Legislative Assembly of Ontario

The House recessed from 1224 to 1300.

Introduction of Bills

1748317 Ontario Inc. Act, 2022

Ms. Khanjin moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr8, An Act to revive 1748317 Ontario Inc.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

Menstrual Health Day Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 proclamant la Journée de la santé menstruelle

Ms. Karpoche moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 30, An Act to proclaim Menstrual Health Day / Projet de loi 30, Loi proclamant la Journée de la santé menstruelle.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Would the member like to give a brief statement.

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: This bill proclaims May 28 of each year as Menstrual Health Day. The day aims to raise awareness of the challenges people who menstruate face due to a lack of access to menstrual health products, and gives menstruaters and non-menstruaters in Ontario the opportunity to celebrate the natural process of menstruation and fight menstrual health inequity and stigma.

Menstrual Health Day will contribute to the normalization of menstruation, as menstruating is a natural bodily function, and access to menstrual products is as necessary as access to soap, water and toilet paper.

933834 Ontario Limited Act, 2022

Ms. Khanjin moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr9, An Act to revive 933834 Ontario Limited.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): It the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

Murray Whetung Community Service Award Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 sur les prix Murray Whetung pour services à la collectivité

Mr. Dave Smith moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 31, An Act to provide for an award for exceptional cadets / Projet de loi 31, Loi prévoyant la remise d’un prix aux cadets exceptionnels.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Would the member like to make a brief statement.

Mr. Dave Smith: The Murray Whetung Community Service Award Act, 2022, provides that the Minister of Citizenship and Multiculturalism shall provide for an award to be given each year to a cadet in each local Royal Canadian Air Cadet squadron, Royal Canadian Army Cadet corps and Royal Canadian Sea Cadet corps who is selected by their corps for demonstrating exceptional citizenship and volunteerism within their community and their corps.

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

Ms. Karpoche moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 32, An Act to proclaim Black Mental Health Day and to raise awareness of related issues / Projet de loi 32, Loi visant à proclamer la Journée de la santé mentale des Noirs et à sensibiliser la population aux questions connexes.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Would the member like to make a brief statement.

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: This bill proclaims the first Monday in March of each year as Black Mental Health Day to recognize the ongoing mental health impacts of anti-Black racism and to raise awareness of the specific mental health needs of Black communities across Ontario.

The bill also requires the collection of race-based data to address the lack of evidence-based policy-making and service provision, and to begin addressing the issues of systemic discrimination and worse health outcomes for Black communities.

Finally, the bill requires the provision of culturally appropriate services that speak to the diversity within Black communities.

Maternal Mental Health Day Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 sur la santé mentale maternelle

Ms. Karpoche moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 33, An Act to proclaim Maternal Mental Health Day / Projet de loi 33, Loi proclamant le Jour de la santé mentale maternelle.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Would the member like to make a brief statement.

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: Maternal mental health illness often goes unnoticed and untreated, causing negative impacts for the mental and physical health and well-being of the birthing parent, child and partner. As a first step, the bill proclaims the first Wednesday of May in each year as Maternal Mental Health Day to raise awareness on the issue.

1310

Pandemic Preparedness Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 sur la préparation aux pandémies

Ms. Karpoche moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 34, An Act to amend the Health Protection and Promotion Act with respect to pandemic preparedness / Projet de loi 34, Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection et la promotion de la santé en ce qui concerne la préparation aux pandémies.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Would the member like to make a brief statement.

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: The Pandemic Preparedness Act amends the Health Protection and Promotion Act to protect the funding formula for cost-shared programs and services between the province and local public health units.

The bill also requires the Minister of Health to establish a pandemic preparedness review committee composed of public health and pandemic preparedness experts, as well as community leaders from equity-seeking groups, to ensure our response is equitable. The committee will review the province’s pandemic response plan every five years, and the Minister of Health would be required to present the plan to the Legislature.

Petitions

Volunteer service awards

Mr. Dave Smith: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas in the First and Second World Wars, over 7,000 First Nation members, as well as an unknown number of Métis, Inuit and other Indigenous recruits, voluntarily served in the Canadian Armed Forces; and

“Whereas countless Indigenous people bravely and selflessly served Canada at a time of great challenges for Canada; and

“Whereas this spirit of volunteerism and community marked the life of the late Murray Whetung, who volunteered to serve in the Second World War; and

“Whereas many First Nations individuals lost their status after serving in the wars off-reserve for a period of time; and

“Whereas despite this injustice, many continued to recognize the value of continuously giving back to their community; and

“Whereas the values of volunteerism and community are instilled in the army, air, and sea cadets across Ontario; and

“Whereas the Murray Whetung Community Service Award Act establishes an award for the cadets and tells the story of Indigenous peoples’ sacrifice and mistreatment;

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

“To urge all members of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to support the passage of the Murray Whetung Community Service Award Act, 2022.”

I fully endorse this petition, will sign it and give it to page Julie to take to the table.

Labour dispute

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: This petition is titled “Support Education Workers—Stop Bill 28.” It reads:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the government is launching an unprecedented and unfair fight with Bill 28, attacking the bargaining rights of workers;

“Whereas if the government refuses to negotiate a fair deal with education workers, it will drive caring adults out of the classroom permanently and our kids will pay the price;

“Whereas the staffing crisis created by the Ford government will mean that the youngest students will have less support in school, kids with disabilities won’t have the help they need, and classrooms will go uncleaned;

“Whereas the Ford government can make sure there are enough caring adults in the classroom to support students by giving education workers a decent standard of living;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately respect workers’ rights, rip up the anti-worker Bill 28, and have the Ontario government return to the bargaining table with a fair deal that retains education workers, rather than driving them away.”

I fully support this petition and will affix my signature to it.

Volunteer service awards

Mr. Lorne Coe: Thank you, Speaker, and good afternoon.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas in the First and Second World Wars, over 7,000 First Nation members, as well as an unknown number of Métis, Inuit and other Indigenous recruits, voluntarily served in the Canadian Armed Forces; and

“Whereas countless Indigenous peoples bravely and selflessly served Canada at a time of great challenges for Canada; and

“Whereas this spirit of volunteerism and community marked the life of the late Murray Whetung, who volunteered to serve in the Second World War; and

“Whereas many First Nations individuals lost their status after serving in the wars off-reserve for a period of time; and

“Whereas despite this injustice, many continue to recognize the value in continuously giving back to their community; and

“Whereas the values of volunteerism and community are instilled in the army, air, and sea cadets across Ontario; and

“Whereas the Murray Whetung Community Service Award Act establishes an award for the cadets and tells the story of Indigenous peoples’ sacrifice and mistreatment;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows....”

I’m pleased to affix my signature and the date, and provide it to Molly so she can take it back to the table.

Sexual assault

Mr. Adil Shamji: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas 39% of Ontario hospitals and health centres reached by She Matters throughout the course of the sexual assault kit accessibility study stated they did not have sexual assault kits available to survivors;

“Whereas many hospitals do not have nurses or physicians trained in conducting a” sexual assault evidence kit “examination and specialized training is required to gather evidence without further re-traumatizing the survivor;

“Whereas it is not mandatory in nursing and medical schools to learn sexual assault evidence collection and many colleges charge a fee beyond traditional tuition for nursing students who want to take a SANE course on weekends;

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

“That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario should amend the Post-secondary Education Choice and Excellence Act, 2000, to require persons who grant degrees in nursing under the act to provide sexual assault nurse examiner training, free of charge, to nursing students and amend the Public Hospitals Act to require hospitals to have at least 10 sexual assault evidence kits available for patients at all times and to provide them to patients who are in need of them, free of charge.”

I agree with this petition and submit it with my signature to Bridget.

Volunteer service awards

Mr. Dave Smith: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas in the First and Second World Wars, over 7,000 First Nation members, as well as an unknown number of Métis, Inuit and other Indigenous recruits, voluntarily served in the Canadian Armed Forces; and

“Whereas countless Indigenous peoples bravely and selflessly served Canada at a time of great challenges for Canada; and

“Whereas this spirit of volunteerism and community marked the life of the late Murray Whetung, who volunteered to serve in the Second World War; and

“Whereas many First Nations individuals lost their status after serving in the wars off-reserve for a period of time; and

“Whereas despite this injustice, many continue to recognize the value in continuously giving back to their community; and

“Whereas the values of volunteerism and community are instilled in the army, air, and sea cadets across Ontario; and

“Whereas the Murray Whetung Community Service Award Act establishes an award for the cadets and tells the story of Indigenous peoples’ sacrifice and mistreatment;

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

“To urge all members of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to support the passage of the Murray Whetung Community Service Award Act, 2022.”

I fully endorse this petition, will sign it and give it to page Sofia to take to the table.

Conflit de travail

M^me Marit Stiles: Bonjour, madame la Présidente. Je suis heureuse de présenter cette pétition :

« Supportons les travailleuses et travailleurs en éducation–Arrêtons le Projet de loi 28.

« À l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario :

« Alors que le gouvernement lance une bataille sans précédent et injuste avec le projet de loi 28, s’attaquant aux droits de négociation des travailleuses et travailleurs;

« Alors que si le gouvernement refuse de négocier une entente équitable avec les travailleuses et travailleurs de l’éducation, il poussera définitivement des adultes bienveillants hors des salles de classe et nos enfants en paieront le prix;

« Alors que la crise du personnel créée par le gouvernement Ford signifiera que les plus jeunes élèves auront moins de soutien à l’école, que les enfants handicapés n’auront pas l’aide dont ils ont besoin et que les salles de classe ne seront pas nettoyées;

« Alors que nous pouvons nous assurer qu’il y a des adultes bienveillants dans la salle de classe pour soutenir les élèves en offrant aux travailleuses et travailleurs de l’éducation un niveau de vie décent;

1320

« Par conséquent, nous, soussignés, demandons à l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario de respecter immédiatement les droits des travailleuses et travailleurs, retirer le projet de loi 28 qui est anti-travailleur et faire revenir le gouvernement de l’Ontario à la table de négociation avec un accord équitable qui retient les travailleuses et travailleurs de l’éducation, plutôt que de les pousser vers la sortie. »

Je suis heureuse de soutenir cette pétition. Je la signerai et la remettrai à la page Molly pour la table des greffiers.

Volunteer service awards

Mr. Graham McGregor: I have here a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

“Whereas in the First and Second World Wars, over 7,000 First Nation members as well as an unknown number of Métis, Inuit and other Indigenous recruits voluntarily served in the Canadian Armed Forces; and

“Whereas countless Indigenous peoples bravely and selflessly served Canada at a time of great challenges for Canada; and

“Whereas this spirit of volunteerism and community marked the life of the late Murray Whetung, who volunteered to serve in the Second World War; and

“Whereas many First Nations individuals lost their status after serving in the wars off-reserve for a period of time; and

“Whereas despite this injustice, many continue to recognize the value in continuously giving back to their community; and

“Whereas the values of volunteerism and community are instilled in the army, air, and sea cadets across Ontario; and

“Whereas the Murray Whetung Community Service Award Act establishes an award for the cadets and tells the story of Indigenous peoples’ sacrifice and mistreatment;

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

“To urge all members of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to support the passage of the Murray Whetung Community Service Award Act, 2022.”

I will also be affixing my signature to the petition and handing it to Conner.

Animal protection

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

“Whereas the process popularly known as declawing is actually an amputation, that is the equivalent of cutting off a human’s fingers from the knuckle up;

“Whereas the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association considers declawing to be an unnecessary cosmetic procedure;

“Whereas research has shown that declawing a cat significantly reduces a cat’s quality of life and leads to behavioural and health problems;

“Whereas declawing eliminates a cat’s ability defend itself when in danger; and

“Whereas the process is considered to be inhumane and is banned in more than 40 countries;

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

“To ban the unnecessary and inhumane procedure known as declawing in the province of Ontario.”

I will sign this petition and give it to page Karma.

Education funding

Mr. Joel Harden: I have a petition here entitled “Stop” Premier “Ford’s Education Cuts.” It reads:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the” Premier’s “education” policy “seeks to dramatically increase class sizes starting in grade 4;

“Whereas the changes will mean thousands fewer teachers and education workers and less help for every student;

“Whereas secondary students” are being “forced to take … classes online with as many as 35 students in each course;

“Whereas” the Premier’s “changes will rip … $1 billion out of Ontario’s education system by the end of the government’s term;

“Whereas kids in Ontario deserve more opportunities, not fewer;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to demand that the government halt the cuts to classrooms and invest to strengthen public education in Ontario.”

Amen, Speaker. I will be signing this and sending it with page Sofia to the Clerk’s table. Thanks to those who signed.

