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

December 4, 2023

43rd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2023-Dec-04 vol. A (PDF)

L119A - Mon 4 Dec 2023 / Lun 4 déc 2023

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Monday 4 December 2023 Lundi 4 décembre 2023

Orders of the Day

Enhancing Access to Justice Act, 2023 / Loi de 2023 visant à améliorer l’accès à la justice

Members’ Statements

Lynn Roy

Government’s record

Brian Paton

CTV Lions Children’s Christmas Telethon

Government investments

Cost of living

Events in Etobicoke–Lakeshore

Liberal leadership

Anti-racism activities

First responders

Introduction of Visitors

Question Period

Government accountability

Government accountability

Public transit

Taxation

University funding

Long-term care

Government accountability

Public transit

Housing

Government accountability

Agri-food industry

Mental health and addiction services

Small business

Mental health and addiction services

Deferred Votes

Cleaning Up Corruption Act, 2023 / Loi de 2023 concernant la lutte contre la corruption

Reception

Member’s birthday

Independent members

Member’s birthday

Visitors

Introduction of Visitors

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Heritage, Infrastructure and Cultural Policy

Introduction of Government Bills

Preventing Unethical Puppy Sales Act, 2023 / Loi de 2023 sur la prévention de la vente de chiots contraire à l’éthique

Petitions

Education funding

Long-term care

Dental care

Long-term care

Sexual violence and harassment

Social assistance

Social assistance

Health care workers

Labour legislation

Ehlers-Danlos syndrome

Member’s birthday

Orders of the Day

Time allocation

Royal assent / Sanction royale

Time allocation

Better for Consumers, Better for Businesses Act, 2023 / Loi de 2023 pour mieux servir les consommateurs et les entreprises

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Next, we’ll have a moment of silence for inner thought and personal reflection.

Orders of the Day

Enhancing Access to Justice Act, 2023 / Loi de 2023 visant à améliorer l’accès à la justice

Mr. Downey moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 157,

An Act to amend various Acts in relation to the courts and other justice matters / Projet de loi 157, Loi modifiant diverses lois en ce qui concerne les tribunaux et d’autres questions relatives à la justice.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Would the Attorney General care to lead off the debate.

Hon. Doug Downey: I’ll be splitting my time with the Solicitor General and with the member from Simcoe–Grey as well, but I will begin.

Of course, good morning to everybody. Happy Monday. I am really pleased to rise in the House today to open debate on the Enhancing Access to Justice Act, 2023, a bill that would, if passed, improve access to justice, enhance community safety and modernize the justice system for Ontarians.

But before I begin discussing the bill we’re introducing today, I must acknowledge and thank my colleague the Honourable Michael Kerzner, Solicitor General, and his team at the Ministry of the Solicitor General for their partnership, their co-operation and sheer hard work helped in pulling all the elements of this bill together. We’re only as good as our partners, and so I appreciate the opportunity to work alongside my friend and the responsive and innovative team that he leads and the team itself at the Solicitor General’s office.

I also want to thank some of the many stakeholders who have provided input by being the driving force behind so many of the proposals that I’m about to share with you—some of them you recognize: the Ontario Bar Association, the Federation of Ontario Law Associations, the Ontario Trial Lawyers Association, our colleagues at the Ministry of Public and Business Service Delivery. There are so many people who have given input into this, and many of them participated in consultations during the last few years, not just recently, so that we can improve Ontario’s justice system.

I’d also like to acknowledge the First Nations communities that engaged in one-on-one discussions to provide their perspectives on approaches to cannabis regulation that would work for them and how to support the cannabis regulation on-reserve.

I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention my own team members that helped pull this together: the excellent professionals at the Ministry of the Attorney General and the people in my ministry office led by Joseph Hillier, my chief of staff, and my very capable team all the way through. It’s really been phenomenal as they worked hard to put this together.

I must acknowledge the staff at the Ministry of the Attorney General. They’re all over the province. There are some 8,000 employees across the province. They work tirelessly, and they’re innovative. They make efforts to steer the justice system forward, no matter the challenges.

I have to say, their professionalism, drive and the collaboration to keep our system going and evolving is unparalleled, from every corner of this province. It really is something to see, when you go to a space in the north—I was up in Thunder Bay recently for a swearing in for a judge—the pride that they take in how they serve their communities. And it’s no different whether you’re in Pembroke or you’re in Ottawa or you’re in Windsor, the places that we go and the people that we see that have innovative ideas for how the system can be improved.

On top of that, I have to acknowledge all the practising lawyers, the paralegals and legal professionals on the front lines who have provided very important feedback and recommendations to us as we work toward a more responsive and more resilient system. I’ve had many different roles in our justice sector myself, including working as a clerk and a court registrar before I went to law school. I know that when positive change happens, it’s truly the result of the determined and collaborative efforts all the way through the system.

I’ve also been struck by how keen people are who work in the system. They want to share their ideas; they just need an openness to it. We’ve made it very clear that we want to hear ideas from the people on the front lines, from the people who are actually meeting with the constituency, meeting with the people who are coming into conflict and then into court. Sometimes, people come to court for the first time, and it’s a very confusing and sometimes cumbersome system, so the perspective of those on the front line to help streamline and take away unnecessary judicial red tape is critical. We’ve benefited from the motivation to do better and the remarkable generosity of those on the front line.

This kind of dedication has led to the introduction of the act before us, the Enhancing Access to Justice Act. This act represents a necessary step forward for Ontario’s justice system and the people who need it most. We’re bringing forward changes that would allow us to take bold and immediate action to strengthen and modernize the justice system by simplifying court and government operations, strengthening community safety and ensuring access to justice for more victims of crime.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, keeping our communities safe and increasing access to justice for victims of crime is a vital priority for this government. Ontario’s justice system needs to be accessible and responsive to all Ontarians, especially those who need it most. That’s why we are proposing changes to the Victims’ Bill of Rights that would make it easier and less traumatizing for certain victims to sue convicted offenders for emotional distress and related bodily harm.

Currently, three types of crimes are identified in the Victims’ Bill of Rights where a victim can sue their convicted offender for emotional distress that is already presumed to be true. These crimes include assault by a spouse, sexual assault and attempted sexual assault. We are proposing to expand this list to include victims of human trafficking, victims of sexual offences against a minor or a person with a disability and victims of the distribution of a voyeuristic recording or an intimate image without that person’s consent.

There is well-documented evidence that victims of these crimes experience long-term effects like post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety and other mental health conditions.

Take Ava, for example—a pseudonym, of course—Ava had intimate images of her posted on a website without her consent. The person who did this sent a link to her family, to her friends and to her co-workers. He was eventually convicted in criminal court. Ava was impacted by this crime in many ways, as you can well imagine. Because the pictures were distributed to her employer and co-workers, she was embarrassed to go back to work. She ultimately lost her job, and now she’s in danger of losing her home.

She experiences negative thoughts and nightmares about the images that were posted and lives in constant fear that people she meets, including prospective employers, will see the photos. Ava would like to sue her offender for emotional distress.

With the changes we’re proposing, Ava would be able to launch a civil suit against her offender and would not have to prove to the court that she suffered emotional distress. This would help prevent her from experiencing and re-experiencing further distress and re-traumatization.

Many victims have told us that it’s re-traumatizing for them to not only have to testify about crimes of such a personal nature but also to have to justify the trauma that they experienced and to do it in a courtroom.

Here’s another example: Ben—another pseudonym—was sexually exploited as a child by his custodial parent. It took Ben many years to come forward to the police, but his offender was eventually convicted in criminal court. Ben has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and would like to sue his offender for the emotional distress he’s experienced. With our proposed changes to the Victims’ Bill of Rights, Ben will be able to do so without having to prove he suffered emotional distress in court.

We’re listening to victims, like Ava and Ben, and we’re making the necessary changes that would increase their access to justice. These amendments will complement the recent changes made to the regulation under the Victims’ Bill of Rights where additional crimes, such as terrorism offences, motor vehicle theft and hate crimes that target religious officials and places of worship, were all added to the list of crimes where victims can sue their convicted offenders for emotional distress and related bodily harm.

Hate crimes and terrorism offences have devastating impacts on individuals and communities. We’re seeing an increase in these acts reported throughout the province. These proposed amendments will make it easier for victims to sue their offenders for emotional distress in civil court and also send a clear signal that our government recognizes the serious nature of these crimes—and we are doing something about it.

On another topic, our government remains committed to protecting children and youth from the negative effects of cannabis, as we well should. Five years ago, the federal government legalized cannabis in Canada. Part of this new legislation allowed for the growth of up to four cannabis plants in people’s homes. That means that, currently, recreational cannabis can be legally grown in homes with child care facilities—not something I would have thought of, but apparently it’s happening. As another means of keeping our children and youth safe, we are proposing to ban the growth of recreational cannabis in both licensed and unlicensed homes offering child care services.

Now, we didn’t think this up. British Columbia has already done it. British Columbia had a similar rule in place for years, and we feel it’s a safe and measured way to limit youth exposure and access to cannabis.

We’re also taking steps to negotiate and implement agreements with First Nations communities to support cannabis regulations on reserves. Entering into agreements with First Nation communities reinforces a shared commitment to keeping communities safe, protecting our youth, ensuring a safe supply of recreational cannabis and reducing the black market and unregulated activities. Currently, there are only seven licensed recreational cannabis retailers on First Nation reserves in Ontario. This means that all other retailers on reserves are operating outside the provincially regulated framework.

That’s why our government is proposing legislative amendments that would strengthen our ability to enter into and implement agreements with First Nations communities. This comes on the heels of much conversation with First Nations partners and communities, and the aspirations they have for a safe and regulated market to protect their youth and their communities, just as we seek to do the same in the rest of the province of Ontario.

Now, our government is also taking active steps to ensure that Ontario’s justice system and laws meet the demands of the 21st century. Together, with the judiciary and partners across the justice system, we continue to harness new and existing technologies to improve and expand access to many different services. No matter the scope of the changes—be they big-picture or small changes in routine processes—our end goal has always been clear: to facilitate a modern and accessible legal system that works for everyone who uses it. Ontarians deserves nothing less.

Now, I have mentioned before, when I was a court clerk, back in the early 1990s, I was the one taking the filings over the counter. Law clerks would come in with filings, and they would do the filing. You couldn’t pay with a credit card. You had to have a certified cheque from a trust account to be able to do that filing, and that seemed very cumbersome. Years later, when I became a lawyer and I was the one trying to file, I realized how cumbersome it was. I was practising in Orillia; I had to file in Barrie. So I have a half-hour trip to go, but I had to go and get the cheque from the bookkeeper.

We had to get it certified. We had to put it with the filling. I had to get to Barrie. I had to file—Mr. Speaker, this is very antiquated, but that’s okay: It was the early 1990s. But fast-forward to when I became the Attorney General in 2019. You still could not file a document with a credit card. Now, that is shocking to me. I can rent a condo by signing on my phone with my fingertip, but I couldn’t file a court document with a Visa or a Mastercard. Obviously, that had to change, and that has changed.

