).

Petitions

Employment standards

Mr. Ted Arnott: I have a petition that reads as follows:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas in 2017 pay to employees for public holiday pay were based fairly and proportionately on the percentage that the employee worked within the week. The current public holiday pay calculation is unfair to both employers and employees. Based on $14 per hour, someone who works two four-hour shifts per week for a total of eight hours per week would receive $56 public holiday pay. However, an employee that also totals eight hours per week but only works one day a week would receive $112 for public holiday pay.

Further, the person that works one eight-hour day a week is now entitled to the same public holiday pay as a person who works five full days per week. The drastic increase to public holiday pay financially penalizes employers for hiring part-time employees and reduces hiring and scheduling flexibility. It has and will continue to reduce employment opportunities for those that are either only able to, or want to, work part-time.

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“That the current 2018 Ontario holiday pay calculation be abolished, and that the prior Ontario holiday pay calculation, as follows, be reinstated: That the calculation for public holiday pay is to be calculated on the amount of an employee’s earnings for the four weeks prior to the public holiday and be divided by 20.”

It’s signed by a substantial number of my constituents.

Anti-smoking initiatives for youth

Mrs. Liz Sandals: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

“Whereas:

“—In the past 10 years in Ontario, 86% of all movies with on-screen smoking were rated for youth;

“—The tobacco industry has a long, well-documented history of promoting tobacco use on-screen;

“—A scientific report released by the Ontario Tobacco Research Unit estimated that 185,000 children in Ontario today will be recruited to smoking by exposure to on-screen smoking;

“—More than 59,000 will eventually die from tobacco-related cancers, strokes, heart disease and emphysema, incurring at least $1.1 billion in health care costs; and

whereas an adult rating (18A) for movies that promote on-screen tobacco in Ontario would save at least 30,000 lives and half a billion health care dollars;

“—The Ontario government has a stated goal to achieve the lowest smoking rates in Canada;

“—79% of Ontarians support not allowing smoking in movies rated G, PG, 14A,” which is up from 73% in 2011;

—The Minister of Government and Consumer Services has the authority to amend the regulations of the Film Classification Act via cabinet;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“—To request the Standing Committee on Government Agencies examine the ways in which the regulations of the Film Classification Act could be amended to reduce smoking in youth-rated films released in Ontario;

“—That the committee report back on its findings to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and that the Minister of Government and Consumer Services prepare a response.”

I affix my signature and give this to page Joseph.

Health care funding

Mr. Norm Miller: I want to thank Tammy McAughey of Sprucedale, Marjory Goodwin, June Tebby, Karen Wright and Marcia Mackesy of Huntsville and others who collected these 384 names on this “save our hospitals” petition. It reads:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare has been considering the future of the Huntsville District Memorial and South Muskoka Memorial hospitals since 2012; and

“Whereas accessible health care services are of critical importance to all Ontarians, including those living in rural areas; and

“Whereas patients currently travel significant distances to access acute in-patient care, emergency, diagnostic and surgical services available at these hospitals; and

“Whereas the funding for small and medium-sized hospitals has not kept up with increasing costs including hydro rates and collective bargaining agreements made by the province; and

“Whereas the residents of Muskoka and surrounding areas feel that MAHC has not been listening to them; and

“Whereas the board of MAHC has yet to take the single-site proposal from 2015 off its books;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario requests that the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care” commits to maintaining “core hospital services ... at both Huntsville District Memorial Hospital and South Muskoka Memorial Hospital and ensures all small and medium-sized hospitals receive enough funding to maintain core services.”

Of course, I support this petition, Mr. Speaker, and give it to the page.