Home care

Mr. Andrew Dowie: “Whereas Ontario’s seniors deserve high-quality, patient-centred care and our government is making significant strides toward better meeting the needs of long-term-care residents by hearing directly from them; and

“Whereas people, including seniors, should have the option to stay in their homes and receive the care they need, if they choose and if it is possible; and

“Whereas home and community care keeps people healthy and at home, where they want to be, and plays an important role in the lives of more than 700,000 families annually; and

“Whereas a strong home and community care sector is key to the government’s plan to end hallway health care and build a connected, patient-centred health care system; and

“Whereas home care supports will prevent unnecessary hospital and long-term-care admissions and will shorten hospital stays; and

“Whereas our government plans to invest up to an additional $1 billion over the next three years to expand home care, improve quality of care, keeping the people of Ontario in the homes that they love longer; and

“Whereas the additional funding is intended to support home care providers, address rising costs and support recruitment and training, as well as expand services; and

“Whereas these types of investments and other developments, such as virtual care options, care at home, can become a choice that seniors, recovering patients and their families make instead of only relying on more traditional venues of care;

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

“To urge all members of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to build on the progress this government has made on building a patient-centred home and community care system.”

The petition was led by Owen. I affix my signature to it and provide it to Conner to bring to the table.

Orders of the Day

Strengthening Post-secondary Institutions and Students Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 sur le renforcement des établissements postsecondaires et les étudiants

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 3, 2022, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 26, An Act to amend various Acts in respect of post-secondary education / Projet de loi 26, Loi modifiant diverses lois en ce qui concerne l’éducation postsecondaire.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: I will continue where I left off earlier, perhaps with a little bit of a recap.

Too many people, particularly racialized people, women, non-binary, trans, gender-diverse folks, often experience sexual harassment and violence at a very excessive level. I’d say any level is too much, but people are targeted because we live in a hierarchical society that’s based on, really, an idea of privilege and entitlement. That entitlement comes with people thinking that they are better and that they have the right to actually put other people in their place.

So I’m going to go back to my notes. I’m going to tell you that this is something that happens often in graduate school. You have relationships of power, and that’s what we’re talking about: It’s people either feeling entitled to use their power or feeling a need to exercise their power over others. In graduate school, you’ve got very close one-on-one contact, where the student is utterly dependent on the support of their advisers for their future careers and, clearly, for their future lives. These relationships are, of necessity, close. And I’d like to go beyond to other places—I’m going to call them places of educational intimacy—music schools, dance schools, arts schools, where one-on-one mentoring is necessary and normal. I’m calling these “places of educational intimacy” because, very similar to graduate school, it is the things that a student cares about most passionately, the things that define them as a person, that are on the line. And, frankly, they’re often sites of passion for instructors, as well. Otherwise, a student wouldn’t have asked to work with them.

I have also seen years of the bedding of students at summer camps, where the crossing of this boundary is frequently the norm. Really, the exploitation of the vulnerability of students as they receive attention from their beloved mentors becomes the ticket to sex away from home, because instructors usually are there without their partners. These behaviours are normalized in these settings, and I know from hearing the mentors talk about it, that they believe they are genuinely helping their students with their emotional issues by taking them to bed.

What I want to say, though, that underneath all of this is a culture of entitlement. Far too often, we’ve got these positions that are mostly dominated by men, mostly white men, and they will exploit their positions of power to access their students sexually. The pressure can come through flattery, bribery or subtle threats, but it is a large imbalance of power and the sense of entitlement of those who believe they are entitled to have power over other people that makes the sexual exploitation of students seem normal, and this is one of the places where a law such as the one being proposed here can help, but it doesn’t address the deeper need to teach about consent.

1330

This is such a deep problem because to truly understand consent also means truly understanding how gender and enforcing gender roles is so central to the sexual, physical and emotional violence experienced by women and gender non-conforming people, people who identify as trans. Sometimes it can be men who are too thin, women who are too fat—whatever it is, there is a disciplining that often takes place in a social setting that says, “I’m normal. I’m better than you. I can do violence to you in order to assert my own position here.” Meanwhile, perpetrators know that their chances of being punished for the assertion of their right to dominate is unlikely.

We’ve seen this story again and again with women portrayed in the courts as deserving of what they got because they were Indigenous or they were drinking or they were Black or they were asking for it or they were simply trying to be accepted by the in-crowd, only to find themselves raped and sometimes gang-raped.

So where does this fit in all of this bill? Well, there are things missing. There are certainly things missing that the Ford government has taken away. Under Ford, sexual assault and rape crisis centres have lived with constant threats to cut their funding, and unstable and insufficient funding. Ford took us a step backwards by disbanding the province’s Roundtable on Violence Against Women.

While this bill is a step in the right direction, we need a truly holistic approach to enforcing policies on sexual violence. There must be minimum standards for campuses when it comes to sexual or gender-based violence, which would ensure a broader, wider-reaching impact. We must provide survivor-centred support that ensures campuses are a safe place for students to learn and live.

But I want to also think about another kind of violence that happens around sexual abuse, and that’s administrative violence. Every institution we have seen will do their utmost to cover up any sexual violence that takes place under their supervision. We’ve seen it again and again, and it’s been horrifying; massive numbers of gymnasts, for example, all thrown under the bus by their administrators.

So there is a problem in how institutions position themselves and acquire their funding. Wouldn’t it be amazing if an institution actually stood out and said, “We want to be known for how we protect people on our campus”? That has yet to happen. You hear talk, but the reality is, I have never seen it. I have yet to see this happen. So there’s that institutional violence.

I also want to point out—I mentioned this earlier, but I recommend that people look up the cases of Pamela George and Cindy Gladue, who are Indigenous women who died violently. They were murdered violently, but first, they were raped and cut up and had unbelievably hideous things done to them. And yet their perpetrators walked away, and their perpetrators walked away because the sense of dehumanization of Indigenous people and Indigenous women in particular is so normalized in our culture that judges will instead say, “Oh, these young men, I don’t want to take aware their career opportunities.” So the lives of these women become completely disposable. This is not something from 50, 60 years ago. These cases continue to happen now.

When we are looking at changing things—we’re creating a law inside post-secondary institutions, which is what we’re focused on right now—great; there will be some accountability. But we are still not challenging the culture. We’re not challenging the culture of entitlement. We’re not challenging that sense of hierarchy that some people are entitled to exploit and use other people for their own benefit.

I will close with what I closed with earlier, which is to make the connection between sexual violence and Bill 28, where we are seeing people willing to exploit and use up workers who are already at the end of their ropes. I heard yesterday from OSSTF members about how many schools actually have 30% less than the educational workers they need because they’re all at home with injuries. They’re sick and they can’t get replacements. Meanwhile, the staff is so small that they are also getting sick and stressed out, and there are no replacements available.

Under Bill 28, first of all, people know that their rights are not being respected. You’re using the “notwithstanding” clause to crush existing rights, so that’s no encouragement to join the profession. Secondly, they know that the bargaining has not been taking place, in spite of what the minister likes to say. And third, they know that the wage they’re getting is not going to be enough to survive on.

So this is a willingness to exploit and, frankly, throw away workers when you’ve used them up. That is what’s been happening in the schools. It’s what’s been happening in our hospitals—largely female workforces. They put their heart and soul into it, and they get thrown out—

Mr. Deepak Anand: Point of order.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I have to apologize to the member. I recognize the member for Mississauga–Malton.

Mr. Deepak Anand: I was intently listening to the member opposite on the debate, and I truly appreciate the member standing up for Bill 26, Strengthening Post-secondary Institutions and Students Act. I really appreciated your remarks initially.

But, Madam Speaker, for some reason I just realized that they have wavered away from Bill 26, so I just wanted to remind the member opposite.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Thank you to the member. I would just remind the member for Thunder Bay–Superior North to bring the message and bring your conversation back to the bill that we are debating right now: Bill 26.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Well, I regret that you actually don’t see the connection because we are talking about sexual violence and an assumption of entitlement that takes place in institutions, and what we are seeing is a sense of entitlement that applies to workers as well, workers who are also subject to sexual violence and exploitation.

I’ll conclude my remarks there. I’m open for questions.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): It is time now for questions and answers.

MPP Kristyn Wong-Tam: Thank you very much for those very sage comments.

I want to ask the member—there are some conflicting actions that are coming from this government. You mentioned that this government had dismantled the provincial round table to end sexual violence. At the same time, I know that there’s been a freeze and a cut to investments and spending in sexual assault centres. And then we have a bill that actually does some good, but it actually has no teeth—there’s no additional funding to it.

How do we square this? How do we reconcile the fact that the words don’t line up with the actions?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Thank you for the question. I think, again, that we need to be actually recognizing those contradictions. The government needs to put the money where its mouth is and support those centres. They are incredibly important. Universities have them. Small communities have them. They need to be funded and they need to be given operating funds so that they are not scrambling on a project-to-project basis, which is what happens now. Often, the people who are affected by these transgressions—these very deep transgressions—don’t have access to the support they need.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Questions?

Mr. Graham McGregor: I thank my colleague from Thunder Bay–Superior North for her comments on the bill.

I think I’d like to draw attention to another part of the bill where we talk about renaming one of our institutions, formerly Ryerson University, as Toronto Metropolitan University. I think we can all agree that’s an important thing and something that needs to happen.

Now, I know my colleague, when it was the Ryerson medical school that was put forward by this government in a prior budget, a medical school in Brampton, the member voted against that. I’m wondering if this bill passes and we change the name to the TMU medical school and that’s put forward in future legislation, do you think the member would support a medical school for Brampton under the new name.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Well, I have to say, I’m not entirely sure what the member is getting at, but what I would like to talk about is reconciliation, what the member for Kiiwetinoong talked about this morning when he was talking about renaming Ryerson University the Toronto Metropolitan University—some people refer to it as University X—as an important symbolic step to recognize the harm done by residential schools.

1340

Now, you’re asking if we want to name something else: maybe, maybe not. We need tangible, money-backed solutions and education-backed solutions. We’re really talking about the need for a profound culture change, and as I mentioned earlier—

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Response.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Oh, that’s enough? Sorry. Thank you.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Question?

Mr. Joel Harden: I really appreciated what my friend from Thunder Bay–Superior North was saying about the culture of entitlement in the post-secondary environment. As someone who has taught in that environment, I’ve seen it first-hand.

I guess I’m wondering if you think the government may be inspired after moving this bill to carry forward a debate we brought from Ottawa. We’ve had a currently and formerly elected city councillor in our city independently investigated 35 times who is still an office-holder. We didn’t give the city of Ottawa the power to remove that person who had been independently investigated for repeated acts of sexual misconduct.

Do you think the government, given their apparent interest and progress on this, which is noble, should move forward to make sure that municipalities have the power to remove people independently investigated who have engaged in sexual misconduct against political staff?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Absolutely. Thank you for telling me about that, because we do see this all the time, that people with power and good contacts will close ranks and protect people who are known to be doing really hard things and sexually violating people. They’re known amongst their social circles and yet they’re protected. We do need that force of law to make sure that those things can be made public.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Questions?

Ms. Natalie Pierre: Thank you to the member for her remarks today.

As many of us in this room today are parents, we know the feeling of wanting to keep our kids safe. Most times, we let them figure things out on their own, but sometimes we get a chance to step up and be a part of important legislation that helps post-secondary institutions increase the protections that they have in place to protect students from sexual assault and sexual violence from staff and from faculty.

Speaker, will the member be the voice of those parents and stand up for our students in post-secondary institutions?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: I’m happy to stand up for students in post-secondary institutions. They need our support. We need to recognize that the problem goes beyond faculty and student relations to student-on-student sexual violence. The bill doesn’t address that, so that is a huge gap.

As I say, the education gap needs to be there. Students—all people need to understand what is meant by consent, what does it look like. And where is the support? As I say, people are often protected by their peer groups and then the student or the person who has been violated is left standing on their own, having to decide whether to go public or not. We know that the violence of going public is often as bad as the violence of the sexual act.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Questions?

Mr. Michael Mantha: I want to thank the member from Thunder Bay for her very good comments she brought to the floor this morning, and I want to add to that. Sometimes when we see the legislation that is being brought forward by the government, we see, potentially, from our side, a missed opportunity. Again, we see a missed opportunity here.

I’ve often heard the Premier say, “A good idea is a good idea; we’re going to take that good idea.” I want to go back to one of our members and other members—particularly the member from Toronto Centre, who brought in a private member’s bill on Consent Awareness Week. She had brought that forward. It would benefit us in here to have the discussion, because it would be loud and it would be a very good exchange as far as what we are all facing within our ridings. But to actually pass it, to give the public the opportunity to highlight all of those issues—what would have been the benefit of this government to include Consent Awareness Week within the context of this bill?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Thank you for the question. It would mean that students of all ages would actually have a week of time where they are focused on the questions of consent. What does consent look like? What does no look like? These are crucial moments of learning that need to be there, and the fact that we have not been able to get this bill passed here really makes me question, then, the sincerity of the government, on the one hand, looking at post-secondary students and giving consequences, but on the other hand, not giving younger students, wherever they are on the spectrum, the tools they need to understand how healthy relationships are built.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Essex.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: I want to point out schedule 1 to the proposed piece of legislation, which sets out the various penalties that can be imposed in the event somebody is found to have violated this piece of legislation. In subparagraph 16.1(2)(a), you can get fired; (b) you’ll get no compensation after you get fired; (c) it doesn’t matter what your contract of employment says, you’re fired and you get no compensation.

In subparagraph (3), you can’t get re-employed by that institution from which you just got fired and (5) you’re not going to be protected by a non-disclosure clause. You’re going to get fired, and it’s going to be disclosed.