That is one very small thing, but it’s not for the convenience of lawyers, and it’s not for the convenience of the courts. It’s because all of that running around that I had to do to get the certified cheque, to put it with the thing, to drive to Barrie, to drive back—I didn’t pay for that. The client paid for that. That drove up the cost for those trying to access the justice system. That’s really what our focus is on; it’s on the end-user—more customer-focus. You see that in some of the approaches that we take.

I’ll talk about a few of them in a moment, but it’s really about making sure that we have the tools and the modern system that people would expect if you were to build a system from the start.

I’m going to turn to one of the other accomplishments. This past February, I was pleased to join many of my colleagues at the opening of the Ontario Court of Justice in Toronto down on Armoury Street—a facility that is absolutely remarkable. If you have a chance to see it, the architect, Renzo Piano, a famous Italian architect—he did the Shard. He’s done others. It is a magnificent building, beyond its functionality. And it is very functional; I’ll talk about that in a moment. It actually brings together six different court locations into an accessible and inclusive state-of-the-art courthouse.

It has technology that allows for virtual and hybrid hearings in every one of the building’s 63 courtrooms and 10 conference settlement rooms. It’s got top-of-the-line security features. This is a courthouse that was built with, quite frankly, everyone in mind.

It was a multi-year project and a multi-government project, but we got construction going when we took government, and we got construction done. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, it’s a real beacon. It’s something I’m very proud of.

It’s not just a building full of rooms. It has uniqueness to it. It has drug treatment courts. It has Gladue services. It has youth and mental health court users, and it provides supports for victims. It has space for people as they enter and interact with the justice system, in a modern way, in a way that suits the way that you would expect it to, in modern times. By building, upgrading, and modernizing our infrastructure across Ontario, as well as the ways we deliver justice, we will ensure that Ontario is built to last today and for future generations.

It’s not intuitive for people to know that the Ministry of the Attorney General is the second-largest land manager in government, with some seven million square feet across the province, in big towns and in small towns. It’s really the face of government for some people because that’s what they see when they go downtown: historic buildings. The average age of infrastructure in the Ministry of the Attorney General is 75 years. We have some really old, beautiful buildings. We contrast that with the new Toronto courthouse, which is brand new, cutting edge and wired for sound, as they would say, Mr. Speaker.

So I’m really proud of the great work that we’re doing within the ministry to modernize, but it requires ongoing feedback about the ways we can strengthen the system for everyone who accesses it.

A few months ago, we also announced a significant new

chapter in our plan for digital justice solutions to replace paper-based processes and deliver more justice services online. I mentioned about me running around as a student or as a clerk trying to file documents and driving from here to there. It doesn’t need to be that way. We didn’t need to invent the Internet to be able to use it. We just needed to harness the tools that are there.

Now we have an online filing system. We brought in CaseLines. It has worked fairly well—quite well—but we can do better, and we can do more. Not everybody will know this, but the digital transformation in our sector—well, of course, we know it was long overdue. Everybody knows that. But we’re succeeding in making 21st-century technology a permanent fixture in the administration of justice in Ontario.

Just this last summer, in August in August, we announced a partnership for Thomson Reuters to deliver a one-size filing system. Currently, there are multiple filing systems, depending on the level of court and depending on the topic area. So if you’re filing something up until recently in the criminal courts for the Superior Court, there’s one system. If it’s in the criminal courts for the Ontario Court of Justice, it’s another system.

That makes no sense to me in terms of how you would actually run something, but it’s a historical anachronism because Superior Court judges are appointed by the federal government; the Ontario Court judges are appointed by the provincial government. So they come from a different space, but the province is charged with running the administration for all of it.

You would think that there would be one system, but there hasn’t been since the inception of Canada. But the judiciary and judicial partners and legal partners, we all got together and said, “There has to be a better way. Why are we doing this?” That’s why we made the announcement that we’re going to all come together and we’re going to have one system that runs for everybody. It’s going to be better for the people who have to deal with the system, and I don’t mean the lawyers; I mean the public, because their lawyers aren’t going to have to know two and three different systems.

They’re just going to have know one, and that’s going to be much cheaper and it’s going to be much better service in terms of judges being able to issue orders electronically, in terms of information flowing in real time, in terms of trials happening and the documents being there, in terms of scheduling and the other pieces Really, it’s stuff that when I talk about it, people go, “It doesn’t work that way already?” No, it does not, but it will. It’s a significant investment. It was a $166-million investment for us to do this over the next couple of years, so I’m very excited about that.

It’s a very important milestone in moving us into the new era for justice in Ontario.

The platform is going to support access to both the Superior Court and Ontario court and be the most significant single step forward in the digital evolution of justice, not just in Ontario but in all of Canada. It will allow court users to quickly and easily file documents—as I said—pay fees, improve access for hearings and so much more. It’s all going to be online, and it’s all going to be a single platform.

When we talk about transformational change, this is exactly what we’re talking about. The challenge in the years ahead will be how we continue to implement practical technology in meaningful ways across the courts and the justice sector at large—not whether we will but how we will. But the justice system is just that; it’s a system, and we must ensure that each piece works as efficiently as possible. If we have choke points in the system, if we have a weak link in the system, we need to address that and make sure that it’s not holding up the way we think things should be.

Modernizing the justice system to be one that is accessible to Ontarians is and will continue to be my driving motivation and my primary goal as Ontario’s Attorney General. Almost three years ago, in March 2021, we launched the Justice Accelerated Strategy to break down long-standing barriers in the system and move more services online and closer to Ontarians, no matter where they lived. This includes rural, northern and First Nations communities.

Since the introduction of that initiative in 2021, we’ve expanded electronic filing to more than 700 types of civil, family, bankruptcy, divisional courts, small claims court documents through Justice Services Online. We’ve expanded our online court case search tool to ensure the public can search basic court information and select civil and active criminal cases without having to line up or call a courthouse.

It’s not just the public; the media is able to do that, and it makes it more transparent and open. We have an open-court principle. It makes it more accessible for the individual reporter to see what’s going on without having to go into the courthouse, up the escalator and stand at a kiosk. It’s online, where it should be.

We’ve enabled Ontarians to dispute traffic tickets and other provincial offences virtually where available, which saves them an extra trip to the local courthouse. As more processes move online, we have also substantially increased funding for Community Legal Education Ontario, known as CLEO. This latest funding supports the ongoing operation and expansion of guided pathways, which are online, interactive tools that help Ontarians complete court forms easily and accurately along with providing users with tailored legal information.

If you haven’t been on the CLEO site, I encourage you to. It’s really a phenomenal amount of information for people who are self-represented. It’s largely in the family law area that we have self-represented individuals. There’s a ton of information there, and it helps them fill out forms and helps them address the needs that they have 24/7, any time of day. Obviously, it’s an electronic website with tools and is tailored to the needs of the individuals.

Now, we talk a lot about making our system more accessible, and I do think about it a lot. You have my commitment that we will not let this become another catchphrase. This is the way of the future. It’s what the people of this province deserve and it’s what they want.

Since 2021, we’ve also committed $65 million to virtual and hybrid hearings and there have been more than a few. Since 2021, there have been over five million hearings online. Think about that. There were none before 2021. It just wasn’t happening, but now, over five million hearings. This new technology will help ensure that hearings are available in courthouses in every region in every corner of this province, including more rural, northern and First Nations communities, helping to speed up people’s access to justice and reduce their need to spend time and money to get to a courthouse.

We’ve hit some major milestones over the past year, but there’s always more work to be done. Despite all our advances, some of Ontario’s court processes are still pretty inflexible, which can lead to inefficiencies and challenges for court users. That’s why we’re putting forward proposals today to change the Courts of Justice Act and other statutes to create flexibility and fix current gaps and procedures for things like evictions enforcement, child protection cases and dealing with vexatious litigants.

These changes will streamline processes, create efficiencies and free up court time and resources to support more high-priority items, including criminal cases, some of which you’re hearing about in the news. Those are a priority.

I’m talking about making common-sense changes, like limiting the delays that can happen during a child protection trial when a provincial judge is appointed to another court. What happens is, the odd time an Ontario judge is appointed as a Superior Court judge, if they’re in the middle of a child protection case, it has to start all over again. That’s not in the interests of the public and it’s not in the interest of the child, quite frankly. So we’re making a change to limit the disruption and allow that Ontario Court judge to continue to finish the trial, even though they’re appointed a Superior Court judge.

This kind of disruption could have negative impacts on the child or the family and it’s clear we need to take steps to limit that.

We’re also putting forward changes to make the procedures for judges in the Court of Appeal and Superior Court of Justice dealing with vexatious litigants more flexible to help reduce the use of court resources and the delays that vexatious litigants can cause. These delays are a significant challenge for the courts and a big drain on resources.

I want to clarify that a vexatious litigant is someone who repeatedly brings forward legal proceedings that have no chance of succeeding in court; have an abusive purpose, like harassing or wearing down opposing parties; or meet other criteria that have been identified through case law. This depletes the court’s time and resources, which are better used for legitimate attempts to resolve disputes. It also costs the other parties money to respond to each case and show up in court.

Currently, an order against a vexatious litigant can only be obtained in the Superior Court of Justice. Our proposal would allow not only Superior Court judges but also Court of Appeal judges to make orders declaring someone to be a vexatious litigant and stopping them from starting any cases in the future unless they get permission. At the same time, vexatious litigants’ procedural rights will still be preserved, like the right to know that the court is thinking of making an order against them. These changes will speed up procedures and save our courts from unnecessary burdens on their time and resources.

We also need to address court-related legislation that is now outdated and which results in those laws being unclear or out of step with current technology or practices. We are making proposed changes that would make legislation clearer and more current, such as addressing out-dated language in

an act or clarifying details that can cause delays and frustration. There are obvious fixes to some long-standing problems, and we don’t want to wait any longer to implement them.

One last item, Madam Speaker, before I finish. I want to briefly discuss another way our government is enhancing the justice system, strengthening our community and holding offenders accountable. It’s something that we’ve previously announced and it’s a crucial part of our commitment to keep our communities safe from crime while finding solutions to increase public safety.

Back in the spring we announced a $112-million investment over three years to ensure that high-risk and repeat offenders comply with their bail conditions. As part of this, we’re investing $26 million over three years to establish Intensive Serious Violent Crime Bail Support Teams. Working alongside police services and bail compliance units, these teams make sure all the necessary evidence is in place to make the best possible case when bail hearings are held for repeat offenders involved with serious crimes.

I want to update you today that these Intensive Serious Violent Crime Bail Support Teams, launched on September 25, are now working hard to help increase public safety by reducing the risk that persons accused of violent and serious crimes will reoffend.

And know this: Premier Ford and our government will continue advocating to the federal government for meaningful bail reform. We need to keep our communities safe.

In closing, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to discuss this legislation. If passed, the reforms in the Enhancing Access to Justice Act would support access to justice for victims of crime, simplify court and government operations and support communities.