Casinos

Mr. Wayne Gates: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the current request for proposals (RFP) by the Minister of Finance regarding the gaming bundle for Casino Niagara and Fallsview Casino Resort is absent of the following original 1996 RFP criteria to ensure job creation is paramount:

“—to ensure job retention and creation;

“—economic development; and

“—encourage investment;

“Whereas an independent report from HLT Advisory indicated the current RFP could put 1,400 jobs in Casino Niagara and Fallsview Casino Resort at risk;

“Whereas the workers at these casinos have built and continue to build families as well as play an important role in the fabric of our communities;

“Whereas the removal of any jobs from either Casino Niagara or Fallsview Casino Resort would have long-term damaging effects on both the displaced workers and their communities;

“Whereas the people of Niagara deserve to know their government is committed to sustaining and creating good jobs in their communities;

“We, the undersigned, add our names to petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and call on the government, the Premier and the Minister of Finance to:

“—immediately halt the current RFP process concerning Casino Niagara and Fallsview Casino Resort;

“—immediately consult local communities for input;

“—issue a new RFP covering Casino Niagara and Fallsview Casino Resort which includes a guarantee to keep existing good casino jobs in Niagara Falls and uses original 1996 RFP criteria.”

I’ll sign my name and give it to the page.

Voting age

Mr. John Fraser: I have a petition here to amend

section 15 of the Election Act to lower the eligible voter age in Ontario.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas pursuant to

section S. 15 ... of the Election Act, every person is entitled to vote who, on the general polling day, has attained 18 years of age; and

“Whereas youth in Ontario want to be politically engaged; and

“Whereas younger person(

s) have a vested interest in the selection of their political representatives; and

“Whereas young person(

s) should not have to pay taxes without representation; and

“Whereas jurisdictions including ... Austria and Brazil have extended the eligible voter age (1); and

“Whereas electoral polls indicate a higher rate of electoral turnout in these jurisdictions (2); and

“Whereas young person(

s) have the knowledge and maturity to participate in the electoral process;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“That the province of Ontario lower the eligible voter age to 16 years old, pursuant to amendments made to

section S. 15” of the “Election Act.”

Thank you very much. I’ll give it to page Hannah.

Dental care

Mr. Toby Barrett: The people who signed this petition organized an additional 886 signatures on a postcard campaign with respect to better dental health.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas too many people in Haldimand–Norfolk live with pain and infections because they cannot afford dental care;

“Whereas OHIP pays to treat pain and infection in every part of the body except the mouth;

“We, the undersigned, support extending provincial programs to include everyone who needs and cannot afford emergency and preventative dental treatment.”

I’ve worked closely with this group, and I’m very pleased to add my signature to the list.

Long-term care

Ms. Cindy Forster: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Ontario’s 627 long-term-care homes play a critical role in the support and care for more than 100,000 elderly Ontarians each and every year;

“Whereas nine out of 10 residents in long-term care today have some form of cognitive impairment, along with other complex medical needs, and require specialized, in-home supports to manage their complex needs;

“Whereas each and every year, 20,000 Ontarians remain on the waiting list for long-term care services and yet, despite this, no new beds are being added to the system;

“Whereas over 40% of Ontario’s long-term-care beds require significant renovations or to be rebuilt and the current program put forward to renew them has had limited success;

“Whereas long-term-care homes require stable and predictable funding each year to support the needs of residents entrusted in their care;

“We, the undersigned, citizens of Ontario, call on the government to support the Ontario Long Term Care Association’s Building Better Long-Term Care pre-budget submission and ensure better seniors’ care through a commitment to improve long-term care.”

I support this petition, will affix my signature, and send it with page Sophie.

Voting age

Mr. Bob Delaney: I have a petition entitled “To Amend S. 15(1)(

a) of the Election Act (1990) to Lower the Eligible Voter Age in Ontario.” It’s addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it reads:

“Whereas pursuant to S. 15(1)(

a) of the Election Act, every person is entitled to vote who, on the general polling day, has attained 18 years of age; and

“Whereas youth in Ontario want to be politically engaged; and

“Whereas younger person(

s) have a vested interest in the selection of their political representatives;”

And as this petition has been read earlier, Speaker, I’ll abridge it a little bit:

“Whereas young person(

s) have the knowledge and maturity to participate in the electoral process;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“That the province of Ontario lower the eligible voter age to 16 years old, pursuant to amendments made to S. 15(1)(

a) Election Act.”