Those are pretty serious consequences of a violation. I called this “teeth” yesterday. So my question is as follows: What does the member think we should add?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Data collection, prevention measures, support, student-guided support, professional support for victims. It’s one thing to punish perpetrators—it’s another thing to provide the support for people who are experiencing sexual assaults of one sort or another. It needs to be there. We need minimum standards. Also, what does it look like?

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: It is an honour to rise in the House today to speak on two important sets of legislative amendments relating to post-secondary education proposed by the Minister of Colleges and Universities.

I listened to what the minister and the parliamentary assistant had to say yesterday, and I was so pleased to see how this legislation will directly keep our campuses safe for our students. Our government believes that no one should have to worry about sexual violence or misconduct on or off-campus. Every woman has the right to live in safety and with dignity, free from intimidation and the threat of violence.

From day one, we have been clear that this government has a zero tolerance for sexual assault, harassment or any other forms of violence or misconduct. I think the minister highlighted well all of the steps our government has taken to increase safety on campus by introducing policies that decrease sexual violence, including from her time in my ministry, but also at the Ministry of Colleges and Universities, including barring the asking of irrelevant questions when reporting sexual assault that may deter an individual from coming forward. These questions could include things like asking about an individual’s sexual history, attire and so on. Let me be clear: Nothing that an individual does causes them to be responsible for their sexual assault. When it comes to sexual assault and sexual violence, the guilt 100% and entirely rests on the perpetrator—period. Our government knows this, and I am so pleased that the minister has already addressed this matter.

In addition, the minister has also previously introduced legislation that would allow survivors to report a sexual assault without fear of consequences from their academic institutions, including if they were in contravention of the law. This could include instances where a student was assaulted while drinking under age and so on. This is an important step because previously, when there was that fear they may face consequences, there was a strong deterrent when it came to reporting. During the debate yesterday, it was the member from Toronto Centre who said, and I’m paraphrasing, that it is important to talk about sexual assault because that is how we can address it. By removing deterrents to reporting, we are encouraging young women and men and, indeed, all survivors to feel secure and safe enough to come forward.

1350

Our government has worked with stakeholders, including the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance, to address multiple concerns and work together on how we can combat sexual assault. This work has been ongoing and multi-faceted, and we will continue to look for ways to combat this issue on and off-campus.

Also, in debate yesterday, the member from Oshawa criticized the bill for not going far enough. I think that we recognize that we need to constantly be communicating with students, with institutions and updating our policies accordingly, which I do think we have done. This bill, Bill 26, is just another piece to that component. There is no silver bullet or one policy that is going to end all sexual violence on campus, but it takes listening, responding, enforcing and collaborating—all of which the minister has been doing now for years. So, rather than criticize, I congratulate the minister for being a champion and advocating for survivors.

Now, the member for Toronto Centre has also spoken about consent week, the private member’s bill, the concept of which I think is commendable. But, as I hope as the member from Oshawa would recognize, consent week is not going to end sexual violence. But it does raise awareness and starts conversations and provides a level of visibility that contributes to the fight.

After many years in behavioural consultancy, I can tell you that this issue is not only common, but in need of very sharp eyes. The government has launched several sexual violence prevention education initiatives in the education sector that aim to change the attitudes and behaviours that perpetuate sexual violence, to promote healthy relationships and an understanding of consent. These are good things that will help Ontarians, young and old. As a mother of daughters and sons, I firmly believe that we need to achieve an early understand of consent and continually reinforce that lesson throughout a child’s development. These are valuable additions, and we ought to work together on this issue.

Speaker, all post-secondary institutions have a responsibility to provide safe and supportive learning environments and are expected to do everything possible to address issues of sexual violence and misconduct on campus. As Associate Minister of Women’s Social and Economic Opportunity, my top priority is ensuring that women are safe—all women in Ontario. While our government has taken action to strengthen the policies that protect secondary students who report incidents of sexual violence or harassment on campus, we must also address acts committed by faculty and staff towards students. This is the next step, and an important step, in tackling sexual violence on campus. That’s why last summer, our government and the Ministry of Colleges and Universities held consultations with more than 100 stakeholders, including representatives from post-secondary institutions, labour and student groups, private career colleges, faculty associations and community organizations.

Today, we have before us legislative amendments that would require publicly assisted colleges and universities and private career colleges to have specific processes in place that address an increased transparency of faculty and staff sexual misconduct on post-secondary campuses.

The strengthened policies would allow institutions to deem the sexual abuse of a student as just cause for dismissal, prevent the use of non-disclosure agreements to address cases where an employee leaves an institution to be employed at another institution and their prior wrongdoing remains a secret—

Mr. Todd J. McCarthy: Point of order, Speaker.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Durham.

Mr. Todd J. McCarthy: I’m just concerned, as a matter of a point of order, about the speaking time remaining for Bill 26 and the fact that we’re not having a night sitting beyond 6 p.m. and the fact that we have other business, including a pending vote, as I understand it, on second reading of Bill 28. So, just in the interest of time, I wanted to raise that point of order, having regard to what has been proposed and agreed to and the standing orders.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): That is not a point of order.

I apologize to the minister. You may continue.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and with that, I move adjournment of the debate.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Ms. Williams has moved adjournment of the debate.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.

All those in favour, please say “aye.”

All those opposed, please say “nay.”

I believe the ayes have it.

Call in the members. This is a 30-minute bell.

The division bells rang from to 1357 to 1427.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Please take your seats. Ms. Williams has moved the adjournment of the debate.

All those in favour of the motion, please rise and remain standing to be counted by the Clerks.

All those opposed to the motion, please rise and remain standing to be counted by the Clerks.

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 74; the nays are 30.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I declare the motion carried.

Second reading debate adjourned.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: Point of order, Speaker.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for London West.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I rise pursuant to standing order 1(c) on a point of order, seeking clarification related to standing order 18, particularly as it relates to visitors who chose to wear a colour to identify themselves and show support for their cause in the legislative precinct.

Standing order 18 stipulates that “any stranger admitted to any part of the House or gallery who misconducts himself or herself, or does not withdraw when strangers are directed to withdraw, while the House or a Committee of the Whole House is meeting, may be expelled from the precincts of the House by the Sergeant-at-Arms, or anyone acting under the direction of the Sergeant-at-Arms.”

On Tuesday, November 1, the office of the member from Ottawa West–Nepean was contacted by the office of the Sergeant-at-Arms and informed that visitors from the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation would be denied entry to the Legislature if they came to the precinct wearing purple and would be ejected if they put on purple apparel after entering the precinct.

The office of the Sergeant-at-Arms—

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Excuse me. I recognize your point of order. However, I do not deem it a point of order. It’s a matter that has nothing to do with procedures in the House but rather with security and will be dealt with by security.

Keeping Students in Class Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 visant à garder les élèves en classe

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 1, 2022, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 28, An Act to resolve labour disputes involving school board employees represented by the Canadian Union of Public Employees / Projet de loi 28, Loi visant à résoudre les conflits de travail concernant les employés des conseils scolaires représentés par le Syndicat canadien de la fonction publique.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Pursuant to the order of the House passed earlier today, I’m now required to put the question.

Mr. Lecce has moved second reading of Bill 28, An Act to resolve labour disputes involving school board employees represented by the Canadian Union of Public Employees.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.

All those in favour of the motion will please say “aye.”

All you those opposed to the motion will please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

Call in the members. This is a 30-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1432 to 1502.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Will members please take their seats.

On November 1, 2022, Mr. Lecce moved second reading of Bill 28, An Act to resolve labour disputes involving school board employees represented by the Canadian Union of Public Employees.

All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

• Anand, Deepak
• Babikian, Aris
• Bailey, Robert
• Barnes, Patrice
• Bethlenfalvy, Peter
• Bouma, Will
• Byers, Rick
• Calandra, Paul
• Cho, Raymond Sung Joon
• Cho, Stan
• Clark, Steve
• Coe, Lorne
• Crawford, Stephen
• Cuzzetto, Rudy
• Dixon, Jess
• Dowie, Andrew
• Downey, Doug
• Dunlop, Jill
• Fedeli, Victor
• Flack, Rob
• Ford, Doug
• Ford, Michael D.
• Fullerton, Merrilee
• Gallagher Murphy, Dawn
• Ghamari, Goldie
• Gill, Parm

• Grewal, Hardeep Singh
• Hardeman, Ernie
• Holland, Kevin
• Jones, Sylvia
• Jones, Trevor
• Jordan, John
• Kanapathi, Logan
• Ke, Vincent
• Kerzner, Michael S.
• Khanjin, Andrea
• Kusendova-Bashta, Natalia
• Leardi, Anthony
• Lecce, Stephen
• Lumsden, Neil
• Martin, Robin
• McCarthy, Todd J.
• McGregor, Graham
• McNaughton, Monte
• Mulroney, Caroline
• Oosterhoff, Sam
• Pang, Billy
• Parsa, Michael
• Piccini, David
• Pierre, Natalie
• Pirie, George
• Quinn, Nolan

• Rae, Matthew
• Rasheed, Kaleed
• Riddell, Brian
• Romano, Ross
• Sabawy, Sheref
• Sandhu, Amarjot
• Sarkaria, Prabmeet Singh
• Sarrazin, Stéphane
• Saunderson, Brian
• Scott, Laurie
• Smith, Dave
• Smith, David
• Smith, Graydon
• Smith, Laura
• Smith, Todd
• Surma, Kinga
• Tangri, Nina
• Thanigasalam, Vijay
• Thompson, Lisa M.
• Tibollo, Michael A.
• Triantafilopoulos, Effie J.
• Wai, Daisy
• Williams, Charmaine A.
• Yakabuski, John

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): All those opposed to the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

• Andrew, Jill
• Armstrong, Teresa J.
• Begum, Doly
• Bell, Jessica
• Bowman, Stephanie
• Brady, Bobbi Ann
• Burch, Jeff
• Fife, Catherine
• Fraser, John
• French, Jennifer K.
• Gates, Wayne

• Gélinas, France
• Glover, Chris
• Gretzky, Lisa
• Harden, Joel
• Hsu, Ted
• Karpoche, Bhutila
• Kernaghan, Terence
• Mamakwa, Sol
• Mantha, Michael
• McMahon, Mary-Margaret
• Pasma, Chandra

• Sattler, Peggy
• Schreiner, Mike
• Shamji, Adil
• Stevens, Jennifer (Jennie)
• Stiles, Marit
• Tabuns, Peter
• Vanthof, John
• Vaugeois, Lise
• West, Jamie
• Wong-Tam, Kristyn

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 76; the nays are 32.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I declare the motion carried.

Second reading agreed to.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Pursuant to the order of the House passed earlier today, the bill is ordered for third reading.

Keeping Students in Class Act, 2022 / Loi de 2022 visant à garder les élèves en classe

Ms. Khanjin, on behalf of Mr. Lecce, moved third reading of the following bill:

Bill 28, An Act to resolve labour disputes involving school board employees represented by the Canadian Union of Public Employees / Projet de loi 28, Loi visant à résoudre les conflits de travail concernant les employés des conseils scolaires représentés par le Syndicat canadien de la fonction publique.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Mr. Graham McGregor: I am proud that I’m with a government that is keeping kids in the classroom. Madam Speaker, through you, I want to thank Ontario’s education minister for being a champion and a voice for our students who seem to have been left out of this debate by both union leadership and members opposite.

Let’s be absolutely clear: We know gaps in in-class learning hurt our students and contribute to learning loss. We came to the table with a new offer. Ontario’s government adjusted our offer in the interest of finding a deal that worked for education workers, taxpayers, parents, but, most importantly, to keep the kids in class.

The education minister gave union leaders every opportunity to come back with a counter-offer on their own, on one condition: take the strike off the table; put our kids and their education first. Instead, they doubled down and announced their plan to strike indefinitely starting on Friday.

Speaker, our students don’t get strike days back. It really is confusing to me that so many members on that side seem to have forgotten about the last two years and the lasting impact the pandemic had on our students. Even more confusing is that the members opposite and their friends in union leadership also seem to forget that just prior to COVID changing our lives, education unions went on strike for 68 days in 2019-20, and they’re at it again.

I would ask the members of other parties to look back over the last 33 years, where education unions spent a combined 2,244 days on strike. That represents more than six full years of strikes. On top of that already staggering number, nearly half a year—137 full days—were from illegal strike action. And I’d like to remind folks in this place that a school year is 194 days, not the full 365 of a calendar year. That means that students in Ontario have lost 11.6 full years of school to strikes by Ontario’s education unions.

1510

Speaker, CUPE told the government in no uncertain terms they’re going to strike at all costs. Should this House approve this bill, that strike would add to what represents more than 70% of a regular school year lost to illegal strikes—all of this at a time when our students couldn’t afford more uncertainty. I hear from parents that had to adjust their work schedules to fit in the time to assist their kids when their kids weren’t able to be in class; parents that the only time they could see each other was on the weekend because one parent had to work during the daytime and the other parent had to work at nighttime because their kid couldn’t be in school receiving the education that every child in Ontario deserves.