Today’s proposed changes would make it easier for victims of crime, such as victims of human trafficking and hate crimes, to sue an offender for emotional distress. They would protect children and youth by banning the growth of recreational cannabis in homes that offer child care services, which I can’t believe we have to legislate, and explore ways to put an end to illegal online cannabis sales. They would limit interruptions to child protection trials that would happen when a provincial court judge is appointed to another court. They would help provide the tools and resources to keep Ontario communities safe and resilient.

If passed, the Enhancing Access to Justice Act would ensure that Ontario’s justice system remains fair, responsive and accessible for those who need it most, while continuing to keep people safe.

I will now turn things over to the Solicitor General to discuss his ministry’s items in the bill as well.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): I recognize the Solicitor General.

Hon. Michael S. Kerzner: I want to say how wonderful it has been to collaborate with my colleague the Attorney General, and I thank him for his leadership on Bill 157, and I’m happy to speak about it as well.

Madam Speaker, a vital job of a government is not just to pass good laws but to revisit past acts and ensure the laws continue to meet the needs of the people of Ontario. Under Premier Ford’s leadership, I’m proud to share that we have a government that takes the responsibility extremely seriously. We have consistently strived to ensure legislation is up to date, clear in its objectives and effectiveness.

It’s my pleasure to rise and to follow my colleague and friend and speak about Bill 157 and to open the debate on the Ministry of the Solicitor General’s

section of Bill 157.

Madame la Présidente, certaines choses doivent compter. La primauté du droit doit compter et notre sécurité publique doit compter.

Je suis fier de soutenir nos policiers et nos pompiers et nos premiers intervenants et tous ceux qui assurent la sécurité de l’Ontario tous les jours. Ce sont des gens formidables qui nous protègent au quotidien.

Nous écoutons, madame la Présidente, et nous apprenons pour pouvoir diriger. Et, madame la Présidente, comme je l’ai déjà dit, rien pour moi, en tant que solliciteur général, n’est plus important que la sécurité de notre province. Tous ont le droit de se sentir en sécurité chez eux et dans leur collectivité. Chaque personne mérite d’être traitée avec dignité et respect.

Nous vivons une époque sans précédent mais nous avons des opportunités toutes aussi uniques. Qui dit Ontario sécuritaire dit Ontario fort.

A safe Ontario is a strong Ontario.

Passed laws are crucial because they provide a framework for maintaining order, justice and stability in our Ontario communities. To be effective, a law must be as relevant and responsive to the public’s needs on any given day as it was on the day it received royal assent.

As Ontarians, we have—and I just said it—an inherent right to feel safe within our province. We thank everyone who keeps Ontario safe every day. We thank our police officers and our firefighters and all those that keep Ontario safe. I’ll add the special constables; the auxiliary officers, civilian and sworn; those amazing 911 call operators and telecommunicators that always need to be acknowledged; the animal welfare inspectors—everyone that plays a role in keeping Ontario safe needs to be thanked and acknowledged. As I’ve said before, Madam Speaker, through our government’s continued concern about public safety we will always have their backs.

Public safety is the most fundamental responsibility and, I might add, one of the highest priorities of our government, because it matters to people where they live and how they live. They want to be able to wake up their children in the morning and say goodbye to their loved ones. They want to be able to go to work. They want to be able to shop and see their kids home at the end of the day and have dinner with them around the dinner table. They want to be able to pray and they want to be able to do that safely.

Every day across government we work hard to ensure nothing falls through the cracks. The laws that hold the framework of public safety together must include tools to help the institutions that are the first line of defence when someone is experiencing or has experienced an emergency. My ministry’s addition to this bill does just that. The changes you will see in my ministry’s portion of the bill effect real change and will have direct impact within the institutions of policing and fire, and our death investigation system.

The proposed Enhancing Access to Justice Act introduces impactful amendments and additions across our justice system to clarify and make existing public safety regulations even more effective.

The first order of business for the proposed legislation on behalf of the Ministry of the Solicitor General will be to modernize pieces of existing public safety legislation. This includes proposed amendments to the Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019, that will be important before it officially comes into force next year.

As I have found out first-hand as I have travelled through the province, by speaking to chiefs and officers and cadets—and I want to especially acknowledge the First Nations police chiefs all over Ontario—the nature of policing and community safety has drastically changed in the past 30 years. The Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019, replaces a piece of legislation that was introduced almost 33 years ago. We’ve come a long way since then and it’s our responsibility as legislators to make sure that the justice system has the tools it needs to save lives and to ensure public order.

This bill is just one example of how our government is prioritizing public safety. The Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019, is about modernizing the province’s policing and community safety framework to address these important changes. We are stepping up to keep people of this province safe, no matter the obstacles.

Regulations under the CSPA as of right now are being finalized, based on consultative input from our stakeholders and the public. I want to acknowledge many of the stakeholders. Some were here last week, as an example, in the Legislature. We had members representing the Police Association of Ontario. I speak regularly, in addition to that association, to the Toronto Police Association, to the Ontario Provincial Police Association, to the Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs, to the Ontario association of professional firefighters—the OPFFA—and many others, and their input and collaborative conversation with us has been very, very important.

We’re listening to those who serve Ontario and keep Ontario safe.

The Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019, will also increase the trust between communities and their police by ensuring that police work with communities, including those most vulnerable, and strengthening the minimum standards of policing to ensure that police services are well resourced and funded by municipal partners; by promoting effective, independent and effective governance of policing personnel; by promoting public confidence in policing through a robust and independent police discipline and oversight system; ensuring that the police have the competence, skills and training and continuous education necessary to perform their duties.

The proposed Enhancing Access to Justice Act, 2023, also includes an amendment to the CSPA that states the adjudicator must be appointed within 30 days. If passed, the proposed amendment will support the development of appropriate and responsive rules and procedure for expungement hearings.

Another proposed amendment to the Community Safety and Policing Act, or CSPA, involves a change in the French translation of “special constable” from “agent spécial” to “constable spécial.” “Agent spécial” has been used in Ontario for a long time, but its presence on the uniform of special constables can be confusing given that it may be mistranslated as “special agent” and not “special constable.” The change is also in alignment with the language used in French-speaking provinces like New Brunswick and Quebec. Inaccurate translations can lead to misunderstandings, confusion and even unintended offence.

Precise translation helps prevent misinterpretation that could result in conflicts or misinformation. The amendment, if passed, would change the term in all Ontario statutes upon the Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019, coming into force in 2024 to ensure consistency and also respect the francophone community, something that is very important to me personally.

In addition to the Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019, the proposed Enhancing Access to Justice Act seeks amendments to the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997. This will develop a new mechanism to strengthen enforcement and compliance of the act—and to the Coroners Act to improve construction-related accidental death investigations.

Administrative monetary penalties, or AMPs, will allow for monetary penalties to be imposed by authorized persons for a contravention of requirement in

an act, regulation or bylaw. An authorized person may issue an AMP upon discovering that the contravention has occurred. These fines are important because they promote compliance without requiring the issue of a ticket in violation of requirements in

an act, regulation or bylaw. AMPs are used by municipal law enforcement officers and police officers for parking violation and other bylaw infractions. For Ontario’s first responders, there is currently no authority for an AMP remedy under the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997, and I’ve listened, and we are being responsive, as I’ve said, to the Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs and other stakeholders that have been advocating for such a compliance tool for years.

Bill 157 proposes an amendment to the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997, to ensure the future development of AMPs as an additional enforcement tool. AMPs could potentially, depending on the regulation, be imposed upon anyone, including owners, tenants and corporations who are found to be in contravention of requirements in the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997, and its regulations, such as the Ontario fire code.

Madam Speaker, to be clear, passing this amendment does not mean that AMPs will be introduced overnight. The amendments enable the Ministry of the Solicitor General to consult with stakeholders such as municipalities on a future framework, including identifying the contravention; determining the amount or range that the penalties could be set at; enforcement and collection details, including how AMPs could be administered in unincorporated areas of Ontario; and establishing a framework to review associated impacts during the regulatory process.

Existing requirements under the Fire Protection and Prevention Act would not be affected by the proposed amendment. Unlike previous governments, we are aiming to build on this relationship, not rewrite what has already been fought for.

Madam Speaker, I want to bring attention to those who have lost their lives on the job. This is serious, and this is imperative, when we understand these tragedies, to keeping Ontario safe. I’ve said it before; I said it in my remarks: There’s nothing more important than keeping Ontario safe. Every single death is a tragedy, and the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development thoroughly investigates all workplace fatalities to try to determine the cause of an incident.

The coroner’s office currently conducts an inquest for each incident causing one or multiple deaths. This process is time-consuming, resulting in repetitive recommendations. Construction-related inquests typically deal with individual deaths and therefore are not capable of identifying trends—and this is important, identifying trends—which a broader review may accomplish. Inquests are not designed to analyze deaths in aggregated fashion, thus trends and repeat factors are not identified, for example age, training, language, health status, workplace culture and safety.

Individual-death-based, construction-related inquests often deal with similar and repeated issues, leading to repetitive recommendations that are not found in a timely manner or that advance public safety. For example, it can take up to three years for an inquest to be scheduled, and that can only happen once all regulatory investigation and prosecutions under the Occupational Health and Safety Act have been completed.

The proposed Enhancing Access to Justice Act includes amendments to the Coroners Act that, if passed, would require an accidental construction-related death to be subject to a coroner-led, mandatory, annual review, rather than a mandatory inquest for an incident where one or multiple deaths have occurred. The motive for this change is to prevent further deaths by underlying trends by examining them cohesively.

But, Madam Speaker, it is important to note that while this change would remove mandatory inquests, families of those lost to construction-based accidents can still request a review through the coroner’s office, and one will be completed at their discretion. Their request will be reasonably considered. I want to repeat it again, because I think it is important: Families of those lost to construction-based accidents can still request a review.

The review process will include industry representatives, families and experts, and it is important to note that the proposed amendment would not apply to deaths in mining plants or mines. Families would be involved in the mandatory review process and could require that an inquest be held in addition to the review, which I’ve just said. Unlike an inquest for every incident where a death or multiple deaths occur, the proposed amendments would lead to a broader, systemic examination of safety issues in construction and would produce more realistic and sector-relevant recommendations to prevent further deaths.

The expectation would be that this would happen in a timely manner. Our government continues to build a modern and responsive justice sector for the 21st century.

Madam Speaker, I’ve said this before: Our province is big. I’ve travelled the province; although I have not got to the furthest northern part of Ontario. On the north side, I’ve been up as far as Cochrane. I’ve been west to Sioux Lookout and to Lac Seul First Nation, and I look forward to going to Kenora and Fort Frances in the new year. I’ve been down to Windsor and Essex. I’ve been out to Hawkesbury and Ottawa. All you have to do is travel Ontario and you’ll see how big it is. But together, we can make it a place that delivers safety for every single person within our borders.

Ontario was here before any of us. It will be here long after us, so it’s our duty to be prepared not only for today but also for tomorrow. The proposed Enhancing Access to Justice Act supports this critical work, with amendments to existing public safety legislation.