Speaker, I am pleased to sign this petition and to send it down with page Rowan.

Anti-smoking initiatives for youth

Mr. Toby Barrett: A petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas:

“—In the past 10 years in Ontario, 86% of all movies with on-screen smoking were rated for youth;

“—The tobacco industry has a long, well-documented history of promoting tobacco use on-screen;

“—A scientific report released by the Ontario Tobacco Research Unit estimated that 185,000 children in Ontario today will be recruited to smoking by exposure to on-screen smoking;

“—More than 59,000 will eventually die from tobacco-related cancers, strokes, heart disease and emphysema, incurring at least $1.1 billion in health care costs; and

whereas an adult rating (18A) for movies that promote on-screen tobacco in Ontario would save at least 30,000 lives and half a billion health care dollars;

“—The Ontario government has a stated goal to achieve the lowest smoking rates in Canada;

“—79% of Ontarians support not allowing smoking in movies rated G, PG, 14A (increased from 73% in 2011);

“—The Minister of Government and Consumer Services has the authority to amend the regulations of the Film Classification Act via cabinet;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“—To request the Standing Committee on Government Agencies examine the ways in which the regulations of the Film Classification Act could be amended to reduce smoking in youth-rated films released in Ontario;

“—That the committee report back on its findings to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and that the Minister of Government and Consumer Services prepare a response.”

Casinos

Ms. Cindy Forster: I have a petition which is entitled “Don’t Gamble Good Jobs. Save Niagara Casinos.” You can see hundreds of people have signed this.

“Niagara’s casinos were built to bring good jobs to the community. They are now being treated as one more public service to sell off by the provincial government.

“A current request-for-proposal (RFP) process shows no regard for working people who rely on casino jobs. This RFP has no criteria to ensure job creation or provide long-term stability for existing jobs. Completing this process could cost the Niagara region 1,400 jobs directly through the possible closure of the Fallsview Casino.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the current request for proposals (RFP) by the Minister of Finance regarding the gaming bundle for Casino Niagara and Fallsview Casino Resort is absent of the following original 1996 RFP criteria to ensure job creation is paramount:

“—to ensure job retention and creation;

“—economic development; and

“—encourage investment;

“Whereas an independent report from HLT Advisory indicated the current RFP could put 1,400 jobs in Casino Niagara and Fallsview Casino Resort at risk;

“Whereas the workers at these casinos have built and continue to build families as well as play an important role in the fabric of our communities;

“The removal of any jobs from either Casino Niagara or Fallsview Casino Resort would have long-term damaging effects on both the displaced workers and their communities;

“Whereas the people of Niagara deserve to know their government is committed to sustaining and creating good jobs in their communities;

“We, the undersigned, add our names to petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and call on the government, the Premier and the Minister of Finance to:

“—immediately halt the current RFP process concerning Casino Niagara and Fallsview Casino Resort;

“—immediately consult local communities for input;

“—issue a new RFP covering Casino Niagara and Fallsview Casino Resort which includes a guarantee to keep existing good casino jobs in Niagara Falls and uses original 1996 RFP criteria.”

I support this petition, sign it and will send it with page Will.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): That concludes the time we have available for petitions this afternoon.

Orders of the Day

Access to Consumer Credit Reports and Elevator Availability Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur l’accès au rapport de solvabilité du consommateur et la disponibilité des ascenseurs

Resuming the debate adjourned on April 12, 2018, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 8,

An Act to amend the Consumer Reporting Act and the Technical Standards and Safety Act, 2000 / Projet de loi 8, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les renseignements concernant le consommateur et la Loi de 2000 sur les normes techniques et la sécurité.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Further debate?

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Speaker, I first of all seek unanimous consent to defer our lead.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): The member for Elgin–Middlesex–London is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to defer the lead speech of the official opposition. Agreed? Agreed.

I recognize the member for Elgin–Middlesex–London.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: I’m glad to stand today in discussion of Bill 8,

An Act to amend the Consumer Reporting Act and the Technical Standards and Safety Act, 2000.