Following the pandemic, we’ve seen increased rates of addiction, a worsening of the opioid epidemic, destructive substance abuse and higher rates of domestic abuse, self-harm and suicide. These trends, witnessed across our society and the whole of Canada, are even more profound for our young people. We’ve heard everyone—unions, opposition members and parents—tell us that they know kids need to be in class, that they understand the challenges posed by the last two years, but that can’t be true. Can that be true, colleagues, based on the rhetoric that we hear from the other side? We know it can’t be true because we’re here today debating a measure that will keep our kids where they belong—in the classroom. We know that parents understand this. They witness it first-hand.

Just yesterday, I met with a cancer survivor who asked me not to name him out of fear of professional retribution, who told me how the calls for a strike have impacted him and his son. He saw the way spending years outside of the classroom was impacting his son’s learning. In addition, he’s been in remission for 16 years. He had an appointment scheduled for Friday—this Friday. He had an appointment scheduled for this Friday. Speaker, it’s no secret that there’s a severe backlog in health care services due to the pandemic. He had to cancel his appointment or decide whether he wanted to take his eight-year-old child to the hospital with him—something that should have been an easy decision to begin with. He should be able to drop his son off at school and be able to make his appointment, but, unfortunately, he had to cancel. What hit me the most about this wasn’t his worry about him missing his appointment and waiting for the availability; it was the fear he had that his son was once again going to miss being in the classroom, and seeing his education suffer.

While we heard stories like this across the spectrum in terms of academic performance, it did seem to be most noticeable in math. To be frank, we know the trouble that some of the members of the opposition have when it comes to math. Recent EQAO results showed us exactly how big the problem was: double-digit drops—double-digit drops in math for both French and English students, but other subjects were impacted too. Literacy—you remember literacy—a foundational skill for success in life, was also hit hard. This was seen across the western world.

Interruption to education resulted in student performance trending downward. The 23-point drop we saw in grade 9 math is especially troubling. French-language results were similar in the trend, showing a 25-point drop in grade 9 math. Perhaps more than any other subject, this is illustrative of the difference that in-class instruction can make, and it’s important that we pay attention here, because proficiency in math and literacy are critical elements for success in the modern economy, in everything from the trades to business and everything in-between. Working out problems, sounding out and learning new words and asking questions are infinitely harder through a computer program or video chat than in a classroom. And when your teacher is on strike and you aren’t able to receive an education, it’s even more difficult.

We know that playing catch-up is harder than getting it right the first time—we know this. Parents watched this happen and had few tools to change it because the pandemic was impacting their lives as well. They were there in their homes as their children had to adapt to a new reality for their education, but more than simply academic decline, parents also witnessed the extraordinarily taxing mental health challenges faced by their children. Students couldn’t see their friends. They couldn’t play sports or hang out at the mall or all the other things those kids are doing nowadays.

The miracle of technology has the tools to connect us around the world, but it cannot make up for loneliness and isolation. The generation of students who lost two years to this pandemic are the ones we must keep at the top of our minds as we talk about keeping our schools open. That’s why our government is also spending record amounts to get our students back on track with Ontario’s Plan to Catch Up.

Ontario’s Plan to Catch Up is designed to increase competency in the basics: literacy and math. Ontario’s Plan to Catch Up will help make sure that our kids can achieve the academic success they need to set themselves on a path to a brighter future.

The minister announced Ontario’s Plan to Catch Up this summer, building on our learning recovery action plan, which is, as the members know, a five-point plan to strengthen learning recovery, which included $176 million for our historic tutoring—to set up our one-of-a-kind publicly funded tutoring program that serves in small groups, after school, during school, on weekends, over the summer and online. This province-wide program began in April 2022, and I was happy that the education minister recently announced we’ll be extending it until next year. We’re meeting students where they’re at to give them the support they need to get back on track.

We’re also helping parents, we’re helping families with the catch-up payments: $200 to $250 per child going back into parents’ pockets. And it’s concerning to me when you hear from the opposition side, who recently walked off the job yesterday—they all got paid over $400 for the day of work—

Ms. Catherine Fife: We kept working.

Mr. Graham McGregor: Okay—

Interjections.

Mr. Graham McGregor: That’s $400 and they’re scoffing—the same opposition scoffing at the idea that $200 per child to a parent—I mean, heaven forbid this parent spent their own money that was their money in the first place. This wasn’t the government’s money.

Do you know where money comes from? It comes from Ontario taxpayers. It’s their money. They know how to spend their money better than you do. Sorry, through the Chair: Parents know how to spend money better than the members opposite.

But as we can see from the impacts of COVID and learning loss, Ontario’s Plan to Catch Up won’t work by itself. It needs the whole education system working together, keeping Ontario’s kids in classrooms. Right now, our students need the stability of uninterrupted classroom learning, and this government is making sure that’s exactly where they will be: uninterrupted from September right up until June.

Speaker, our students have had enough. They want to be in class this year. They are excited to be back with their friends. They’re excited to play sports and act in school plays again. They’re ready to get back on track, preparing for the next steps that they’re going to take, be it a university education or a trade certificate. They’re finally getting their lives back after two years of disruption. They’re the ones who don’t have a voice in this Legislature today.

The facts are simple: Kids suffer when they’re not in class. Kids do worse at math when they’re not in class. The mental health of our children is worse when they’re not in class. And let me be clear: The only reason we’re here today is because education unions are once again threatening to take our kids out of class, consequences be damned.

I believe that this government has a moral obligation to our students. We have to put them first. We have to say enough is enough. We cannot follow up two years of pandemic interruptions with education union strikes. We cannot allow our students to fall even further behind. We’ve come forward with record funding, a one-of-a-kind publicly funded tutoring program, support for math and literacy—all a part of Ontario’s Plan to Catch Up.

Students need this plan to work. Parents need this plan to work. Frankly, Ontario needs this plan to work. That’s why this government, this party, is united in our goal, the only ones clearly united in our goal of keeping kids in the classroom and helping them to get back on track. That is our top priority. Speaker, I think it’s time that that’s the priority of every MPP in this House.

1520

My colleagues, I am asking you today to join me in supporting Bill 28, an act to keep students in class. Our kids deserve it and it will make sure that our best days are still ahead of us, because we will have left it in the hands of our young people, who will have the tools they need to build a better province.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: As a mother of five, and four children who are in the public school system, I am so proud to speak in support of Bill 28, an act to keep kids in class.

Madam Speaker, we’ve heard the members across the aisle tell us they’re fighting for women, but as Ontario’s Minister of Women’s Social and Economic Opportunity, I speak to women every day—

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Opposition, come to order.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: —entrepreneurs, private sector, public sector—women across the entire spectrum of our workforce, from every corner of the province—

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Member from Toronto–St Paul’s, come to order.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: Thank you, Madam Speaker. We don’t get things done when we don’t listen—and as I’ve met with them throughout Ontario, I have heard one thing consistently: Our kids belong in school. There are more than two million students in our schools across the province right now, and, Madam Speaker, those students have mothers. For two years, these women have faced balancing their lives, their careers, their families and their kids in the face of a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic.

Working moms have had to find ways to make sure their kids could learn from home. That meant in many cases taking time off of work. Others, like their kids, had to navigate working from home, while still being the parent their kids needed. Those moms are the women who the members opposite are forgetting about. When schools close because of strikes—and that’s a pattern we’ve seen in Ontario for more than 30 years, with 2,244 strike days—many women are forced to balance the needs of their kids with the reality of their jobs.

Every time there’s a strike, we’re asking working moms to take on double duty—actually, Madam Speaker, that’s not entirely accurate, because working moms are already pulling double duty each and every single day. That’s what makes them a working mom. So when unions close our schools, we’re asking them to now do triple duty. Unions are piling on more on their plates, taking time from nearly every aspect of their lives when they walk away and close our schools.

I’ve spoken to countless women who shared their stories with me. One mom, who runs her own small business out of her home, said, “COVID made life almost impossible. My daughters began slipping in subjects they used to excel in.” She told me how her oldest used to love math, but as she went through grade 8 math online, her daughter couldn’t get the support she needed. She was emotional when she said, “It broke my heart, but I couldn’t be there to help her,” because “I had to make sure I met deadlines and got products out the door. No matter what I did, I felt like I was falling behind. I felt like I was letting my daughters down.”

This was a mother who was forced to adapt to the impossible challenges that COVID placed on families across Ontario, but thank goodness for mothers. We’re optimistic. She was hopeful. She finished telling me, “I can’t tell you how happy my girls are to be in school. And it’s not just them, I feel like I can be” a mother again. “I feel like together, we’re all getting back to normal. Schools need to stay open.”

Speaker, this is not a unique story here in Ontario.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Have you seen the ICUs for children? Have you seen the emergency rooms?

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): The member for Waterloo will come to order.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: Working moms across the province have told me—

Interjection.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: Hey, hey. You’ve got to listen to this. This is important—they told me a major barrier they face to re-entering—

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): The member for Oshawa will come to order.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: Imma repeat myself: A major barrier that women face when entering, re-entering and staying in the workforce is child care. For many women, a big part of child care is the education system that provides a safe space and supportive environment that parents can rely on—

Interjections.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: Yes. So women rely on open schools for their kids, so that they can go to work, so that they can put food on their table, so that they can support their children. In many cases, these are the women who are the sole providers for their families. These are the women who are hurt the most when unions close our schools.

A strike will force more than one million women to find emergency child care. I bet you there are many of them on phones trying to figure this out right now: women who, like their kids, are just getting back to normal after a devastating pandemic. These are, in most cases, women who do not have among the most generous benefits in the country. These are women who do not get to take 131 sick days, and women who do not get their summers off. So—

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Opposition, come to order.

Hon. Charmaine A. Williams: So if the opposition is serious about helping women, they will stand up today and support Bill 28, to keep our kids in class, to support more than a million working moms right now across our province. I know that’s why I’m supporting an act to keep our kids in school. Women, children and every family right across Ontario are hurt when unions shut down our schools, so please, just do the right thing and keep our schools open. Let’s keep our kids in class.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak this afternoon. This is a critical bill. Those who are in the galleries are well aware of what’s at stake. People out in the rest of Ontario know what’s at stake. We have a government that has, in the last few years, caused profound damage in our health care sector by starving that sector of the wages necessary to keep people employed, to keep them in a situation where they are not demoralized, where they can actually afford to get on with their lives. It has said to them, “You are not valuable. Get out,” and they have come forward with privatization and coercive bills to deal with the crisis that they have generated.

I want to say that that is not a one-off. That is not a one-off, because we are seeing it today in education. With this bill, what we are seeing is a government that is taking a wrecking ball to our education system. No matter what they say, students are very low down on the list of priorities for this government. This government, with this bill, is setting things up to destabilize our public education system, to drive people out of that system, to make it very difficult in the years to come for parents to be able to count on publicly funded education.

I have to say that during the height of the pandemic, as I was talking to parents and talking to children who were contacting my office, I heard from those parents and I heard from those children about the fact that they were not seeing the investment in their schools in smaller class sizes, in ventilation, that allowed them to feel safe and comfortable when they were allowed to go to school. And so, the number of parents who said, “I’ll go to a private school, where they have much smaller classes. I know they’re investing in ventilation. I’m less worried,” or even a 16-year-old who said to me, “My parents are sending me to a private school, not that they can afford it, but the classes are too big. They’re worried about my health. They don’t see the investment. They don’t see the money being put into ventilation to keep all of us safe, and I don’t want to leave my friends behind in public school, but I’m being driven there”—what this government is doing is setting things up in the education system for the kind of undermining and damaging that we’re seeing in the health care system. That is indefensible.

1530

This bill will beat up education assistants. It will beat up early childhood educators, custodians and librarians. That process of driving people out has already started. I’m not talking about anything theoretical. I hear from parents now who tell me they’re desperate to get support for their children in the classroom, but the wait for that support is backed up, so they don’t get the assistance they need—and that’s in a situation where those workers are doing the best they absolutely can.

But when I talk to them—and I do talk to them as I go door to door—they tell me, “There are not enough of us to actually do what’s necessary to be done.” They say, “Day after day, I’m just putting a Band-Aid on the worst kind of wounds.” And this government is not simply carrying on that process of breaking down the education system—with this bill it is going to accelerate it.

Not all people are unaware of what the government is doing. I just recently had a letter from a parent and school council in my riding, from McGregor elementary school. Actually, it’s a copy of a letter to the minister. The parents write:

“We, the undersigned, are the executive of the parent and school council for R.H. McGregor Elementary School.

“As parents we understand the importance of keeping kids in school after the last few years of COVID-19-related disruptions. Our children deserve more than just being in a classroom.” They don’t just want them in a room, staring at a television; they actually want education. “They deserve an education system that’s fully staffed by qualified education workers.

“The 55,000 members of CUPE’s Ontario School Board Council of Unions (OSBCU)—custodians, maintenance and library workers ... early childhood educators, educational assistants, IT professionals—who are working in publicly funded schools across Ontario are the backbone of the province’s ... education system. As parents, we have witnessed how their skills and dedication to our children are vital to both the operation of schools and our kids’ educational experiences.