I want to again say that the piece of legislation that the Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019, is replacing goes back to

an act that was enacted in 1990. We are updating laws that are over 30 years old, and we’re developing new legislative and regulatory tools to ensure that we address emerging trends in criminal activity and enhance our ability to keep the people of Ontario safe.

There is nothing more important than the safety of Ontario. This is a priority of this government, led by Premier Ford, who reminds us each and every day that we have an absolute right to live safely in our own homes and communities. This is fundamental. When we work hard, when our government works hard, when our message resonates all over Ontario—I will be, this Wednesday, marching past the largest class of cadets at the Ontario Police College, who will take their steps in a time-honoured tradition of keeping Ontario safe.

There is nothing more important fundamentally than our rights to live safely, and it is an honour to do my part along the way.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Merci beaucoup. Meegwetch.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): I recognize the member from Simcoe–Grey.

Mr. Brian Saunderson: Good morning. I want to thank the Attorney General and the Solicitor General for their remarks this morning and for giving me the opportunity to speak to the Enhancing Access to Justice Act as the parliamentary assistant to the Ministry of the Attorney General.

Speaker, our government believes in putting victims of crime first, protecting our children and ensuring that our neighbourhoods remain safe havens for all. Our Solicitor General spoke about the need to keep our communities safe and the rights of our individual citizens to expect that, and the hard work that the Solicitor General’s office is doing in enforcement and the Attorney General’s office is doing in making sure that we have the legislative tools for our courts to enforce those.

In order to do this, we are proposing comprehensive legislative updates that address the evolving challenges faced by victims, children and families across our great province. Our initiatives aim to strengthen the legal framework, ensuring justice, supports and protection for those who need it most.

First and foremost, we’re proposing significant updates to the Victims’ Bill of Rights, 1995, and its regulations. It is imperative that our legal system evolves to meet the changing landscapes of crime, methods of crime and the scope of crime. We seek to expand the list of crimes for which victims can seek redress for emotional distress and related bodily harm. This expansion will include such heinous and personal crimes as terrorism, vehicle theft and human trafficking. The expansion will also include hate-related crimes that are targeting our places of worship.

Speaker, Simcoe–Grey is a rapidly changing riding, with many new demographics moving into the beautiful towns of Collingwood, Alliston, Angus, Thornton, Thornbury and many more points in between. We are seeing the arrivals of different faiths and different belief systems.

I was down this past spring in Alliston, at an opening for a local mosque for our Muslim population, and this coming weekend, I will be attending a lighting of the menorah in the town of the Blue Mountains, which will be hosting its first synagogue in the coming months.

With geopolitical changes, recently, in the world, and particularly the Middle East, we’ve seen how tensions amongst some of our faiths have been exacerbated. We need methods to control that and to prevent those types of crime from proliferating.

We see many different faiths, cultures and religions are now being immersed in our communities, and we need to ensure the safety of places of worship and to prevent hate-related crimes. By doing so, we send a clear message that those who perpetuate such acts will be held accountable for the immeasurable pain they inflict on their victims.

We have talked before in this House about the importance of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and how

section 1 provides for the balancing of individual rights. We have freedom of expression. We have freedom of religion. We need to protect those rights, and we need to protect them from the other end of the spectrum, which is hate-related crimes, distortion and misinformation.

Madam Speaker, our commitment to protecting the most vulnerable members of our society is unwavering. To that end, we are proposing a ban on the growth of recreational cannabis in homes that offer child care services. As the Attorney General mentioned, it is surprising that we need to legislate this. This is following the lead of the government in BC, which has successfully combatted this by providing similar prohibitions. This measure is essential to ensure that our children and youth in my riding and across the province of Ontario are shielded from the potential risks associated with the cultivation of cannabis in environments where their well-being is entrusted to others.

We have also seen, during this session of Parliament, the proliferation of human trafficking. And as part of the justice standing committee, I can say that we heard on an all-members’ bill that was brought before the House looking at expunging debts related to human trafficking—we heard, over the course of two days, very concerning and disturbing testimony from our stakeholders indicating that the age of recruitment for young girls into the sex trade has gone from 15 to 14 and is still trending downwards.

We need to make sure that we are protecting the most vulnerable in our communities from such heinous crimes as human trafficking. I can speak from experience, because in the riding of Simcoe–Grey, just prior to the pandemic, a human trafficking ring was broken up. The members of that ring were being housed in a resort in the town of the Blue Mountains, unbeknownst to the resort owner. Larry Law, the owner of Living Waters, turned around and took those victims—he hired them, and he housed them.

I can say, with great pride, that those victims are now living as residents of Simcoe–Grey, working at Living Waters and other jobs that have been successfully integrated into our population. It is another reminder of the proximity and the closeness of this type of crime right under our nose. We need to make sure that we’re giving the victims of those crimes the ability to seek redress against their offenders, those oppressors, regardless of whether they’re convicted under the Criminal Code.

Madam Speaker, by taking these steps to increase avenues of redress for victims of crime, we aim to create a safer and healthier environment for our future generations and make sure that they have the full scope of remedies available to them.

Additionally, we recognize the sacrifices that are made by the hard-working individuals in our construction industry, and the Solicitor General spoke of this in his comments. These individuals go to work each day to build our economy, to build our infrastructure, and to build the much-needed housing that we need, as we move forward with our commitment to build 1.5 million new homes by 2031. We need to make sure that those individuals are protected and that any injury or death is properly investigated, to make sure that we are making provisions to prevent that type of needless accident moving forward. Nobody should go to work not knowing whether they’ll return home safely from their shift.

Through these amendments to the Coroners Act, we are determined to bring justice and closure to the families of construction workers who have tragically lost their lives on the job. This initiative is a testament to the ongoing commitment of this government to stand by those who build the foundations of our communities, ensuring they receive the recognition and support that they deserve.

Madam Speaker, one other way that we are expanding the redress for victims of crime is in the auto theft sector. We know that this is a crime that is growing in scope and magnitude across our province. Just last week at the Port of Montreal, through random screening, they found a shipping container bound for overseas that contained 20 automobiles stolen from Ontario. We know from our discussions with the insurance industry that these crimes are increasing in frequency.

We know after the pandemic with the restriction on computer chip production that replacing stolen automobiles is becoming more difficult and they are becoming more in demand. So we are expanding that through the Victims’ Bill of Rights, 1995, to ensure that those who have had their automobile stolen can bring action against those who stole their cars for redress for that crime.

The current legislation represents a significant stride towards building safer communities, supporting victims of crime, holding offenders accountable and protecting the most vulnerable among us, our youth and our children.

This piece of legislation builds on our government’s advocacy and commitment to bail reform. We have seen—and the Attorney General mentioned it in his comments today—that through this government and over the past year, with the loss of life we’ve had of front-line officers in our law enforcement, that important steps are necessary to combat that small segment of our criminal population that will re-offend regardless of the circumstances.

We have broadened the scope for reverse onus provisions under the Criminal Code for those seeking bail to prove that they do not pose a threat, and we are moving forward through the creation of special bail teams to make sure that those that should remain behind bars pending trial will remain behind bars. This government is making significant investments in law enforcement, auto theft prevention and the digitization of court processes, and this is another important step along the way.

In conclusion, as members of the provincial Parliament, we have a duty to prioritize the safety and well-being of our constituents, and through these legislative proposals, we aim to create a society where justice is served, victims are empowered and our communities thrive. This legislation, if passed, will do just that, and it is part of this government’s commitment to putting in place the levers for our justice system, for our law enforcement officers to make sure that we build a future where everyone feels secure, protected and confident in the strength of our legal system.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Questions?

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: Thank you to the government for their presentation on the new justice bill. I was actually very excited to see a bill that was entitled “accelerating access to justice,” the

short title of the bill, be tabled, because we’ve all heard about the extraordinary delays that we’ve seen in the courts, about certain charges being dropped. Whether it’s criminal charges affecting sexual assaults of minors, rapists walking out the door, we’ve heard them all, oftentimes because it took too long.

What I’m very interested in knowing from the government is, why are we not seeing the investments come in through the bill specifically to address the shortage that we are seeing in the courts? We do not have enough law clerks. We do not have enough court reporters. We do not have enough trial coordinators, as well as judicial assistants. So why are the solutions for funding the courts not there?

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): The Attorney General.

Hon. Doug Downey: I’ll just go back to where the investments have been made. We’ve put a lot of resources into hiring full-time and full-time-equivalent individuals, making court clerks permanent and full-time employees, not just part-time, making sure that they have the tools that they need—about 340 full-time staff, whether it be crowns, reporters, clerks within the system. So we have made investments to scale up. We’ve reclassified staff so that they are in a better position and will stay in the job and keep the experience on the job, so we’ve made a lot of those investments.

But this bill, Madam Speaker, is really about fixing process, because things like vexatious litigants are eating up a lot of resources and we have to make sure that we’re making capacity in the system for those employees that we did hire to help bring those cases forward.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Next question?

M me Lucille Collard: I do have questions for the Attorney General. This is quite a substantive bill with a lot of good things in it, but one of the issues that was brought to my attention right after it was introduced was about

schedule 1 and the new concept of limited licences that seems to be duplicating a licence process that already exists for the Association of Architectural Technologists of Ontario to license these architectural technologists.

Could you explain why we have this duplication that now seems to create more red tape and create confusion for the profession?

Hon. Doug Downey: I thank my friend for the question. There was a court case that talked about architectural technologists not being able to be regulated by the association, and yet they couldn’t practise without being regulated, so it has created a glitch in the system. That’s why we brought it forward. There are a number of people who are architectural technologists who are sitting in limbo, who can’t be regulated by the organization until we do this change, and yet can’t practise without it.

I’m happy to give more information. It’s really hard to give it in one minute, but I’ll give more information to you. We’re trying to get these people back on the job, quite frankly.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Next question?

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: Thank you very much, Minister, for this presentation. It’s good to bring some legislation which can help victims to get the justice they need to. But if that bill does allow victims to sue their offenders—even if there are no convictions, can they sue their offenders?

Hon. Doug Downey: Thank you for the question. The victims still can sue the offenders, but under the Victims’ Bill of Rights, if they’re convicted and then they sue, they don’t have to go through proving the impact on themselves. If they’re suing without that conviction in place, then they’re in a normal civil proceeding.

With something like human trafficking, if somebody has been human trafficked and the perpetrator is convicted criminally, I think everybody would agree that the victim shouldn’t have to go through the trauma of explaining the impact on themselves. It’s, quite frankly, patently obvious. That’s what the Victims’ Bill of Rights, as expanded under this bill, will allow us to do, is to not retraumatize those individual victims and allow them to get restitution.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Next question?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: In 2018, the Broken Trust report, written by the Office of the Independent Police Review Director, identified the importance of having a coroner’s office in Thunder Bay. However, in 2023, that service is gone and the acting police chief at the time said the move will create further delays that will have significant adverse affects on their investigations, and potentially traumatize families who are waiting for the remains of their loved ones, while creating an indignity to the deceased. What’s happening is that all bodies are being sent to Toronto.

Interjection.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Yes. And we can imagine, with all the weather problems and so on, how many delays there can actually be.