This bill, of course, was resurrected from the prorogation that occurred a few weeks ago from this Liberal government during its final weeks in office. I guess the prorogation was an attempt to reprogram this government’s agenda, but in actuality, it was a chance, or an opportunity, for this government to try to change the movement of the people of Ontario with regard to how they see this government in its true light, which has been one of mismanagement, debt, deficits and erosion of our health care services. It’s quite unfortunate that the government resorted to this type of plan of action.

What has definitely been seen over the past few weeks is that the government’s attempt to confuse voters didn’t work. The people of Ontario still see this government for what it is: a government that has tripled our debt over the last 15 years to over $300 billion, with interest payments now eclipsing $12 billion a year. That is $12 billion taken out of health, $12 billion taken out of education, agriculture, natural resources and social services. In fact, this $12 billion puts debt repayment up to about the third-highest payout this government has. We have health care, education and debt—payment on the interest charges on our debt.

I think it speaks volumes to what has occurred with regard to this government over the last 15 years. In my riding alone, over its tenure, this government has lost over 6,000 well-paying manufacturing jobs. We’ve lost the Ford plant; we’ve lost the Timken plant; we’ve lost Lear seating; and we’ve lost Sterling and all the feeder plants associated with it.

Unfortunately, what has happened is we’ve had some jobs return to the area but not the jobs that people once had in our area. We now have lower-paying jobs without benefits, often part-time. The main reason is that our province has become uncompetitive. It’s been uncompetitive in its tax structure. It has also become uncompetitive with its energy rates.

You don’t have to go much further than to look at how high our energy rates have gone over the 15 years with this government. In an attempt to woo voters, they borrowed billions of dollars that the pages will be paying for, and probably the pages’ kids down the road, in order for this government to have the appearance of lowering energy rates prior to an election, only to see them skyrocket down the road. It’s unfortunate that in doing so over the last 15 years the energy rates have been skyrocketing and businesses have left this province. Businesses have left southwestern Ontario.

As I said before, those were well-paying jobs, with benefits and pensions, that kept smaller communities running. It kept local communities strong.

Mr. Bob Delaney: Speaker, on a point of order.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): The member from Mississauga–Streetsville on a point of order.

Mr. Bob Delaney: Thank you, Speaker. While the member is welcome to have his opinion on other subjects, I would draw to the Speaker’s attention that at the moment we’re discussing Bill 8, which relates to elevators and credit reporting. I’ve been patient, and I know the Speaker has been, too, waiting to see if the member will actually address the topic of the bill.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): We are, indeed, debating Bill 8 at second reading. I would ask the member for Elgin–Middlesex–London to continue.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Thank you, Speaker, and rightly so. I was building the groundwork into credit rating scores, which is dealt with in Bill 8. If you aren’t able to have a well-paying job and your debt does increase, your credit rating scores are greatly affected.

Mr. Toby Barrett: That happens to governments, too.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: And rightly so. The government’s credit ratings, with their record levels of debt—$312 billion; some $1 billion a month in interest payments—and potential deficits projected to 2025 under this Liberal plan—our credit rating in the province is starting to lower. That doesn’t bode well for future interest rates and interest payments for this province to hit. I thought it was important to lay that groundwork out with regard to the consumer reporting with credit scores, and build that case.

I was making mention of the hydro rates, which caused the slow. You look no further than to the wind and solar subsidies that are being forced upon our municipalities. You look no further than Dutton Dunwich, which has become closer and closer to being forced to build these wind turbines, and 84% of the constituents in the municipality of Dutton Dunwich voted against the building of these structures. I know that the government said that they would be listening to municipalities in the decisions for these wind turbines.

It’s unfortunate that Malahide, which is a municipality that is only about 25 or 30 minutes away from Dutton Dunwich—they wanted the wind turbines. I’m not sure why they wanted to go that route, but they did. But the government gave it to the municipality which voted 84% against these wind turbines.

Mr. Bob Delaney: Speaker, on a point of order.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): The member for Mississauga–Streetsville, once again, on a point of order.