“Low wages, coupled with significant cuts to education of $1.6 billion by your government alone, have led to a critical staffing shortage and poorer educational outcomes of students, all while your government is sitting on” a projected “$44 billion in unspent taxpayer dollars.

“It’s time to take education workers’ proposals seriously, because they’re reasonable, necessary to our children’s education, and affordable.

“Pay workers better, guarantee increased services for students, make significant investments into our schools and ensure adequate staffing levels. Focus on building our schools for the students, not on austerity.

“We look forward to your timely response and resolution.”

Speaker, parents understand—maybe not all parents at this point, but they will increasingly understand as they go to school and are told, “We don’t have enough people to look after your child. We don’t have the educational assistants to ensure that your child gets the reading assistance that they need.” People will understand that this government is taking apart our education system, and this bill is a central part of making this happen.

This bill is undermining our system, and to say anything else is, let’s say, an abuse of the facts. When you decide to demoralize and drive out the very education workers who you need to make the system function, then you can’t argue that your priority is education. And when you look at this government’s record on education over the last four and a half years, you can recognize quickly that any commitment, or any claim they make to a commitment, to Ontario’s children and families is not a real commitment.

Now, I have had a variety of other letters from other parents, and I’m just going to read some excerpts:

“I am writing to say thank you for standing up to” the Premier and the minister “yesterday in the Legislative Assembly. Their current handling of CUPE negotiations and their abuse of power is shocking, unacceptable and, frankly, terrifying. As a teacher at a local school, I want nothing more than for students to remain in schools on Friday; however, I also support CUPE’s demand for a living wage and most importantly, the right to strike which is enshrined in our charter rights.”

Another parent writes, “This government is slowly eroding our democracy. My children (both special-needs students) have been suffering in the underfunded education system for years, together with their fellow students.

“The learning environment of all our children is only as good as the work environment of all the education workers! And it’s been a disaster.

“Investing in our children, from early years on, will be a long-time investment for our society, and this is a proven fact.

“Lots of the families and workers in the field are feeling hopeless, tired and forgotten. The daily struggles of raising a family, and especially children with special needs, are hard. We need someone to stand up for our children and the community that is in charge of them.”

I just want to go back and reflect on this comment. If you think that you can run an education system without a group of dedicated workers with morale and a sense that they are respected for the work that they do, then you misunderstand how education works. You misunderstand how all social production, all work, actually is done, because when you demoralize a workforce, when you make sure that they know they are not important, that they are not respected, then you make it extraordinarily difficult for a system to actually function. You make it extraordinarily difficult.

Another parent writes that they heard that we wanted to have stories to share in the Legislature about what’s going on in our schools: “My daughter started junior kindergarten last year. She was a very young JKer, and has lived in pandemic times since she was just over two. After the September reshuffle, she was placed in a split JK/SK class with 26 children. The EA in her class was an utter lifesaver for her and for us. Every morning when my reticent kiddo arrived at school, the EA would greet her and make sure that she was immediately recruited for a ‘task’ that the EA needed help with, to ease her goodbye time. My daughter talked all the time about her wonderful EA, collecting jokes and stories she couldn’t wait to share with her EA at school.

“This EA was a vital source of information on my daughter’s academic and emotional progress at school. Especially in a time when parents were literally not permitted to enter the school, it was comforting for us as parents to know that this EA was present in the classroom with our child every day. For example, when my not-even-four-year-old struggled with toileting at school, the EA had a plan. She had nothing but support and care for my daughter and was full of strategies and solutions.

“This particular EA has been working in this role for nearly 20 years. She is an expert at her job. It is heartbreaking to think that she is not being fairly compensated for her time. If I were to take my own money to the open market to hire someone privately to perform this work, and I were to propose a salary of $39,000, I would be laughed out of the room. These women (as EAs predominantly are) provide vital caring work to help our children grow and thrive. This is not a casual position—this is deeply skilled work that is vital not only for our kids, but for us as parents!”

Speaker, when you hear parents talk about the vital work that is done by these dedicated educational assistants, these dedicated early childhood educators, and you think that when they come forward to us, they are given an offer of a wage increase that is far below inflation, that in no way makes up for the losses that they’ve endured over the last few years, it’s just a question of shame. It’s just a question of shame.

Another parent writes, “Early childhood educators and education assistants were and are skilled, educated employees that are crucial members of the learning environment, and their salaries and prep time should reflect the expertise they bring to the role. My child was in junior kindergarten when the pandemic began, and our ECEs and support staff were instrumental in giving her the best start possible given these unprecedented circumstances. In the last three years, educators and support staff have gone above and beyond to implement new technologies and teaching strategies, while managing chaotic schedules, hybrid learning models and increased class sizes to accommodate student learning above all else. They have done so with inadequate pay and little government support before, during and after the pandemic. If anyone in this province has more than earned a living wage then and going forward, it is the educators and support staff of this province.”

1540

Speaker, COVID-19 relief funds remain unspent. Homeowners across the province have seen an increase in property taxes over the pandemic and funds that are intended for school expenses, and they’re not seeing them spent on the schools—they’re not seeing them spent on the people who actually deliver the services that educate our children. They are not given the wages they deserve. They are not being given the resources they need for this vital task.

Another copied me on a letter to the minister: “I am writing to voice my anger and concern around your treatment of CUPE education workers, their desire to negotiate and be remunerated in a way that supports cost of living and the essential work they provide in our classrooms.”

Another to the Premier: “I am an outraged and very deeply concerned citizen who supports the education workers 100%.... You clearly have no clue what these incredibly hard-working people do each and every day and how valuable they are to the students. I spent more than 10 years as a volunteer in the elementary school system (a position I was highly valued by staff, parents and students as there is such a huge shortage of support staff).... I was fortunate to have other means of support and could afford to give my time to dedicate to the staff and students that I loved and cared about and had the option to walk away if it got too dangerous or stressful for me.

“If being an education assistant was my only means of financially supporting myself and was daily put in” difficult situations, I would find $39,000 to be an insult. “I would be angry, frustrated and asking for better work conditions and financial compensation as well. These people do the job because they are dedicated to the students, but if their mental and physical health are put in jeopardy due to the shortage of support and not being valued or appreciated by their employer, then they have no choice but to fight for better conditions, something they have a right to do. And we know they cannot risk their health because our health care system is in crisis as well, thanks to the leadership of you,” Mr. Premier.

Speaker, when I go door to door and talk to parents about the situation they’re facing, it validates what I see in the emails that have come to me. A few weeks ago, I was at a door talking to a woman who was saying, “I can’t believe that I can’t get support for the reading assistance for my child who is in grade 2. I can’t believe it. I keep getting told that there’s a shortage of staff, that my child will be on a waiting list, but time is passing.”

This is the window to give them those reading skills. But what is being done with this bill is that, not only are we already short on resources that this bill will not address, but we are setting things up to drive these skilled workers out so that the children who need this assistance will get less and less in the future. It may be, with this bill, that the physical buildings will be there—just as hospitals are there, just as clinics are there—but the people who actually deliver the services inside them will be gone, will be driven out, will be demoralized.

The education system has been stretched—stretched to the limit and beyond. The children are not given the support they need, parents are anxious, and dedicated workers are demoralized. This bill will not correct any of this. In fact, it will make it worse and cause disruption for everyone. This bill must be abandoned. The government needs to sit down, seriously negotiate a fair deal with the people who deliver these critical services and give parents, children and education workers a future and a sense of hope that the education system will be there for all of them.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Mr. John Fraser: I think it’s fair to say that in terms of working men and women in this province, this week has probably been, at least for me, one of the darkest weeks for them that I can remember. The government is intent on breaking the first commandment, the first tenet of labour relations in this province, and that’s every man and woman’s right to bargain for a living wage—a living wage. What the government has proposed to these education workers is not a living wage. So who are we talking about? The people we all rely on to make sure our schools are safe, welcoming environments for them to learn. And who are they? The custodians—we all figured out really how important they were during the pandemic. News flash: They still are.

They’re secretaries, or administrators. I think I said earlier this week, my mother-in-law, Yvonne, who I talked about this morning, was a school secretary, or an administrator, as we call them now, for 25 years—25 years. She got paid nothing. That school would not have run without her—not a chance. She knew every child. She knew their parents. They came to her. They trusted her. You can’t buy that. You can’t pay for that. I challenge anyone to figure out how you can pay for that. So the nickel-and-diming that’s going on right now I don’t understand.

Who are the other people? They’re educational assistants. Who are educational assistants? Educational assistants are the people we rely on to help the most vulnerable, frail, exceptional students with exceptional needs every day. There’s not enough of them, and sometimes they have more work than they can do. These are students who, through no fault of their own, have a behaviour problem and they lash out. Some of them have to wear Kevlar.

Why do they do it? They do it because they love the kids, because they care for the kids. And do you know what? You can’t buy that. I challenge anyone to try and buy that. So why are you nickel-and-diming them? If we can’t recognize the people who are doing this for us and instead take a hammer out to tell them that if they don’t comply, we’ll hit them with it—that’s no way to build a workforce.

Right now, we’re struggling to find people to work for us in hospitals, in schools, in businesses, in manufacturing, in construction, and this government’s message is, “We have the reins on your wages, and if we need to, we’re going to use this tool and we’ll restrict them.” And the message that’s being sent today to every person who bargains in the province is—every person; I don’t care whether you work construction, I don’t care whether you work at a grocery store, I don’t care where you work—there is no respect for your fundamental rights, and the government can take them away any time they like, willy-nilly.

The government says it’s bargaining fairly. It’s been bad-faith bargaining from square one. First of all, in the media, pumping up the numbers, talking about sick leave—do you think anybody wants to be on sick leave, like that’s some sort of thing people are taking advantage of? No. As a matter of fact, how much sick leave do we have? A heck of a lot. I was really disappointed to hear the minister say that—really disappointed.

It’s been bargaining in bad faith in the media, and we’ve got to this point. Two weeks out, a little less than two weeks, and the Premier pulls out of his back pocket the get-out-jail-free card, the “notwithstanding” clause: “I don’t have to go to court except if I’m not trying to testify at the emergencies inquiry.”

The problem is—that part’s not important. What he’s done is, he’s overriding our fundamental rights, willy-nilly, with the people who are paid the lowest, who take care of the most vulnerable people, our children—not just the children with special needs, exceptional children, but all children—trying to make an example of a group of workers who are mostly women.

Does that sound familiar? Bill 124. Why is the Premier so intent on building a surplus on the backs of women in this province? That’s what he’s doing. That’s what’s happening. Because I dare anybody here to say where that’s happening in any other male-dominated profession. Give me a call later on and tell me. I can’t find it yet.

1550

So we get to where we’re at in negotiations, two weeks out, and then the government’s position is to workers: “That shield that you have, that right to strike—that shield that people have earned for years with blood, sweat and tears, the thing that protects you, that shield, that right, put it down. But I got this big hammer and I’m holding it over your head. Put it down.”

The government didn’t withdraw the “notwithstanding” clause when asking for a withdrawing of the strike. So it’s totally disingenuous to say that you offered something; you didn’t offer anything, nada, not a thing. You can’t threaten people. You can’t say, “You must comply or I’m going to use this on you.” That’s what you’re saying, and it’s sending a message not just to educational workers but to the people who live in your communities, the people who are workers, the people who will bargain—construction, grocery stores—anywhere; I don’t care. That’s the message; that’s what they’re hearing. That’s why there are some ministers in this House who haven’t said very much about this bill, and I can think of one in particular. I also know that a few people have been getting calls from other people. Maybe people aren’t making noise outside like LIUNA did, but they’re making noise.

Last thing: When I said earlier this week, and you all stood up and you laughed and clapped—I said: “You know, it’s really important to learn from your mistakes, but what’s even more important is learning from other people’s mistakes, like ours on Bill 115.” But you didn’t learn, because what you did is, you went in the other direction. You pushed the nuclear option, and you’re breaking trust with workers across Ontario.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Ms. Jess Dixon: I’m standing today in support of Bill 28, an act to keep students in class. I’m doing so because Ontario students, our students, need a voice—a voice to say that their lives, so recently returned to normal after two years of pandemic disruption, cannot be upended yet again. COVID was hard on all of us, yes. But it is not hyperbole to say that as a group, as an entire demographic across the board, it was hardest on our students, on Ontario’s kids.

When I gave my inaugural address, I tried to answer the most common question: why did I decide to do this. In that address, I mentioned my neighbour, Laura, and her young daughter Caprea. I don’t think Caprea was even a year old when I first met her almost eight years ago. Caprea has grown up with very small family circle: It’s just her mom and her older sister. Her mom, Laura, didn’t have any other family supports, nor did she have the money for pre-school or daycare or activities. Caprea is a very smart little girl, but as she got older, it became clear that her language skills had lagged behind, I think simply because she didn’t have the typical exposure to other kids and other adults.

When Caprea entered kindergarten, her language skills started to improve a bit, but she was still behind the other students. She’s a social little girl, desperate to interact with her friends, and she would get so excited about even the smallest bit of praise and attention from her teachers. In school, her language skills and her social development continued to improve, slowly but surely.