So my question is: Will the government amend Bill 157 in order to establish a forensic pathology unit in Thunder Bay, as recommended in the 2018 Broken Trust report?

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): The Solicitor General.

Hon. Michael S. Kerzner: I want to thank the member for the question. Part of her comment is not entirely accurate, because some of the autopsies are being done in Thunder Bay. The coroner’s office is sending a pathologist on a regular basis to Thunder Bay where appropriate, and when difficult cases are identified, then those bodies are being shipped to Toronto and they’re being expedited.

To answer the question: Yes, Madam Speaker, we are looking into all alternatives and hopefully, one day, having an office in the northwest region. This is something that is being investigated right now.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): The next question.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: In 2020, the Conservative government decided to stop renewing an annual million-dollar funding boost to rape crisis and sexual assault support centres. Some of these centres have seen the longest wait-lists they’ve ever experienced. Centre workers warn that wait times act as a deterrent for victims because victims will stop trying to access services when they are told they have to wait. Obviously—we know people—the trauma is just intensified with the waiting.

Will you consider amending Bill 157 to increase funding to rape crisis and sexual assault support centres?

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): The Attorney General.

Hon. Doug Downey: We have put several supports and increased funding to not just support centres but to victim witness programs and into every sector of our expansion for the justice system. So it wouldn’t be the tool, quite frankly, of this bill to do a funding increase per se.

I’m happy to chat more about where you think the system needs more supports, but we are supporting the system and we are supporting the victims of everything from serious sexual assaults to human trafficking all the way through the system, Madam Speaker. As they need the supports, we’re providing them and, of course, we’ll continue to provide more in the future.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): Next question.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: I had a particular interest in the Architects Act, which might not be immediately obvious, but the Architects Act, obviously, governs architects in the province of Ontario, and under the current piece of proposed legislation, it proposes to create new categories within the Architects Act. I think that’s very useful and particularly important in getting us towards our goal of building 1.5 million homes over the next 10 years, and I’m wondering if any of the speakers can comment on the changes to the Architects Act and what those changes might entail.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): The Attorney General.

Hon. Doug Downey: Whenever I think about architecture, I think about George Costanza. I don’t know why that’s in my brain.

Look, the architects serve a very critical part of our housing strategy. Without the architects, we wouldn’t be able to build the 1.5 million homes that we are going to.

The architectural technologist category does exist already, but as was mentioned to my friend from Ottawa–Vanier, there is a glitch in the system. The glitch is that they exist as an entity, as a part of the puzzle for moving us forward, but there was an issue around the architects association being able to provide regulatory oversight. So, Madam Speaker, we’re taking the opportunity to fix that glitch and get them back to work.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bhutila Karpoche): It is now time for member statements.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Lynn Roy

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: Madam Speaker, Lynn Roy, who lives in the village of Greely in my riding of Carleton was living in the Philippines 10 years ago while her husband was working there on a contract. She was shown the San Pedro, Laguna garbage dump site, an enormous dump site with more than 1,000 families living in the dump with no water, no electricity and no opportunity. They are, as Lynn describes, the poorest of the poor.

In 2014, Lynn co-founded the Home for Alternative Learning and Motivational Strategies school, which provides an opportunity for impoverished children living in the San Pedro garbage dump site to go to school, and to also have breakfast and lunch every day.

Since moving back to the Carleton riding several years ago, Lynn has been working part time at the Manotick LCBO. Every single dollar she has ever made at the LCBO has been donated to the Home for Alternative Learning and Motivational Strategies school, and she continues to run the school from her home. She also takes a month’s leave of absence without pay each year to go to the Philippines and to work at the school as a volunteer.

Lynn, thank you for being an inspiration.

Madam Speaker, Lynn is proof that there really are angels among us.

Government’s record

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: Selflessness is service without thought of reward or recompense. This is the heart of kindness. As we enter the holiday season, we as legislators should reflect on kindness, goodness and what it means to be in this role and how we can best serve our communities.

I’m reminded of the famous quotation, “The measure of a society is how it treats its weakest members.”

Seniors raised us, built our communities, but this government has done scarce little to support those in their golden years and treat them with the utmost respect. CPP and OAS have not kept up with the cost of living, and the meagre increases under this government are nowhere near enough.

Vacancy decontrol puts people at risk. In 2003, Premier Dalton McGuinty promised tenants, “We will get rid of vacancy decontrol which allows unlimited rent increases....” Since then, we see more of the same wilful neglect.

Why is there ideological opposition to rent control and protecting tenants? Who does this blind adherence serve? Seniors, people living with disabilities, new Canadians, young people and those on a modest income are all at risk. Why won’t this government help and serve them?

Why privatize health care? There’s tough talk about price gouging and HVAC scams, but there’s no action. Social assistance rates are below the poverty line, and food banks are at the risk of collapse from demand.

Rather than writing letters, I hope this government will look inside this Christmas and reflect on who they truly serve.

Brian Paton

Mr. Ernie Hardeman: Oxford has a long and proud history of baseball and softball. In fact, Beachville is home to the first documented game of baseball in North America, taking place on June 4, 1838. It was not in Cooperstown, New York, as is commonly believed; it was in Oxford.

One of Canada’s best professional baseball players, Tip O’Neill, started his career playing in Woodstock as well. Called Canada’s Babe Ruth, O’Neill was one of the star players during the early years of the sport. The baseball diamond in Woodstock’s Southside Park is now named after him.

Earlier this month, another

chapter of this history was written when Woodstonian Brian Paton was inducted into the Softball Canada Hall of Fame. This honour only adds to his long list of accomplishments, including being a member of the International Softball Congress Hall of Fame and Woodstock Sports Wall of Fame.

Brian started his softball career as a catcher, later becoming an outfielder for the Woodstock Twins and Tornadoes. In 1987, Brian made the jump to Team Canada’s softball team, helping them to win gold four times at the Pan Am Games and three World Cup medals. He remained a member of the team for 17 years, eight of them as team captain. He also played for the Toronto Gators, where he was MVP and the top hitter for the team.

Congratulations, Brian, for being named to the Softball Canada Hall of Fame, and thank you for your contributions to softball in Oxford and Ontario.

CTV Lions Children’s Christmas Telethon

MPP Jamie West: This weekend was CTV Lions Children’s Christmas Telethon’s 75th anniversary. That is 75 years of people giving back to the community. It’s actually become a northern tradition when people kick off their Christmas decorating period or they do their baking or, as a tradition, they volunteer or they perform and, most importantly, they donate.

This year, they raised $337,615, which is a mouthful, but it’s a reflection of how much the community in northern Ontario loves to give back. The slogan is, “Putting a Christmas Smile on Children’s Faces Since 1949,” and you think about how many kids have a special Christmas because of it.

Last year, when I was volunteering, I answered the phone and a lady who was donating told me that when she was growing up, the only gift she got as a child came from the CTV Lions Children’s Christmas Telethon, Speaker. Just imagine what that meant to her and the fact that for more than 20 years, she’s been donating and giving back, making sure that other kids have a special Christmas.

I know it’s a special time of year. It’s something to be very proud as a northern tradition. I want to thank CTV, I want to thank the Lions Club, but most of all I want to thank the volunteers, the performers and everyone who comes together to ensure that these kids have a smile at Christmastime.

Government investments

Mr. Hardeep Singh Grewal: At the end of this month, it will conclude my first year here in the Ontario Legislature. It’s an honour and privilege to represent the community of Brampton East, and I’m pleased to be part of a government that’s finally delivering for the people of Brampton.

Under Premier’s Ford’s leadership, we’re building a new second hospital for Brampton. We’re building a new medical university, led by the Toronto Metropolitan University. We’re creating new jobs in Brampton, such as the new Magna plant that’s being built on Mayfield Road in my riding of Brampton East. We’re supporting drivers with the gas tax credit, giving them 5.7 cents per litre. We’re supporting our economy and we’re continuing to build the largest transit expansion in Ontario’s history.

By supporting Brampton Transit and developing the Queen Street rapid bus transit route in my riding, our government shows its commitment to build the infrastructure that Brampton so desperately needs. We’re building infrastructure, we’re expanding existing highways such as the 401 and 410, and we’re going to build Highway 413 to unlock all that gridlock that people are stuck in. We’re the government that’s going to get it done. And this list is going to go on. Under this government, Brampton will never again feel left behind.

I’d like to take a moment to thank my caucus colleagues for their support, as well as my staff, Anthony, Mumpree, Pinar, Harpinder, Jasmeen and Navi, for their hard work. Most importantly, I’d like to thank the people of Brampton East for their tremendous support and trust. I’m honoured to represent them here in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

With that, this being my last member’s statement of the year, I’d like to wish everybody a merry Christmas, happy Hanukkah and happy holidays. I hope you enjoy this holiday season with your loved ones and friends. Have a great time.

Cost of living

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Hunger in Ottawa is reaching record levels. One in seven Ottawa residents is now food insecure. Ottawa food banks have been visited nearly half a million times this year alone, the highest number of visits in their history. They have had to extend hours into evenings and weekends to accommodate people who are working full time and still need to use the food bank.

People are calling, desperate and hungry, and being given an appointment in three weeks because that’s the earliest available time slot. Seniors organizations are receiving phone calls from hungry seniors looking for free meal programs because their fixed incomes are no longer covering the cost of food.

The school breakfast program provided by the Ottawa Network for Education is serving over 17,000 students every single day but it’s still not enough to meet the demand. Nine new schools were added this year to the program, but for the first time ever, a wait-list was created because there are more schools that want to join than there are resources to support them.

We know what the solutions to hunger are, but this government is too busy pretending they’re helpless in the face of an affordability crisis to implement any of them. It’s time to stop price gouging; reinstate real rent control; fund and build not-for-profit, deeply affordable housing; increase Ontario Works and ODSP; raise the minimum wage; and crack down on wage theft. It’s time for action, not excuses.

Events in Etobicoke–Lakeshore

Ms. Christine Hogarth: This weekend, what an excitement. Things were happening in Etobicoke–Lakeshore. It was an absolute pleasure to once again join the Etobicoke–Lakeshore Santa Claus Parade, which has been spreading holiday cheer since 1991. The parade sees a turnout of over 60,000 community members every year and this year was no less impressive. It was followed by Skate with Santa, another holiday highlight, amid music, games, hot beverages and lots of cookies.

Community events like these are not possible without the fantastic volunteers who run them, people like Carlos and Claudia, Jenn and Graham. I’d also like to thank the Lakeshore BIA, the Long Branch BIA and, of course, 22 Division—all the local organizations that ensured this year’s holiday parade was fun and safe for everyone.

This festive season I also want to recognize the anonymous, unsung volunteers and donors in my riding who are helping bring joy to those who are struggling. To everyone in my riding, if you can, donate to our local charities to ensure that a joyous spirit warms every home and heart this holiday season.

Speaker, as we are coming to the end of 2023, I want to conclude by extending my best wishes to all the residents of Etobicoke–Lakeshore and all the people of Ontario. We wish them a joyous, happy and prosperous holiday season.