Mr. Bob Delaney: Thank you, Speaker. We’re now six minutes into the member’s address and he has yet to mention the word “elevator” and has yet to actually talk about the topic of the bill. Again, he’s welcome to talk about what it is that he is discussing when we’re debating an energy bill, but we’re debating a bill that deals with elevators and credit reporting, and I would ask the Speaker to request that the member stay on topic.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): I would say again: We are debating Bill 8,

An Act to amend the Consumer Reporting Act and the Technical Standards and Safety Act, 2000. I would ask the member to make reference to the specifics of the bill.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Sure. Sorry, Mr. Speaker. I was talking about credit ratings, which is contained in Bill 8, but I guess we could also mention elevators. Elevators go up, much like the debt of this province has been going up over the 15 years of this government’s tenure.

Mr. Arthur Potts: And they come back down.

Mr. Randy Hillier: Debt goes up; credit rating goes down.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: That’s right. Elevators go down. So do the credit ratings, with their debt going up.

But with regard to the TSSA, which is also referenced in this bill, I thought I’d also have the opportunity to speak about some of the concerns raised from constituents of mine with regard to the TSSA that aren’t addressed in Bill 8, which maybe should have had some opportunity regarding some accountability and transparency that are lacking in the TSSA.

When I was first elected in 2011, I was called to a summer camp area, Camp Barnabas, which is a Christian-run camp just on the outskirts of east Elgin. It’s actually fairly close to the riding of the member from Haldimand–Norfolk. This camp has been running for decades, and part of its fun for the students and the kids who go there in the summer—who have nowhere else to go, really. This is their opportunity to get away from their siblings who didn’t go with them and/or their families and/or the rigours of having to do chores all day, and to go have some fun at camp.

They have this hill. It’s not man-made; it’s a natural hill. At the bottom is a little area where there’s a bunch of water. I wouldn’t say it’s a pool because it’s not a pool. It’s just an area that holds water. And what they would do is put one of those slip-and-slide mats on the hill and get it wet, and the kids would slide down into the water.

I went over and checked it out. It’s probably about 15 feet they have to slide. It’s not a steep hill. TSSA had deemed that it needs to be enforced and that it needs, first, an engineer’s technical report, and it’s just in the same class as a roller coaster. First of all, this camp can’t afford to hire an engineer to look at a Slip N Slide on a hill. Unfortunately, TSSA was very adamant that it’s an amusement ride even though it’s what we probably grew up doing every day in our neighbourhood—throw down a Slip N Slide and get it wet and slide down it.

They wanted an engineer’s technical drawings on it, and so the camp had to get rid of that fun activity. So there’s one less activity for the kids.

We’re talking about a summer camp in Elgin county. This isn’t a summer camp up in Algonquin park; it’s not a summer camp you see in other areas where they have the resources to develop a full program. This is a summer camp for kids in the area who can’t get to Algonquin park etc. It’s somewhere for them to get away in the summer and have some fun under Christian values. Unfortunately, part of the entertainment—it wasn’t the whole thing.

They have nature trails, nature walks, and they go fishing and there are other things they can do, but part of the fun the kids had was just, on hot days, to get the Slip N Slide going and go into the water. I guess it’s the role of the TSSA to keep the safety in there, but sometimes common sense doesn’t seem to exist in some government agencies.

My other concern that was raised—and this is where it gets interesting. This is the flip side of that argument. I had a constituent contact me that in one of the attractions in Port Stanley, they had those amusement rides that are maybe about this tall, so about five and a half feet tall, and the kids sit on them. It’s like a—

Mrs. Cristina Martins: Ferris wheel.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Ferris wheel; thank you very much. You’re listening. This is great. So it’s like a Ferris wheel. You strap the kid in and it goes around in circles really, really slowly. My daughter used to like to do this one. But unfortunately, there were no safety things on it. One of the warning lights was off and a child broke his leg on it, so they came to me and I contacted TSSA.

TSSA doesn’t oversee those rides. So we have the TSSA worried about Wet ‘N’ Wild’s piece of plastic on a hill, but an actual miniature amusement ride is not in their purview to worry about. The constituent wasn’t asking for major regulations, but maybe a sign to say, “Watch out,” and maybe if there are warning lights, that they’re actually operational on the machine.