But then came COVID and her world ground to a halt. Capria hadn’t learned to write yet, and she struggled terribly in using the tablet. Her mom didn’t have a printer or the money to buy one and physical worksheets weren’t available. Caprea would sit at the kitchen table in the online class, but found it almost impossible to concentrate on that little screen. She was scared to raise her hand. When we finally managed to encourage her, the teacher missed it in the clamour of other raised hands and unmuted mikes. Caprea would end up in tears, believing that her teacher didn’t like her. And no amount of explanation on our part could convince her otherwise.

Remember, this is a little girl with one parent and an older sister—no other parental figures, no aunts, no grandparents, no one else to recognize and celebrate her little wins. The attention that she got in class from her teachers meant so much to her, and the loss of it was devastating.

During COVID, her language skill development stalled out, as did her social skills. Her behaviour became increasingly challenging, especially difficult for a single parent like Laura with absolutely no respite care. I witnessed the impact of her social isolation and it was devastating.

When the schools finally reopened, Caprea was so excited to go back. She loves being able to make new friends. She absolutely delights in the praise and attention of her teachers. She likes going to the library and playing games and making art. She’s happy and bubbly and full of stories about her day.

Also, with Caprea back in school, her mom, Laura, was able to take on some small casual jobs to bring in a bit of extra money. A car had been made available to her, an old car, but Laura couldn’t pay for the insurance. But with that bit of extra money once Caprea was back in school, she was able to pay the monthly fee for insurance and gas and use that car. When Caprea came home that day and saw a car in the driveway, Laura told her that it was theirs and they now had a car that they could go to the grocery store in. Caprea’s eyes got absolutely huge as she looked at it. With a tone of literal breathless wonder, she asked, “Mom, does this mean that we’re rich people now?”

And yet, Laura and Caprea and families like theirs are once again faced with the prospect of closed schools, interrupted in-class learning and the myriad negative consequences that we know will follow. Why? Because the union is intent to go on strike as of tomorrow.

The opposition members seem convinced that the government simply does not understand the importance of these hard-working union employees, the passion they have for their jobs and the students, and the integral part they play in keeping our schools open. To that, I would respond, for heaven’s sake, of course we do. If they weren’t important, then our schools wouldn’t be forced to close in the event of their absence and we would not be here having this discussion—

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): The member for Waterloo will come to order.

Ms. Jess Dixon: They are important. They are valued. But, Speaker, what the opposition members keep forgetting—or choose to remain silent about—is the importance and value of the schools themselves. And it’s because of those schools and the role they serve—

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I apologize to the member. The member for Toronto–St. Paul’s will come to order. The member for Ajax will come to order.

I apologize. You can continue.

Ms. Jess Dixon: It is because of those schools and the role that they serve that we’re here today bringing this legislation before the House.

A school is not just a place for learning, for socialization, for sport and activities. A school is also a critical part of the social support network. Schools can provide a child with a meal they may not have otherwise had. A school can be a safe place, a place to speak with a trusted adult about problems going on at home. A school can be an early warning system, the first line of defence, in spotting signs of neglect and abuse. A school provides child care. It provides recreational facilities. It provides community and the background to the hundred little milestones and achievements in every child’s life.

But when schools shut down, so too do the support and services they provide, and those supports and services—yes, we need them. Parents are scared. They’re scared about being forced to take time off, about losing their jobs, about missing out on the income that they need to support their kids.

This government just signed a historic agreement with the federal government to expand affordable child care spaces across the province, but that deal will mean nothing when schools are closed. Parents will be left without options; kids will be left in limbo.

1600

And, Speaker, I have to highlight this: The parents and students who will be most seriously impacted by these school closures will undeniably be parents like Laura and kids like Caprea—the most vulnerable, the most income- and resource-challenged, the ones who work without the backing of a union and without a pension, without benefits and without sick days.

Members opposite, put these people in your mind. Think about it. Really think about it. Think about exactly how you’re going to phrase it when you tell them that they don’t matter, that their rights don’t matter, and that the immediate consequences that they are going to suffer as a result of this strike are simply less important, less serious and less worthy of your vigorous defence.

We’ve seen the theatrics of the members opposite: the manufactured outrage, the hackneyed metaphors, the entire catalogue of logical fallacies from A to Z, both formal and informal. It’s been echoed by activists and union leaders on social media and created a noisy militia of keyboard warriors. But it’s time to stop and get back to reality.

Speaker, since Ontario’s voters first sent this government to Queen’s Park, we have demonstrated again and again our commitment to the education system and our students. We have added more than 8,000 staff, including 932 more teachers, putting the total number of teachers in Ontario today at over 132,000. We’ve added 7,000 more education workers, bringing our total up to 90,200. We’ve added more than 200 new principals and vice-principals—

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): The member from St. Catharines will come to order.

Ms. Jess Dixon: This year, 2022-23, we’re injecting more money into Ontario schools than ever before—almost $35 billion. With the Capital Priorities Program, we’re creating nearly 15,700 new student spaces and 1,500 new child care spaces.

We’ve got the lowest average pupil-to-adult ratio in kindergarten classes in Canada, plus the lowest class size cap for grades 1 through 3, which is especially meaningful given the importance of student-teacher interactions in the early years of schooling.

We revoked O. Reg 274, and then followed it up with policy/program memorandum 165, which finally removed the antiquated process of seniority-based hiring of teachers, replacing it with a merit-based assessment and a focus on creating a diverse and representative teacher workforce.

We’ve released Ontario’s catch-up payments, supporting parents across the province by providing up to $250 with which to get tutoring supports or necessary supplies and equipment for school and learning. This payment recognized that it was the parents that were best placed to evaluate how their child may have fallen behind, and how best to address their child’s unique needs.

Speaker, as should be obvious, it’s this government that has demonstrated the record of caring for Ontario’s students and Ontario’s education system. These kids are literally the future of Ontario, and we made a promise to them and their parents that never again would they find the doors of their schools closed to them. They need to stay in their schools—for education, for socializing, for safety, for child care, for mental health—and we are here to make sure that happens.

We are regretful that we must bring this legislation, regretful that CUPE would not withdraw their intent to strike and return to the table. But we refuse to allow Ontario’s children to be the casualties of CUPE’s demands.

That, Speaker, is why I am supporting Bill 28, an act to keep our kids in class, and why I’m asking the other members in this House to do the same.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Ms. Chandra Pasma: As I rise this afternoon to speak to the government’s shameful legislation, I would like to take a moment to acknowledge that we have some visitors in the gallery with us at this moment: Mark Hancock, Candace Rennick, Fred Hahn, Laura Walton, Yolanda McClean, Karen Littlewood and other union members who have been fighting for our public education system. Thank you for the amazing work you’ve been doing despite an intransigent and uncaring government.

Let us be clear: Despite the flowery rhetoric that we’ve heard from the government side today about supporting our kids, this government does not care about kids. They caused immense disruption to our children throughout the past two years by shutting down schools for 27 weeks because they wouldn’t invest in the measures that would keep our schools open and keep our kids safe. They sent rapid tests to private schools while families in Ottawa were fundraising and coordinating together to get rapid tests to keep their kids in school. There were families fundraising for HEPA filters for their kids’ schools. If the government wanted to keep schools open, it could have done so at any point by investing in these measures.

We’re also seeing a failure to invest in the kinds of supports that our kids need right now to catch up. A fundamental shortage of workers—we have EAs who are trying to support six kids at the same time, running from one kid to the next, trying to determine who needs them the most. We have kids with accessibility needs being told that they can’t come to school every single day, that they can only come during certain windows, that they don’t get to participate in certain activities or hours because the supports aren’t there for them.

We have parents that are filling in gaps, sitting outside of schools so that they can help their children use the bathroom during the day. We have teachers and principals doing custodial work because there are not enough custodians on staff.

Yesterday I had the opportunity to meet with Tamara Witcher, who was part of the OSSTF delegation. Tamara is a teacher at one of Ontario’s four deaf schools, and she shared with me appalling and horrific stories about the conditions in these schools. Speaker, I mean no disrespect with these analogies, but I felt like I was hearing stories about schools in the deep, segregated South or in apartheid South Africa. At the Robarts School for the Deaf, a boiler broke and was not fixed for one month. These kids were left to learn in a freezing classroom. And in case—

Interjection.

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Robarts is actually in London. This is in Ontario. This is the jurisdiction of this government. The government left children who are deaf, who need to use their hands to communicate, in a scenario where they were in classrooms that were unheated. The class was crowding into the bathroom to try to learn. That was in Ontario, this year.

The W. Ross Macdonald School for the Blind, in Brantford, has the roof caving in. The pool is closed, even though the pool is needed to teach children who are deaf and blind how to swim in safe situations. The school does not have the resources that are being given to other schools, and yet teachers are being told there are no funds to purchase resources for these kids.

And while these schools are an extreme example of the government’s refusal to invest in our schools, we know that the rest of our schools also have a $16.8-billion backlog in school repairs. Our kids are being sent, every single day, to learn in buildings that are unsafe, in buildings with windows that don’t open, that don’t have proper ventilation. If the government actually cared about supporting our kids, they would be investing in schools, making sure they were safe, making sure that every child had the caring adults and the fundamental supports that they need to succeed, every single day.

Let’s also be clear: The Premier is trying to pretend he had no choice, but the government had choices. It is the government’s choices that resulted in us being in this situation today. The government chose not to negotiate for months while workers were asking them to come to the table with a fair and reasonable deal. The government chose to draft this heavy-handed legislation for weeks, instead of coming to the table. The government chose to fundamentally understand how bargaining works this week and claimed to be averting the strike by not bargaining, instead of coming to the table to bargain. The government could have opted for binding arbitration. The government could be sitting at the table right now. It’s not midnight yet. They walked away with 12 hours to go.

1610

They have used our kids—they have used my kids—as pawns for months instead of coming to the table to negotiate a deal that would have protected our kids’ school year. It is the minister’s responsibility, it is the Premier’s responsibility that we are here today.

Parents see the actions of this government, and they are incredibly frustrated by the government and the government’s intransigence. They see the attacks on the people who support their kids every single day.

I want to share a story from Cathy Varette whom I’ve had the privilege of getting to know in Ottawa. Cathy says:

“The part that many people don’t understand is that when you have a special-needs child, you worry constantly. Children like my son require one-on-one attention. Always. If he doesn’t have one-on-one attention, the likelihood of him getting hit by a car, running away, drowning, increases significantly. If he doesn’t get one-on-one attention, he doesn’t survive the day, and that’s not metaphorical.

“When I leave him at school, I do a hand-off. His EA takes him by the hand and into the building. I trust my son’s life with his educational assistants. Without them, he cannot attend school at all. At the end of his day, they bring him back out to me. He doesn’t get to exit the building with his class, he doesn’t get to exit the building or go into the building on his own. It is hand-to-hand.

“I used to worry all day every day. I was sick when he wasn’t with me. I had to learn techniques just to let it go. And to trust someone else with my son.

“This fight CUPE is having with the government is about supporting my child. It is about ensuring that they have what they require to give my son what he needs to access school. These people are heroes. Every day, they ensure my son comes home to me.”

Vanessa Salverda, who lives in the riding of the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, also shared a very heart-warming story with me. Vanessa’s son has autism and requires the help of an EA daily, not solely for educational purposes but also for everyday activities. Without the help of his EA, her son would be in danger of running, soiling himself and causing other disruptions to his classmates.

Vanessa and her husband are so grateful for his EA, who provides him with the privilege of being able to learn in a safe environment and has significantly improved his experience in the classroom. Vanessa said:

“I am disgusted by the fact that this government has brought forth a bill to hand CUPE members a contract in which they did not negotiate for. Their basic rights are being stripped away. They have the right to bargain in good faith for better working conditions and better wages, and this is being taken away from them. How is this right? As a parent, I stand beside them in whatever they need to do. I will gladly keep my child home if a strike occurs. I will gladly walk with them while they strike.”

Our kids see this government’s behaviour, too, Speaker. Yesterday, I spoke with a 14-year-old visitor who was here on bring your kid to work day, and she told me she knows this is a government that doesn’t have her back. This is a government that had her in and out of the classroom repeatedly for the last two years, forced her into online learning despite the fact that they know it doesn’t work and are continuing to force her into mandatory online learning, despite the fact that they know it doesn’t work.

When my 12-year-old heard about what’s happening, she asked if she could attend the picket line tomorrow and if she could bring cookies to support the educational workers who support her and her brother and sister every single day.

Thankfully, our kids are learning from their parents, teachers and education workers and not from this government. Because what lessons would they be learning from this government? That it’s okay to use children as pawns? That it’s okay to threaten and bully someone? That it’s okay to take away someone’s fundamental rights if they cross you?

Thanks to the minister, my kids will be getting a political education on the picket line tomorrow. But my kids aren’t the only ones. My parents-in-law, who have never attended a political protest in their life, have asked about the hours for the pickets tomorrow. A friend from church, who is—I will say delicately—on the older side and never attended a political protest in her life, has asked me to let her know when she can attend a picket line.