I know a lot of us in this Legislature have lost our moms over this year, so it’s our first time having Christmas without them. I know there’s a lot of colleagues out there. Please cherish the memories of our families and those who can’t be with us this holiday season.

A special thank you to Pastor Charlie, who does God’s work to make us smile and come to work every day. Thank you, Charlie.

Liberal leadership

Mr. Ted Hsu: I am honoured today to announce to this House that the Ontario Liberal Party has a new leader, Bonnie Crombie. I had the privilege of being one of five contestants in the leadership race, during which we all travelled across the province and listened to people telling us about their struggles. During a year-long contest, we proposed solutions, we challenged each other, refined our ideas. Now, the Liberal team is more prepared than ever to tackle the cost of living, housing, health care shortages, the climate crisis and hold the Conservative government to account on these and many other issues.

Ontario Liberals have elected Bonnie Crombie who, as mayor, understands the struggles that mayors and their municipalities face, and has the experience of fighting the negligence, interference and shady dealings of this Conservative government.

I and my Liberal caucus colleagues look forward to working hard in support of Bonnie Crombie as she leads the Liberal Party and fights for the people of Ontario.

Anti-racism activities

Mr. Will Bouma: Good morning, Speaker. I am honoured to rise to recognize a group of remarkable students from the Brantford–Brant community. This month, the North Park Collegiate Student Anti-Racism Coalition was awarded a peace medal by the YMCA in the youth category.

The group began as a safe place that provided students a secure platform to report instances of racism around the school. However, the anti-racism coalition has evolved into a distinct group that includes students from many different backgrounds and grades who strive to educate their peers on different cultures.

The coalition also places an important emphasis on the celebration of unique cultures, and it has organized fashion shows, international food days, anti-racism assemblies, educational campaigns and food drives. Despite having 20 core members, the coalition has interfaced with a multitude of students through its weekly meetings and has fostered a strong sense of community and inclusion at their school.

When speaking about the importance of the coalition, Bhumi Shah, one of the students who visited us here last week, said, “Something as simple as acknowledging Diwali, the Hindu festival of lights, as a celebration as meaningful to some as Christmas and Hanukkah, can help students feel less isolated.”

Speaker, I am proud to represent a riding that is home to such bright and talented youth. I’d like to say a big thank you to the members of the North Park anti-racism coalition. You are making Brantford–Brant proud.

First responders

Ms. Jess Dixon: In September, I attended on a ride-along out of 51 Division with Toronto Police Service with officer Jeff Gough. Very shortly into that ride-along, we ended up responding to what ultimately became a death, the death of a very frail and elderly but much-beloved patriarch of a family. I was off in the corner while events were unfolding, but what I witnessed was one of the most remarkable things I’ve ever seen. It was managed by the firefighters, the paramedics and the police.

As I watched these individuals manage the scene and work on this elderly gentleman and work with his family, I saw something that I think will probably stick with me forever. What I noticed was, this is something that, for these first responders, may have been the first call in their night, but for me it was something absolutely incredible. The respect, the honour, the diligence with which they worked was absolutely breathtaking. It struck me that this is just part of their job. This is the job that they do as first responders. For me, it was epic, and for them it was business as usual.

It was absolutely my honour to invite them here today. They’re sitting over there. We have officer Jeff Gough, officer Chris Atwood, officer Julia Grant, paramedic Christian Vantellingen, paramedic David Rundle, paramedic superintendent Michael Larsen, and not present but involved, firefighter Joseph Luongo and firefighter Zachary Miller. Again, thank you so much for all of your service to Toronto and to our community at large.

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Ted Hsu: I just want to introduce to this House my wife, Tara Sharkey, and my daughter Vera-Claire, who are here visiting this morning.

Mr. Trevor Jones: Today’s page captain is Mustafa Arif from the riding of Sarnia–Lambton. I’d like to welcome Mustafa’s family: Tahreem Fatima, Zuhair Arif, Ahmed Arif and Ali Arif. Welcome to our House.

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: I’d also like to lend my voice in support to the good, hard-working first responders from Toronto Centre who are here specifically to be recognized. Thank you for your hard work and ongoing efforts in making our communities safe. If you stick around, I actually have a question specifically around the incident coming up in question period.

M me Lucille Collard: It’s my great pleasure to welcome for the first time at Queen’s Park a great staffer that I have in Ottawa, Amanda Jackson; she’s here in the gallery—also, Mark Kaluski, who’s joining us today.

Hon. Jill Dunlop: I would like to welcome the constit staff from Simcoe North: Jacqueline Bayley; Hannah Jones; Leslie Stroud; Eric Sterling and his partner, Ally. Welcome to Queen’s Park, and good luck on your training today.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I’d like to welcome Aislinn Clancy. She won the by-election on Thursday. She’s my seatmate. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: It’s an honour and an exciting day to introduce our newest colleague, the member-elect for Kitchener Centre, Aislinn Clancy.

Mr. Kevin Holland: I’d like to welcome my cousin to the House today, Karson Holland. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mrs. Robin Martin: It is my great honour to introduce today guests from my riding today, Jane Ambrosino and Valois Ambrosino, who are here with their son Jack Ambrosino, a legislative assistant to my colleague Will Bouma and from my riding of Eglinton–Lawrence.

Mr. Mike Harris: It is a pleasure to introduce my constituency staff here today, Nathan Bahalbi and Scott McNab.

Hon. Stan Cho: Five friends I’m introducing: Vanessa, Jollee, Satnam, Deepak and Xiang. Welcome to the Legislature.

Mr. Ric Bresee: It’s my pleasure to welcome and introduce Debra Vincent, a Haudenosaunee artist, a proud member of the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte from the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory in my riding, here with her husband, Tom. They are here today to watch question period and see one of Debra’s pieces of art displayed in the Gathering Place in room 228. Welcome to our House.

Ms. Jess Dixon: In addition to the individuals I mentioned earlier, I also want to note that we have Toronto Paramedic Services Commander Ric Rangel-Bron, as well as Toronto Paramedic Services Deputy Chief Mike Wionzek, present in the gallery as well.

Again, thank you so much for coming and thank you for your service.

Hon. Rob Flack: It’s my pleasure to welcome two great workers: Deb Ransom and Barb Gonyou, from my constituency office—two great workers, serving the people of Ontario, in Elgin–Middlesex–London.

Hon. Parm Gill: I just want to take a moment and welcome members of our team from our Milton office led by Kiren, Bavneet and Amarjot. Thank you for your hard work.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): If there are no objections, I would like to continue with introduction of visitors.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I would like to draw attention to the pages that I would also like to introduce former page and campaign manager for Aislinn Clancy, Maureen Balsillie.

M. Stéphane Sarrazin: J’aimerais souhaiter la bienvenue à mon équipe qui me représente dans la circonscription de Glengarry–Prescott–Russell : mon adjointe, Stephany Tessier, avec d’autres membres de l’équipe qui sont Ashley Bennett et Emilie Sabourin.

Je veux juste les remercier pour bien servir les gens de Glengarry–Prescott–Russell.

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: I would like to introduce two constituents from my riding of Vaughan–Woodbridge: Dr. Sarah Capetola and Marcos Zottas. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: From the great riding of Essex, I’d like to welcome the greatest constituency assistant in the whole wide world, Mr. Ethan Wuerch. Welcome to your House.

Mr. Dave Smith: I would like to introduce my good friends the chair of the Council for People with Disabilities for Peterborough, Andrea Dodsworth.

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: I would like to introduce from the great riding of Carleton my constit staff: Candice Coates, John Jeff Morris, Gabriella Campagna and Chad Crew. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Laura Smith: It’s my great honour to introduce the constituency staff from the great riding of Thornhill: Mr. Morris Maron and Chelsea Jones-Duval.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): That concludes our introduction of visitors for this morning.

I want to acknowledge that we are meeting on lands traditionally inhabited by Indigenous peoples. We pay our respects to the many Indigenous nations who had gathered here and continue to gather here, including the Mississaugas of the Credit, meegwetch.

This morning we have with us, in the public gallery, the Bishop Strachan School choir from the riding of Toronto–St. Paul’s to perform O Canada and God Save the King. Please stand and join them in the singing our national and royal anthem.

Singing of the national anthem / Chant de l’hymne national.

Singing of the royal anthem / Chant de l’hymne royal.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much. Members may take their seats.

Question Period

Government accountability

Ms. Marit Stiles: This question is for the Premier.

This government is fast-tracking its luxury spa bill, Bill 154. Last week, the opposition tried to find out why exactly the government is trying to pre-emptively block people from suing them for misrepresentation or misconduct when it comes to the Ontario Place scheme. We didn’t get much of an answer from the minister, so I’m hoping the Premier can shed some light on this.

Why does his government need the power to commit acts of misfeasance, bad faith, breach of trust, and breach of fiduciary obligation while building this luxury spa at Ontario Place?

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

Hon. Kinga Surma: Thank you very much to the member for the question.

Mr. Speaker, we’ve had a successful number of weeks in this House. We landed a historic deal with the city of Toronto to provide more supports for the TTC, be it in operations or safety. We released the business case which clearly defined everything our government has been saying for the last year and a half about the fact that it will save $600 million of taxpayer money to move the science centre to Ontario Place. And now we’re presenting legislation so that we can get on with it and start construction at Ontario Place, so that we can bring it back to life and make it a place that families can enjoy once again.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Very creative math there. And of course, let’s not forget the government is planning to spend at least $650 million of taxpayers’ money to subsidize this luxury spa.

Speaker, Ontario’s Environmental Bill of Rights gives the public the right to be consulted and heard on matters that affect our environment—matters that would include exemptions to the Environmental Assessment Act that are being included in the luxury spa act, Bill 154. But in an extraordinary step, the government won’t even send Bill 154 to committee for public hearings.

Why is the Premier so afraid to hear what the public has to say about this bill?

Hon. Kinga Surma: Mr. Speaker, as I’ve explained many times in this House before, we have issued two environmental assessments: an environmental assessment for the site servicing work that is under way today and, of course, an environmental class C assessment for the 50 acres of public realm space that will exist at Ontario Place.

As we submitted our development application to the city of Toronto, we also submitted 40 different studies that cover everything from air to wind to soil to stormwater—conservation plan, heritage impact assessment.

Mr. Speaker, government believes that we have done our due diligence and now it’s time to move on and bring Ontario Place and the science centre back to life.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: First of all, the minister knows perfectly well that the environmental assessment is not being done on the west island, where this luxury spa is happening.

Speaker, this government’s luxury spa act, Bill 154, is another attack on democracy and basic norms of lawfulness and good governance. It specifically blocks people from suing the government for misrepresentation or misconduct. It specifically blocks remedies for people who have been harmed by this government. What’s more, it gives a new minister the power to issue ministerial zoning orders, which this government has already, as we know, widely abused.

With this government currently under active police investigation by the RCMP, why is the Premier fast-tracking a bill to give his government the power to ignore the law?

Hon. Kinga Surma: What this bill helps us do is bring Ontario Place back to life, make it a place that families can enjoy 365 days of the year, which will include a brand new amphitheatre that will run all year long, a water park facility and a brand new science centre that will serve constituents and residents for the next 50 years.