The third point I’ll raise about the TSSA is really an interesting one, and I guess it speaks to the fact that they have to self-fund themselves to a certain extent, so they’re free, without any repercussions, about what they charge. I have a convenience store gas station in my riding which has mentioned to me that he has to provide technical drawings on the safety of where the gas tanks are and the propane tanks etc. which he has to pay to get drawn up and pay a yearly fee on that.

But they asked them for new drawings every single year, even if there haven’t been any changes or modifications made, so he’s forking out close to $700 or $800 a year with regard to these drawings, which haven’t changed year over year. It makes it tough on small business owners—small family business owners, at that; his family has owned that place for decades—and they cannot justify why they have to keep doing that.

This is on top of the lack of the government dealing with contraband cigarettes in this province. They’ve been hit quite hard on the convenience side of the business. I’m not pro-smoking, but I’m very, very anti-contraband-cigarettes in this province, which has been left ignored for decades.

The high energy rates that he’s spoken about, which are considerably going through the roof—he has to keep his lights on. He has had to cut back his staff. There are less employment opportunities because he’s got these extra fees this government has been charging, without any accountability on these fees. And we have the hydro rates.

He has been hit really hard with the minimum wage increase. In fact, I think he has even cut down his staff. Sometimes he’s the only one doing the full-day shift because he just can’t afford to bring in that many folks. It’s unfortunate, because that convenience store is a great starter position for a lot of the kids in the community, because they can walk there to work and are close enough to home. All the parents know the owner and know the business; a lot of the neighbours use it. So it’s quite a good spot for a young person to start out and learn the basics about employment and how to work a job, without the distractions of a cellphone, and having to deal with customer service.

Those are a few of the issues we’ve had with the TSSA and its lack of accountability. I guess the concern with this bill is the fact that now we’re going to give the TSSA the powers to impose the fines on whatever they wish and when, and to also most likely be the judge and jury to any appeals to this type of system.

You can always argue a stance for safety to make anything pass, but there is a balance to be made between safety, which we all want, and we also have to understand the costs associated with businesses. If they’re doing something wrong that’s not safe, that’s fine, but don’t sit there and try to make things up in order to justify your position or your job at the expense of small businesses and the freedoms of the people of this province. It’s quite concerning.

Bill 8 also talks about elevators in this piece of legislation. We did mention about elevators and the debt going up, but in my riding—I guess you can compare it to downtown Toronto; there’s probably more of a cry or a need to ensure that elevators are fixed and repaired in a timely fashion. This is one of the things this bill is trying to achieve. I do know it is such a pain when you want to utilize an elevator and it’s out of order, especially when there are only two and one of them is out of order. In fact, if both go out of order, it’s quite a problem.

The places that do have elevators in my riding are usually places that house seniors in our area. The need for an elevator to be used at their convenience is necessary

But if there is a medical emergency or a fire, our firemen have to get up. I know you’re not supposed to use elevators in a fire, but I think that if you have poor mobility, that’s the first place you’re going to look to. But even in emergencies, getting the paramedics up to the eighth or ninth floor to deal with a medical emergency—it would be really unfortunate if an elevator was out of order for months on end, and we’re hearing that that’s happening.

This part of the legislation that is putting some timelines and reporting in—I don’t truly know the real reasons why it’s taking so long to get elevator repairs done: whether or not there’s not enough competition in the marketplace in order to drive service of those providers, or if there are parts that are missing, or maybe it’s the error of the owners of the elevators; maybe it’s a combination. Hopefully, this bill is able to deal with that situation.

Mr. Speaker, I’ve touched on a few of these issues here today. I have many, many more issues that I could add into this piece of legislation, that I could discuss. I look forward to seeing where this piece of legislation goes, and goes to committee. I know we have three weeks left of sitting in the Legislature before the fun and games begin—although I think they’ve already started in this province. So I don’t know how far this bill is actually going to get, whether or not it will actually get to royal assent.