This government is radicalizing our grandmas and grandpas, because they see the damage that this government is doing to our children’s education system. They see the way they are starving the system of vital supports that our kids need. They see the way they are attacking and bullying the low-paid women who support our kids day in and day out, who have made countless sacrifices to support our children and continue to do so every single day. They know that this isn’t sustainable.

I just want to share another story from Sylvie, who works as a custodian in the Upper Canada District School Board. For years, Sylvie has witnessed the commitment of her school’s EAs to their students. Each and every one of them goes above and beyond their role to ensure that the students have an opportunity to thrive. One EA in particular works with a child with autism. She witnesses just how gentle she is with her. When this child becomes anxious or agitated, her EA is there to provide one-on-one support. She will sit with her for hours until the student can safely re-join her classmates.

The EAs care so deeply about their students and often go out of their way to show extra support. She recalls a story of one EA purchasing a Thomas the Tank Engine lunchbox for one of her students because she knew how much joy it would bring him. This EA, knowing she had a limited grocery budget, was still willing to do this for her student because she knew it would bring a smile to his face.

Sylvie has been in this profession for 27 years and makes just over $20 an hour. She recently had to leave her dream school because she could no longer afford the cost of gas to get there. She now does custodial work overnight at a closer school and greatly misses the time she used to have directly with students. Since September, her school has only been fully staffed with custodians for a mere two weeks. Two of her colleagues have had to move back in with their parents because they can no longer afford rent. How is this acceptable to this government?

Another story, Speaker—this one was sent directly to the Premier, but copied to me as well:

“Mr. Premier,

“2003.

“My husband’s employment income for that year was $35,000 after working as a draftsman for 30 years at Adamson Associates.

“Fast forward to 2022.

“Our daughter is employed as a special educational assistant in a mild intellectual delay class for the York Region District School Board.

“Her employment income from the board in 2021 was $32,455.

“It would seem that there has not been much improvement in wages these past 19-plus years.

“Current legislated wage increases are unacceptable.

“The recent confirmation of a $2.1-billion surplus for the fiscal year ending in March by the Financial Accountability Office suggests that it is time to pay Ontario’s educational support workers a decent wage.”

That is really the crux of the matter, isn’t it, Speaker? The money is there. The government is sitting on a surplus, yet they don’t want to make the investments in our school system that would ensure that our kids get the fundamental supports they need and deserve every day, and that ensure that our workers don’t need to use a food bank in order to be there.

The government is doing to our education system what they have already done to our health care system: driving workers away—workers who care deeply about the people that they serve; workers who got into these professions because they want to help people and support people; workers who have done a difficult job for the past few years of the pandemic, supporting us and keeping us safe, but the utter contempt and disrespect that the government shows them and the government’s low-wage suppression policy are driving workers out of the health care sector and they are driving workers out of the education sector. If the government gets its way, they will continue to drive workers out of our education sector.

It is our kids, Speaker, who will ultimately pay the price. It is our kids who will pay the price tomorrow for this government’s refusal to come to the table and negotiate a deal. It is our kids who will pay the price in the weeks and the months to come, as the supports they need aren’t there and as the caring adults they depend on are driven away from the system. And it is the vulnerable children, the ones who need support the most, who will pay the highest price for this government’s actions—the kids who have accessibility needs, who can only go to school if they have an EA or an ECE who are supporting them; our youngest learners, who depend on ECEs to help them and support them and keep them safe; all of our children who depend on learning in a clean and safe school environment, who will no longer be able to count on that. I can’t understand why this government is willing to applaud and clap itself all kinds of standing ovations while they pass legislation that will rob our children of the educational supports they need and deserve.

1620

The clock is ticking, Speaker. We’re getting closer to midnight. The minister could still be there negotiating. He chose to walk away. But this situation only ends—our kids only get the supports they need when the minister comes back to the table, offers a fair deal and actually provides the investments that our education system needs and deserves.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I rise today to participate in third reading debate of Bill 28.

Speaker, I want to make it clear to the members opposite and the people watching today that this is a dark day in Ontario’s history. The magnitude of what we are debating today cannot be overstated. We are literally debating whether the government is going to violate the charter rights of people in this province. So think about that, Speaker. Think about that for a moment. We are literally debating whether the government is going to take away the charter rights of the lowest-paid education workers in this province.

And so I ask—I ask the members opposite and I ask the people of this province—if the government is going to take away the charter rights of education workers who play such a vital role in caring for our students and supporting them, whose rights are next? Whose rights are next? Whose rights are they going to take away next?

Everybody—everybody—in this province should be worried and concerned about what hammer is going to come down next. Whether this government respects the charter or not, every worker in this province—public, private sector—should be worried that their charter rights to bargain for a fair wage, to bargain for benefits, to bargain for a decent life can be taken away with a stroke of a pen and the fast-tracking of a bill.

Mr. Wayne Gates: Disgraceful.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: It is. It is. I agree with the member. It is.

So I want to say what was disgraceful was earlier today, when we had the second reading vote on Bill 28, that the members actually clapped and cheered and patted themselves on the backs for literally taking charter rights away from workers, the people of this province. That’s what was shameful and disgusting today, Speaker.

So let’s be clear what Bill 28 is: It’s a bully bill. It’s not a bill about keeping students in school. It’s a bill about sticking it to the lowest-paid education workers in this province. And let’s be clear: Students will pay the price for this government’s failure to negotiate a fair deal for the people who care for our children; the people who keep our schools open, who keep them safe and clean; the people who toilet the children who are most in need; the people who get our kids to school and provide the supports that children with special needs need. And to think that this government is going to take away their constitutional rights without negotiating a contract that even gives them a living wage—a wage that doesn’t force them to take a second job or go to a food bank to feed their families.

So I want to speak directly to parents and students. I want children in school. Education workers want children in school. And the best way for children to be in school—in safe, clean, well-taken-care-of schools—is for this government to do its job and actually sit down and negotiate a fair deal with the lowest-paid education workers in this province.

Speaker, if the government cared about students, they would care about the people who care about students and who care for students.

We’ve seen this play before. Right now, our hospital systems are collapsing because of wage restraints. We can’t allow the government to do it to our education system. So that’s why I ask the members opposite: Today, you have an opportunity to do the right thing, to stand up for people’s rights and the charter, to stand up for their constitutional right to bargain a fair deal and vote against Bill 28.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

MPP Jamie West: I have been trying to keep very because this is hurting children and this is hurting families, and when I’m upset, sometimes industrial language comes out, and I’m trying to be parliamentary.

I’ve got to be honest, Speaker. This Conservative government cares about children the same way that they cared about seniors in long-term care during COVID. This Conservative government cares about these workers the same way that they cared about PSWs and support workers in long-term care. This is about protecting children in the exact same way that this is about putting an iron ring around long-term care. This comes down to rewarding buddies. This has nothing to do with helping people, and there is nothing in the history that demonstrates that they care about the children of this province. Nothing shows that.

They care about these children because they gave some money and said, “Buy a textbook”? They care about these children because their support staff—the people who clean the place, the people who literally toilet them and care for them, who have to go to food banks—you care about the children? But the people who care about them, you force to go to food banks.

And you high-five each other and you give yourself a standing ovation—a standing ovation—while you punish these workers. Shame on you.

The government wants to blame the unions. The government wants the union to be the bogeyman in the room, but unions are workers. They’re made up of workers; that’s the part you’re missing. It’s not union leadership. Do you know who union leadership is? The union leadership are people like Charity. I told you several times about Charity going to food banks to feed their children. Imagine how that feels when your kids know that you’re going to a food bank, or if you can’t find child care, that they go to the food bank with you. Imagine the lack of dignity.

And you voted for it, because you do not care about parents. You do not care about children. You do not care about students—through the Speaker.

Daniel is a leader. Remember Daniel? Daniel was a maintenance worker. Daniel is struggling to afford medication for his child who has diabetes. That’s who they care about?

Kori is a union leader. Kori is a mom of two who makes so little under these dirtbag employers that she’s got to move in with her parents—with her parents. You have two kids and you work for the province of Ontario and you have to move in with your parents with your kids? It’s shameful, absolutely shameful.

I salute the 55,000 leaders with the courage to stand up—every single one of them—who are forced to negotiate with a gun to their heads.

The Conservatives will be telling members of their communities, “What else could we do?” and “We’re protecting your children.” I want the people in those communities to understand: What could these workers do? What could they sign?

Who’s going to apply for this job? Who’s going to apply for a job where you have to move in back with your parents? Who’s going to apply for a job where you have to go to the food bank? Who’s going to want to do this? You know who wants this do this? People who love these kids—who love these kids. The exact same way that the Conservative government took advantage of people in long-term care and retirement homes—because no one goes into these fields to get rich. They go into these fields because they love the people they work with and take care of. Each and every one of you could learn to care for others.

1630

I want to read something I promised someone in my riding I would read. Jennifer from Sudbury said, “I would simply like to say that invoking the ‘notwithstanding’ clause to prevent a strike goes beyond a slippery slope. It’s another case of our government mandating that people work for poverty wages in order to support their political goals. We as Canadians cannot and should not stand for it.”

Jennifer’s on the nose. You’re mandating people into poverty—into poverty—and giving yourself a standing ovation. It is absolutely shameful. Do you think that families are going to join you? Do you think that families are on your side? You are completely out to lunch. Speaker, they have no idea.

I’m going to read you this: “I am a 38-year-old single mom. I’m a cancer patient who just finished chemo, who is receiving radiation treatments at the Walker centre. My 13-year-old child has special needs. And although this strike has been a terrible time for me timing wise, I am proud of the education workers for fighting so hard for my children’s learning environment. I just want to say how much I support these CUPE workers. I stand in solidarity and offer my wholehearted support.”

You are on the wrong side of history. You are on the wrong side of families. You are on the wrong side of workers, absolutely the wrong side of workers. This is heartbreaking, heartbreaking.

Just before question period, the Premier, in his Remembrance Day statement, spoke about tyranny of government, and all week we’ve been debating a bill that is going to violate human rights and charter rights. The members of this government are going to go to Remembrance Day ceremonies on the 11th and stare at a cenotaph lined with names of people who have died to provide the rights and freedoms that we have—and they’re going to pretend that they care, the same way they pretend they care about parents, the same way they pretend they care about kids, the same way they pretend to care about these workers, and they do not care. They do not care.

And their friends are walking out the door, Speaker. They’re walking out the door. I want to read this. This is from the Provincial Building and Construction Trades Council of Ontario:

“We are deeply concerned about the potential removal of collective bargaining rights impacting educational workers. Collective bargaining is a fundamental right of working people that has been repeatedly upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada and is enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The foundation of our safe and respectful workplaces comes from negotiated agreements that provide fair and balanced employment conditions, arrived at through collective bargaining.

“The Provincial Building and Construction Trades Council of Ontario stands in support of all workers against the potential removal of collective bargaining rights. We strongly encourage both sides—CUPE and the government—to continue negotiations in good faith in the pursuit of a fair contract that benefits everyone.”

This is important. There is a saying that an injury to one is an injury to all. You want to organize a workplace? What you need is a really bad employer, and the Conservative government has demonstrated time and time again that they are really, really, really, really bad employers. The Minister of Education has said that children will go hungry because of this strike. Will go hungry? Children are already going hungry, Speaker. Children like Charity’s kids and Kori’s kids are already going hungry because of the wages that they’re paying and the contract they’re offering, and Bill 28 is going to ensure that this will happen for another four years—another four years of children in poverty.

I speak passionately about this and I am angry about this because I grew up in poverty. I know what it feels like when you’re a kid and the government lies to you. I was five years old when the Liberal government had announced they were going to eradicate child poverty. I was five years old and I knew I was living in poverty, and I thought they were talking about me. I turned 51 this year. Child poverty is higher than ever before, and the Conservative government not only hasn’t fixed it or attempted to fix it, but is legislating it. That means children growing up will suffer because of it. Children growing up will feel lesser than and not acceptable. Children growing up, going to school—their friends will look at them and wonder why their clothes don’t fit properly or why they look so old or tattered. Children growing up will go on Scout trips, and at the end of the trip—that the Scouts paid for, because you can’t afford to go—they’ll give you all the food. Children growing up will carry that for a long time. Some of them will become MPPs and fight for children like that, and some of them will fall between the cracks.

Time and time again, Conservative members have gotten up and talked about test scores while ignoring the social determinants of health. You know why some kids can’t study well? Because they don’t eat. You know why some kids don’t study well? Because their parents can’t afford the Internet. You know why some kids can’t study well? Because it’s cold in their house, or they don’t have a house and they sleep in their car. You know why test scores don’t do well for some kids? Because they’re poor and because the government of Ontario legislates their parents to be poor. It is shameful of each and every one of you.

What choice do they have? What else could they do but say no to an offer that forces them into food banks? What else could they do? What would you do if it was your kids, Speaker? What would you do if it was your kids and you were legislated into poverty, and you knew that inflation was rising at record numbers, and you knew that Galen Weston was making a fortune, and you knew that suddenly the price of bread went through the roof—you thought you’d fixed the price of bread with Galen Weston—you can’t afford groceries, the price keeps going up, and the government comes with an offer that’s going to legislate you into poverty, where life will continue to get worse. What can you do? How do you look your kids in the eye and tell them that you accepted this terrible offer; that not only will your life stay as miserable as it is, but will get worse? You’d never be able to look them in the eye. I am so proud of these members for standing up. I am so proud of these members for standing up.