What this bill also does, Mr. Speaker, is provide operational dollars to the TTC for the new transit lines that we are building. It also provides money for new trains. It also provides money so that people can be safe on the TTC when travelling to work.

We landed a historic deal and we’re also making extreme progress on Ontario Place so that we can once again enjoy the site after years of neglect.

Government accountability

Ms. Marit Stiles: We have just two weeks left at most, I think, in this Legislature this year and people are counting on us to deliver for them—all of us. Instead of using their majority to bring some relief to people, this government has spent this session reversing legislation that they had just passed and giving themselves sweeping new powers for pet projects, like the Ontario Place luxury spa.

Speaker, when the NDP brought forward positive solutions like paid sick days and free contraceptives, the government seemed to signal some support for those things. When push came to shove, though, they said no.

To the Premier: Don’t Ontarians deserve better than a government mired in scandal and focused solely on their insiders?

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

Hon. Kinga Surma: I’d love an opportunity to talk about some of the things that this government is doing to provide relief for families: number one, the historic deal that we managed to accomplish with the city of Toronto, keeping people safe on the TTC. That is a huge priority in the city of Toronto. It certainly brings relief to my hard-working constituents in Etobicoke.

What about fare and service integration to make it easier for transit riders to cross boundaries, saving them $1,600 a year? What about building more transit stations in the greater Toronto area? I would say we have had quite the productive session this fall session and we look forward to continuing on in the next two weeks.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, while this government is mired in scandal and under criminal investigation by the RCMP, after five years of Conservative government, life is harder for Ontarians. The cost of everything, whether it’s housing or groceries or transit, is out of control. When given the chance to do something about it, the Premier said no.

The NDP put forward a proposal to close the loopholes that let unscrupulous landlords gouge tenants. The government said no. We tabled a motion to invest in desperately needed non-market and affordable housing options. The government said no.

To the Premier: Why does he keep saying no to solutions that would actually help people keep a roof over their heads?

Interjections.

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

The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: First, let me just congratulate the leader of the Green Party and the new member of provincial Parliament here, for Kitchener. It’s never easy turning a seat that has been historically Liberal and NDP, but you were able to accomplish that. I congratulate the both of you for doing that.

I would also suggest to the Leader of the Opposition that she might want to take a look at the results of the by-election. Yet another safe NDP seat has been lost, Mr. Speaker, and you know why that is? Because the Leader of the Opposition isn’t focusing on the things that matter to the people of the province of Ontario. When we reduce costs for people the Leader of the Opposition votes against it. When we put more money back in the pockets of the people of the province of Ontario, they vote against it.

The Liberals have just elected a leader who spends—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. The member for Ottawa South will come to order.

Hon. Paul Calandra: —more time in the Hamptons on private jets than the Prime Minister of Canada. But when it comes to listening to the people of the province of Ontario there is one party that does it and it’s the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Well, there you go, Speaker. This is a government that doesn’t care—

Interjections.

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

The Leader of the Opposition has the floor. She has the right to ask a question. I need to be able to hear it.

I apologize to the Leader of the Opposition for the interruption. Start the clock. Leader of the Opposition?

Ms. Marit Stiles: Well, Speaker, there you go again, right?

I’m glad to see the Premier finally join us this morning. This government—

Interjections.

Ms. Marit Stiles: I didn’t point out when he wasn’t here.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The clock is ticking. It appears it’s necessary for the Speaker to once again remind the members, for the 999th time, that it’s totally inappropriate to make reference to the absence of another member, because from time to time all of us might be absent for good reason. So let’s see if we can reach a little higher on that one.

The Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, I’ve got to say, once again we see this government’s priorities are just not consistent with the burden that so many people in this province are carrying right now.

Let’s take the rising cost of energy, shall we? New Democrats proposed a smart solution to help people reduce the cost of heating and lower emissions at the same time. The Conservatives said no. Their solution? Write a letter to Ottawa and hope someone else does something.

You’ve been in power for five long years. People are struggling. There are real issues that people deserve answers to.

Speaker, as we head into the holidays, when will this government start saying no to their insiders and start saying yes to regular Ontarians?

Interjections.

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

The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, this, of course, is an NDP leader who has to battle with her own executive council to retain her job as the leader, who ran unopposed and has just lost a by-election in one of the safest NDP seats in the province of Ontario, and she says we’re not connected with people? We have put 700,000 people to work who didn’t have the dignity of a job before.

This is a leader who could call Jagmeet Singh right now and say, “Bring down the Liberal government in Ottawa if you don’t take away the carbon tax.” Will she do it? I doubt it, Mr. Speaker, because for the NDP it’s about increasing taxes. It’s more red tape and regulations. That’s what they do best. The people of the province of Ontario have turned their backs on that like her party has turned their backs on her and like the people in Kitchener did just on Thursday.

Interjections.

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

The member for Kitchener–Conestoga will come to order. The member for Mississauga–Malton will come to order.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): It’s usually you.

Start the clock. I apologize. The member for Ottawa Centre.

Public transit

Mr. Joel Harden: My question this morning is for the Premier.

Phil Verster, the million-dollar CEO of Metrolinx, missed yet another deadline last week with the Eglinton Crosstown LRT. In September, Mr. Verster told us we needed to give him some space, and he would get back to us with an update in two months on this failing project. What was that update, Speaker? That we would find out 60 days before the Eglinton Crosstown might open.

A simple question, Premier: Were you satisfied with that answer?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Members will make their comments through the Chair, not directly across the floor of the House.

The Minister of Transportation can reply.

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: We have launched one of the largest investments into public infrastructure and transit in the history of North America. In fact, that member and the leader of the official opposition have voted against every single one of those measures, including the Kitchener line. The NDP has just lost one of their safest seats in Kitchener, Mr. Speaker, and that’s because they have voted against the Kitchener line and the upgrades and the investments that we have made into the Kitchener line every step of the way.

It’s about time that the NDP support public transit and the investments that we are making—$70 billion, whether it’s the Crosstown, whether it’s the Ontario Line, whether it’s all-way, two-way GO, Mr. Speaker. It’s time for the NDP to shift focus and support this government as we build public transit across this province.

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

Mr. Joel Harden: Back to the Premier: Now, colleagues, you have to answer—why aren’t we getting an answer to this question that we keep raising? Why is it that Mr. Verster can earn a million dollars, preside over a project which is three years late and a billion dollars over budget, and just told us that we might get an update 60 days before it opens? Why aren’t we getting an answer? Why are we hearing the government talk about its aspirational plans, while somewhere in this province, someone is waiting in the rain for a bus that is late because this government, in cities outside Toronto, is not funding public transit?

Why does Mr. Verster still have his job? Why does he still have 78 executives serving him, soaking up the sunshine list? Answer the question this morning. Lean into the microphone. Are you happy with the answer Mr. Verster gave us or are you going to fire him like a competent government would?

Interjections.

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

To reply, the Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: I’ll respond to the carbon-tax king that wants the highest carbon tax in the entire world. He gouged the people—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Doug Ford: —gouged the people in the riding—

Interjections.

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

Now, the Premier has the floor. He has the right to answer the question. I need to be able to hear him.

Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I could have sworn he said we aren’t funding transit. So $70 billion is not funding transit? The largest transportation project, the largest subway project in North America, spending $28 billion, making sure that we have the Eglinton West line—that’s ahead of schedule, on time and on budget. We’re going full steam on the Yonge North, Mr. Speaker, and the folks of Scarborough are finally getting a subway. They have been waiting for decades and—

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. The opposition will come to order.

The next question—

Miss Monique Taylor: Brought to you by Grimms’ fairy tales.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I didn’t hear who said that.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. Order.

The next question.

Taxation

Mr. Will Bouma: My question is for the Minister of Indigenous Affairs.

Speaker, the carbon tax is essentially a tax on everything and the residents of northern, remote and Indigenous communities feel the effects of this tax most severely. For more than a year, the Chiefs of Ontario have been calling on the federal government to consult with them on the effects of this harmful and regressive tax on their com-munities. Sadly, the federal government has failed to consult with Indigenous communities and properly address their concerns.

The Chiefs of Ontario have recently filed for a judicial review into the application of the carbon tax in Indigenous communities in Ontario, calling this tax both anti-reconciliatory and discriminatory. Speaker, can the minister please comment on the judicial review process of the federal carbon tax for Indigenous communities in Ontario?

Hon. Greg Rickford: In an effort to take the grin off the Leader of the Opposition’s face on this question—it’s actually shifted to a very serious tone. We saw a federal government choose, hand-pick, a region of Canada for relief from the carbon tax. For weeks, we’ve been talking about the hardship of this tax on all Ontarians, but particularly vulnerable populations in regions of Ontario. Premiers across the country have chimed in with policy solutions to address this tax. Now, Mr. Speaker, that debate is moving into a courtroom.

Last Thursday, the Chiefs of Ontario said in their statement that Canada has refused to enter into good-faith conversations to resolve the harms caused by the carbon charge. The federal government, of course, responded by saying, “We are pledging 0.7% relief from the carbon charge to Indigenous populations in Canada.” Mr. Speaker, that is a mere pittance.

The people of Ontario, including our Indigenous communities, deserve relief from this. The Prime Minister must now scrap the tax before the court does.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Will Bouma: Thank you, Minister, for that response. It is difficult to witness the federal government place this punitive tax on the north. The carbon tax negatively impacts affordability and increases the cost of living in northern and Indigenous communities. It is sad and unfortunate that the federal government is ignoring these critical concerns.

First Nations communities across Ontario are having to endure higher operating costs, higher fuel bills, higher heating bills and out-of-control food prices. That is why it is so disappointing to see how the opposition consistently downplays the crippling economic impact that the carbon tax is having.

The reality is that Canada’s carbon pricing regime disproportionately impacts First Nations communities. Speaker, can the minister please explain how our government is supporting First Nations in responding to the negative impacts of the carbon tax?

Hon. Greg Rickford: Last week, we saw an extraordinary action taken by the Chiefs of Ontario, and it’s one that we strongly support, and I hope that the member from Kiiwetinoong will stand in solidarity with the Indigenous leadership from across the province, in fact, who have filed this injunction. Grand Chief Abram Benedict of Akwesasne said on Thursday that “Canada should be working with us to confront the climate crisis and close gaps on reserve instead of creating policy in an ivory tower that exacerbates the affordability issues our citizens face.” It’s an incredibly insightful comment, Mr. Speaker.

We know that our government has worked to reduce the cost of fuel for planes flying into the north, for people operating vehicles across the province and building electrification projects to a scale never seen before in this province. We just hope that the federal government will finally get the message and scrap this tax before the court—

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

The next question.

University funding

Ms. Peggy Sattler: My question is to the Premier. Since this government came to office, the post-secondary sector has seen a 12% decline in operating grants. Per-student funding now accounts for less than one third of university operating revenues—by far the lowest in Canada—while the need for investment in student mental health, housing and other supports has never been greater.