We may have to take a look at this piece of legislation. It may mean, when the new government forms and we possibly have to re-look at this legislation, we can look at some more accountability and transparency in TSSA, and maybe ensure that they maintain the safety and well-being of the province but justify what they’re doing in the means of safety.

Interjection.

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Exactly; we’ll help. We’re going to do our part, Mr. Speaker, when we form government on June 7. We’re going to do the reverse of what this government has done with regard to the elevators of this province.

We’re going to lower debt, we’re going to balance the deficit and we’re going to make sure the credit ratings rise. And we’re going to do this while ensuring that the services that people deserve and receive in this province are there for them. Hallway medicine will end. The wait times are going to go down. People are going to see a physician when they want to see their doctor. At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, rural Ontario is going to matter again, northern Ontario is going to matter again and agriculture is going to play a key role in our economy. Things are going to be on the bright side when the PC Party forms government on June 7 with Premier Ford at the helm.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Questions and comments.

Mr. Wayne Gates: I normally don’t get up and talk about the first six minutes of a guy’s speech, but if you’re going to stand up, at least try to be truthful with the residents of Ontario. He talked about losing 6,000 manufacturing jobs —

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

Mr. Wayne Gates: Pardon?

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Withdraw.

Mr. Wayne Gates: Withdraw.

I’m going to talk about the 6,000 manufacturing jobs. It was their party that said very clearly, “Let the auto sector die.” It was their party that did that. It was their party, not necessarily in Ontario, but certainly in Canada, that was very clear that we had a petrodollar, which meant that out west was doing quite well when our dollar was $1.10, but it was killing the manufacturing sector in Ontario.

Laughter.

Mr. Wayne Gates: When these guys sit here and laugh—and I don’t appreciate them laughing—the reality is, I lived it. I was the president of my local union. We saw our plant go from 10,000 workers down to 2,000. We saw Hayes-Dana close in Niagara. We saw the steel industry—these things all happened. It happened very clearly, and they said very clearly—and it wasn’t just one guy. Tim Hudak said it as leader, but a lot of their colleagues have said it, too: “Let that sector die.”

And we’re finding out with advanced manufacturing, now that the dollar is back down to probably where it should be, you’re seeing more investment in our plants. But if we would have let it die, nobody—nobody—would have a job today. Our retirees would have had their pensions go to 33%. They would have lost all their benefits.

So if they’re going to stand up, at least sing—because you can’t inhale and exhale at the same time; you just can’t do that. It’s one thing you can’t do.

They don’t talk about the 407. They don’t want to hear about the 407.

If you’re going to stand up and attack people in the House, let’s talk about what really happened. I can tell you that if it wasn’t for the unions standing up against the free trade agreements, the auto sector would have died a long time ago.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Questions and comments.

Mr. Vic Dhillon: It’s an honour to rise to speak to Bill 8, Access to Consumer Credit Reports and Elevator Availability Act.

One of the issues that we discovered was that we need to collect more data because there isn’t enough data. I would like to state that this bill is one of the first worldwide to be introduced—and hopefully will be passed. We will be making an effort that would amend the Technical Standards and Safety Act in order to create regulation-making authority to collect elevator outage data, to ensure information about elevator performance is published so that perspective residents can make better-informed decisions before they rent or buy a home in a multi-storey building.

The other aspect of this bill deals with consumer credit reporting. I look forward to debating that further.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Questions and comments?

Mr. Bill Walker: It’s always a pleasure to stand and provide comment to my colleague and seatmate from Elgin–Middlesex–London. He always brings good thoughts to the table. I know he is always working on behalf of people in his riding and making sure that the issues of his riding are brought to this House, and he voices them very well.

One of the things that all of us are looking at with this bill is that it talks about consumer protection. I think my colleague, again, brought up a number of good points.

I think one of the things that we need to always make sure that we’re talking about to the people of Ontario is protecting them, because that’s one of the responsibilities that we have when we come to the Legislature, having been democratically elected by them and chosen to be sent here.

I am no