Last week, the Council of Ontario Universities released a report on the extensive efforts already being made by the sector to find efficiencies and cost savings. Speaker, how can this government possibly think that the funding crisis they created can be magically solved by universities just finding more efficiencies?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To respond, the Minister of Colleges and Universities.

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Thank you to the member for that question. We are taking our time and reviewing the 31 recommendations from the blue-ribbon panel’s report. We’re working very closely with Colleges Ontario and the Council of Ontario Universities as well. We’re putting working groups together to work directly with my ministry on those recommendations.

But we launched the blue-ribbon panel because we wanted independent and expert-driven advice to help form a practical and principled way forward for the sector. I’ll tell you, if we wanted to waste tax dollars, we would have called it the orange or the red panel.

But while the Liberals and NDP blew their chance to prioritize students when they held the balance of power, our government will always put the needs and future of students first. Unlike our blue-ribbon panel that focused on a shared approach to supporting post-secondary education in Ontario, the Liberals and NDP previously partnered in blowing through spending, blowing off the needs of students and blowing off their responsibility to the taxpayers of this province. That is why our government struck a blue-ribbon panel to ensure that the student experience and access to education—

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

Supplementary question?

Ms. Peggy Sattler: The Council of Ontario Universities warns that changes to tuition in 2019 coupled with the reduced operating grants and rising inflation have created a perfect storm for the sector. Eight universities are reporting deficits, including Queen’s and the University of Waterloo. More universities may face insolvency.

At the same time, Ontario university tuition fees remain among the highest in Canada. Students should not have to make up for this government’s failure to properly fund universities, especially during an affordability crisis.

Will this government commit today to a sustainability plan for the sector that increases operating grants without increasing student tuition?

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Do I need to remind the member, as well as the Liberal caucus, that they voted against tuition decreases in 2019?

My ministry has already begun working with institutions on a financial accountability framework that will allow for early detection of financial challenges and require immediate action to correct bad practices. In order for our sector to be sustainable for the long term, institutions need to take leadership and review their operations from top to bottom. From governance practices, program offerings, day-to-day operations, and everything in between, colleges and universities across the province need to become the best possible version of themselves.

This is not a change that will happen overnight, but it is one that is necessary so that students, families and of course the taxpayers can have confidence that every dollar is being allocated appropriately and with complete transparency.

Long-term care

Mrs. Daisy Wai: My question is for the Minister of Long-Term Care.

Our government must ensure that Ontario’s seniors receive the quality of care they need. By building 30,000 new long-term-care beds and upgrading 28,000 beds, seniors in communities across the province will receive care that is close to home. Seniors and families in Richmond Hill are relieved.

However, our government must continue to make investments that will expand programs and provide specialized services to our seniors. That said, in order to implement specialized services and increase the number of direct care hours per day, there must be sufficient staff.

Can the minister please explain what steps our government is taking to deliver high-quality care to residents in long-term-care homes?

Hon. Stan Cho: That member’s question is very well timed because last week, on November 23, alongside General Jones, we announced $300 million in provincial funding to help recruit thousands of PSWs in the long-term-care community—that’s $25,400 in incentives to PSW students and recent graduates. Here’s how it breaks down: $10,000 to those who commit to working in a long-term-care home or community care for at least 12 months; another $10,000 to help with relocation costs for those who commit to working in rural, remote or northern communities for 12 months; plus a $5,400 allowance to students while they complete their clinical placement in a long-term-care home or community care.

Speaker, by recruiting thousands of new PSWs into the sector, we are ensuring that people who need care in the long-term-care setting have the best care available to them—working towards that four hours of daily care for residents.

We’re getting it done for seniors in Ontario.

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

Mrs. Daisy Wai: It is great to hear about our government’s investments to recruit more PSWs. We know that PSWs are essential in providing care to our seniors living in long-term care each and every day.

However, it takes an entire team of care providers to ensure that our residents receive the care and services they need. This includes nurses, who are vital in order to meet the growing needs of Ontario’s seniors.

By recruiting and investing in additional staff, our government is ensuring that our seniors receive the high quality of care they deserve.

Can the minister please elaborate on how our government is supporting long-term-care homes to deliver safe and effective care?

Hon. Stan Cho: Do you know what? Beds are furniture. We’re building homes for our great seniors in this province. And that means it takes more than just the 58,000 spaces we’re creating; it takes more than the $4.9 billion we’re investing into health human resources. We need to give hope to these workers who do the work for our loved ones that many of us cannot do, Speaker. That’s why we are investing in recruiting more PSWs.

We are also providing $100 million to help PSWs who want to become practical nurses and advance their careers and practical nurses who want to become registered nurses to do the same—an opportunity to scale up and to continue to prosper and succeed while they help our seniors, Speaker. Our efforts are leading to results: 2,000 new nurses to the long-term-care sector will be added by 2025, which will ultimately help reach our goal, as the member said, of four hours of daily care per resident.

Let’s remember, Speaker: Seniors built our lives as we know it. They built our communities. They took care of us; we have a moral imperative to take care of them. That’s exactly what this government is doing by investing in them, Speaker. We’re getting it done for seniors.

Government accountability

MPP Jill Andrew: Last week, the government presented a so-called business case to justify its decision to build a half-sized Ontario Science Centre on top of a public-funded parking garage the Premier wants to build for a luxury spa company. The business case actually showed that the cost of building a new science centre at half the size is twice the cost of repairing the existing heritage building. Not only that, according to the province’s lease with the city of Toronto, the province is already required to make these repairs, regardless of what happens to the science centre.

So my question is to the Premier, and hopefully he answers today: Why does the business case misleadingly present the choice as—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I heard the comment. Thank you very much for drawing it to my attention.

The member must withdraw her unparliamentary comment—

MPP Jill Andrew: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): —and conclude her question.

MPP Jill Andrew: My question to the Premier: Why does the business case interestingly present the choice as relocate versus repair when the province is already required to make these repairs no matter what?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To respond, the Minister of Infrastructure.

Hon. Kinga Surma: I don’t know where to start. It was the NDP that’s been crying for months to make the business case public, and we have. And do you know what the business case says? That taxpayers will be saving $257 million over a 50-year span in today’s dollars, but $600 million over 50 years if you take into account inflation.

We are building a brand new science centre—one that will be modern; one with new exhibits, new technology, and one that will have 10,000 square feet more of exhibition space for the children to enjoy.

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

MPP Jill Andrew: The only way the province can legally avoid its responsibility for repairing the Ontario Science Centre is by negotiating the decommissioning of the existing building with the city of Toronto. This is a heritage building, Speaker. Even if the city of Toronto was willing to negotiate its destruction, the minister responsible for the Ontario Heritage Act would need to approve. Turns out, right after the last election, the Premier transferred this responsibility to his nephew, the Minister of Citizenship and Multiculturalism.

The question back to the Premier: Did the Premier put his nephew in charge of the Ontario Heritage Act because he was already planning the destruction of the Ontario Science Centre?

Interjections.

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

Minister of Infrastructure.

Hon. Kinga Surma: Mr. Speaker, the results of the business case were very clear. The science centre is 54 years old. It is end-of-life. The business case was done by third-party experts in the field. In the business case, it said we had to start exploring future options.

Now, I know what the NDP would like to do. They would like to just leave the building and let it continue to fall apart until they are forced to close it. What we would like to do, Mr. Speaker, is be responsible and provide a long-term solution. We want a science centre for the next 50 to 100 years, and we will have one at Ontario Place.

Public transit

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: Good morning, everyone. Congratulations to our new leader, Bonnie Crombie. I’ll start with that.

Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier. The people of Ontario are sick of deceit. They deserve transparency and—

Interjections.

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

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: Withdraw.

They deserve a trustworthy government that sticks up for them instead of wealthy insiders. Might I mention the RCMP criminal investigation into the $8.3-billion greenbelt land swap again?

Ontarians need to know why Metrolinx continues to delay, delay, delay. It has been over 12 years of construction on the Eglinton LRT. Where are the answers? There’s no timeline for its opening, and Metrolinx announced last week that there would be no announcement—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Government side, come to order.

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: —with just three months—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Question?

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: My question, Speaker: When will he step up and demand accountability from his friend Metrolinx CEO Phil Verster, and finally get an opening date for the Eglinton LRT and broadcast it to the public?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: Mr. Speaker, that former Liberal government was responsible for signing that horrible contract. They were the reason this project is so delayed. But we’re going to deliver it, just like we’re delivering our $70-billion transit plan.

When the Liberals had a chance for 15 years to build transit in this province, they did absolutely nothing. They ignored the people of Scarborough, but this Premier, under his leadership, is building the Scarborough subway extension.

Under the leadership of this Premier, we’re building the Ontario Line. The former Liberal government ignored the concerns and the support that transit needed in this province. The Ontario Line will take 28,000 cars off the road. The Liberals have voted against $70 billion of public transit investment in this province every single time they’ve had a chance, whether it has been in our budget or whether it has been in the FES. They did absolutely nothing for this province. Thank you to the Premier of this province, who’s building public transit across—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

The supplementary question.

Ms. Mary-Margaret McMahon: As a public sector entity, Metrolinx has an obligation to be transparent, fair and honest with Ontarians. Instead, they hide valuable information from all of us. Even their organizational structure is a mystery. Why does an agency of the government of Ontario get to conceal who their highest-earning employees are and how many executive-level staff they employ? My team and I have searched their website and asked our Metrolinx contacts for this information, but apparently it’s not available to be shared publicly. What? Pardon me? A public sector agency not sharing their information publicly? Who can get away with this kind of conduct? It’s unacceptable.

Speaker, to the Premier: Will you commit to requiring Metrolinx to post an entire organizational chart publicly and show the people of Ontario that you actually care about transparency and accountability?

Hon. Prabmeet Singh Sarkaria: We took our plan to build Ontario to the people of this province on December 2, and we received a resounding response to that plan to build, one that the Liberals did absolutely nothing to support, or have done absolutely nothing to support transit in this province.

Let’s take a look at the projects that we’re doing across Ontario: the Ontario Line; the Scarborough subway extension; the Yonge North subway extension, which we just announced a huge milestone on this past Friday; the Eglinton Crosstown west extension and Eglinton West project; the Finch West LRT; the Hazel McCallion Line; the Hamilton LRT.

Then, let’s talk about our highways: Highway 413, the Bradford Bypass. We are building this province, and the Liberals, when they had a chance to do anything to support public transit, to support highways, did absolutely nothing. They did absolutely nothing for the people of this province. Under the leadership of Premier Ford, we are changing the face of transportation in this province, building highways, building subways.

Housing

Ms. Laura Smith: My question is for the Associate Minister of Housing. When the previous Liberal government took office in 2003, Ontario was registering 85,000 home starts per year, and after 2004, Ontario never hit 80,000 housing starts until the Liberals were removed from office. The NDP record was even worse. In fact, based on their policies, it would take 50 years to build 1.5 million homes.

The housing crisis that we’ve inherited was the result of the failures of previous Liberal governments, supported by the NDP, to plan ahead for the future needs of Ontari