I have to say, Speaker, every time I start a sentence, I think of something that would be considered unparliamentary. This is a terrible, terrible thing that they’ve done. This is a horrible thing that they’ve done. They’re making lives worse for children—absolutely worse.

I’ll tell you a personal story. I’ve talked about growing up in poverty; I don’t talk about my sister a lot, but I’m going to share her story. My sister was born very sick. We’re almost opposites. I was almost this size by grade 6; my sister was very small. She had extreme asthma and spent every year in the hospital on the oxygen tank. When she was born, she had 102 different allergies. She was very vulnerable as a kid. She had severe eczema. Most days in the winter, she couldn’t go outside to play. Most days, because of her allergies, she couldn’t take the school bus or walk to school because of the weather, so she’d go in a taxi service in the morning to the school.

The person who met her there was the custodian. The custodian would meet her there and make my sister feel valuable. When the kids were playing at recess time and my sister couldn’t go out to play with them, the custodian would play with her and hang out with her. I remember being jealous because the custodian would let her ride on the floor polisher.

These are people who love children, who love our children, and they do it for poverty wages. The government knows and takes advantage of the big hearts that they have, and they do not care. They simply do not care. For anyone watching, if there’s any doubt that you think they care, if there’s anything they say in the future to you to make you think they care, I want you to think back to long-term care. I want you to think back to the state and the conditions of the seniors, and how they did nothing but sign multi-decade contracts with these private firms that were accountable for the highest number of deaths. That’s how much they care: 0.00%. It is shameful what they did.

1640

These workers have been legislated into poverty—and not just now; this is the worst example, but they have done it for years. For a decade, they have been behind the eight ball, slowly working for less and less. And the government today stands, gives themselves a standing ovation, a high-five—especially the Minister of Labour, whose role it is to stand for workers, to understand employers. He might as well resign or change his name to the minister of employers. Shame on him, Speaker.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: It is just an honour to rise today to register my emphatic protest, disagreement—really, dismay—with Bill 28. My real concern is, why is this government in such a hurry to pass this bill? Why is this government forcing 55,000 education workers—70% female—to take this legislation? What is it that has brought us to this point of crisis and chaos?

What is happening that we’re not talking about? Is it that the Premier has been called before the commission of inquiry for abdicating his responsibility to the people of Ottawa? What is it that we should be debating in this House? Because negotiations should be happening at the bargaining table. That’s where they’re supposed to happen. By law, that’s where they’re supposed to happen. In fact, even strikes are legal. It’s within the rights of labour agreements, according to the Constitution, to be able to do that. So that is not what has brought us to this moment of crisis. I just really, really question this government’s judgment in rushing us, in rushing this debate.

Maybe they don’t want us to get to November 14, when their finance minister will provide an update to this Legislature and have to explain the billions of dollars in surplus and not in the education system and not in the health system, because, as required by law, you have to have a forecast that comes with that. Our law demands a certain level of transparency that’s not controlled by this government. Perhaps it’s going to be harder to explain to those bargaining with you that you can’t pay when you’re putting away billions of dollars in surpluses, or that you’re cutting billions of dollars from education. In fact, $6 billion is what you’re cutting from education. So keep your eye on what they don’t want us to talk about and what they don’t want us to see.

I see that the labour minister has been quite silent—haven’t heard a peep. I think the labour minister should have lots to say.

You know, just recently I saw a post from LIUNA Local 3000, and it really warns this government. It says: “This attack goes beyond basic labour rights. It’s an attack on our fundamental freedoms. They are criminalizing our right to fight back.

“This will affect all of our unions and movements fighting for justice. The government has picked a fight not only with labour, but with the people of Ontario.”

As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. says, “An injustice anywhere is an injustice everywhere.” And you have seen 55,000 front-line education workers, and you have taken away their rights to negotiate and to bargain, and it’s not because of the students.

Ms. Baily, a retired teacher—when I want to find out the facts, I go to retired teachers. She says: “Minister Lecce’s repeated commitment that students must be in school is a farce. Under his government, Ontario students missed more school days during COVID than any other province or territory in the country.

“What’s the trigger for him to switch now almost a 180-degree turn?”

Just because you have the power doesn’t mean you have to use it, and the abuse of power is tyranny. That’s really what it is: “I have the power so I am going to beat you over the head with it.” And it’s wrong.

Without question, Bill 28 is wrong. It has forced us into this point of a crisis in our education system, when all you had to do is stay at the table. The minister could actually just go upstairs and talk to the other side right now. The minister could choose to do that—Attorney General, you are shaking your head. What do you have to say? What do you have to say? Because the federal government is calling you, and I urge the federal government to disallow this bully Bill 28 that strips us of our constitutional right to free and fair collective bargaining and puts this province in a shameful position, because you do not have the courage or the conviction to sit down with these people and negotiate a deal.

How hard is that? That is not impossible. Using the “notwithstanding” clause, section 33, cancelling sections 2, 7 and 15, cancelling the human rights, cancelling the Ontario Labour Relations Board, just to settle a deal when the people have not even gone out for a day on the picket line—totally incompetent. It’s lazy, frankly—

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Mrs. Robin Martin: Let me just start by saying a few things—I’m principally addressing the member from Sudbury on these points. The opposition has no monopoly on caring. The opposition has no monopoly on compassion. The opposition has no monopoly on courage, and the opposition has no monopoly on conviction.

Members of the opposition are not the only members in this chamber who have grown up in poverty. They are not the only members in this chamber who have faced hardship in their lives. We have all faced hardships, and some of us have grown up in poverty as well, and I think it’s important to recognize that. No one has a monopoly on compassion and caring.

On Tuesday, we heard from the MPP for Ottawa West–Nepean and her colleagues. We heard them talk about—

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): The member for Davenport will come to order.

Mrs. Robin Martin: —some of the hard-working education workers here in Ontario.

I want to be very clear at the beginning of these remarks that I, like every other government MPP, thank our education workers for their hard work. We thank them for their commitment to students. We thank them for all that they do for our young people in the education system—thank you.

1650

But these people who dedicate their lives to students are people; they’re not partisan talking points. That’s why, Speaker, I found it troubling yesterday when the MPP from Ottawa West–Nepean and her colleagues spoke. They were clearly confused, or, in the language just used by the member from Toronto–Danforth, their narrative was a clear “abuse of the facts.”

Time and time again, we have heard the opposition say that there have been wage cuts. Speaker, you’d have to check the records of previous Liberal and NDP governments, but I can promise one thing with absolute certainty: Since forming government, this Premier and this education minister and this caucus have not cut a single penny out of the education budget. We have not cut the pay of a single education worker. In fact, we have come forward with a generous proposal, one that would increase the pay of every single CUPE education worker for the next four years while protecting sick pay and pension benefits. Our intention was to give the largest increase—

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): The member from Spadina–Fort York will come to order.

Mrs. Robin Martin: Our intention was to give the largest increase to those who make the least, topping out at 10.3% over four years, which far outpaces average private sector wage increases. But instead of negotiating, the union told us they would strike if they didn’t get what they want, a pay increase of almost 50%: “You must comply, or I’ll take away your child’s education.” Talk about having the power and beating us over the head with it.

Our intention, as I said, was to give this generous offer. We’re certainly still ready to listen, Speaker, and all we have asked—all we have asked—is that the union take the threat of learning interruption—

Ms. Catherine Fife: Take this threat. This is the threat.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): The member from Waterloo has been warned.

Mrs. Robin Martin: —in the form of yet another strike off the table. Take it off the table. That’s all we’re asking—

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): The member from Niagara Falls will come to order.

Mrs. Robin Martin: Faced with the prospect of yet more disruption to the lives of students, Ontario’s government introduced Bill 28. The Keeping Students in Class Act would, if passed, establish a reasonable and a fair four-year collective agreement with CUPE education workers across the province. It would establish a central collective agreement that increases compensation for Ontario’s CUPE education workers, offering an annual increase of 2.5%—an increase from our original offer of 2%—for employees at the top end of their salary grids, around $43,000 annually. This was also increased from $40,000 annually. And we’re increasing the salaries for those who make above that threshold by 1.5% every year for the life of that contract.

In recognition of the important role that they play, we’re also increasing benefits contributions, resulting in a $6,100 annual employer contribution for every employee by August 31, 2026. That is on top of record funding by this government for our education system—almost $35 billion in just this 2022-23 school year alone. This historic funding commitment from Ontario’s government is having real impacts on the education system. What does it mean? It means $90 million more for student mental health, a 426% increase in funding since 2018. To be clear, that means more support for students and almost 200 more mental health professionals in our schools. It means increasing the Special Education Grant funding by $92 million, bringing the total to $3.25 billion for the 2022-23 school year, doubling the prior funding for special education in schools, a cause near and dear to my heart as I have a child on the spectrum. In real terms, that has meant more support to help students with special needs, represented by more than 3,200 new educational assistants.

In February of this year, Ontario’s government announced the 2022-23 Grants for Student Needs—again, the highest level of investment in education in the province’s history: $26.12 billion. That is an increase—again, an increase—of $683.9 million compared to the previous year. That historic increase outpaces inflation. Growth in the Grants for Student Needs since 2002-03 reflects a 77% increase, compared to an increase of only 43% in the consumer price index.

Ontario’s record and historic investments in education also include nearly $550 million in funding through the Supports for Students Fund and the COVID-19 Learning Recovery Fund. Speaker, the Keeping Students in Class Act proposes to increase the Supports for Students Fund to ensure consistency over time.

All of this education investment means 5,675 more staff in schools. It means more teachers—in fact, up to 900 new teachers. It means between 1,630 and 1,800 more education workers supporting special education, mental health and well-being, language instruction, Indigenous education and STEM programming. It means up to 3,000 more front-line staff, like early childhood educators, education assistants and other education workers.

Why are we here, then, today? Why are we here debating this bill when there is more funding across the board for education than there has ever been before? We are only here because of the threat of another strike. I have not forgotten, Madam Speaker—and I bet no one else has, either—that there were 68 days of strikes just a few years ago, in the 2019-20 school year.

I found it very interesting to hear members opposite bring up the financial costs of inflation, because if they support further education strikes, they’ll be forcing parents to pay out of pocket for child care in the face of school closures. Ontario’s families, like those right across the country, are already facing inflationary pressures. This is a universal problem across Canada, one that cannot be solved through blank government cheques. In fact, runaway government deficits like the ones incurred by previous Liberal and NDP governments actually contribute to inflation. Fortunately, the Premier and our Minister of Finance have brought stability back to Ontario’s finances, getting our budget back into the black ink. Hopefully, governments across the country will follow the same path so the compounding consequences of government debt don’t add further fuel to the flames of inflation.

We have heard from parents already who, in the face of potentially illegal strike action this Friday, are hearing that their kids’ schools could face closure yet again; that they will need to pay out of pocket for emergency child care yet again; or even miss out on a day of work yet again, or a paycheque that they need to support their family, pay their mortgage. That, Speaker, is the consequence of inaction. That is the consequence of letting this 30-year pattern of strikes continue without taking any action to stand up for children.

I’m sick of education, frankly, not being about children. That’s where the focus should be. It should be about children; that’s why we have an education system. I have heard from many parents about the importance of stability for their children, the need for a normal school year, the consistency of instruction, the need for stability. Parents have shared how grateful they are that things have been feeling more normal at the beginning of this school year. They’ve often emphasized that education disruptions have adversely impacted their child’s mental health as well as their learning. Our students need schools to stay open. Parents need schools to stay open. Ontario needs schools to stay open.

This government, this Premier and our education minister have done the work of making historic investments across the board in our education system. Schools today have more funding than ever before. We made sure, in this post-pandemic world, that schools have the tools and resources they need to safely stay open.

Let’s keep them that way. I’m asking this House to join me today in supporting Bill 28, the Keeping Students in Class Act.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate? Further debate?

Ms. Khanjin has moved third reading of Bill 28, An Act to resolve labour disputes involving school board employees represented by the Canadian Union of Public Employees. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour of the motion will please say “aye.”

All those opposed to the motion will please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

Call in the members. This is a 30-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1703 to 1733.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Members will please take their seats.

Today, Ms. Khanjin, on behalf of Mr. Lecce, moved third reading of Bill 28, An Act to resolve labour disputes involving school board employees represented by the Canadian Union of Public Employees.

All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

• Anand, Deepak
• Babikian, Aris
• Bailey, Robert
• Barnes, Patrice
• Bethlenfalvy, Peter
• Bouma, Will
• Byers, Rick
• Calandra, Paul
• Cho, Raymond Sung Joon
• Cho, Stan
• Clark, Steve
• Coe, Lorne
• Crawford, Stephen
• Cuzzetto, Rudy
• Dixon, Jess
• Dowie, Andrew
• Downey, Doug
• Dunlop, Jill
• Fedeli, Victor
• Flack, Rob
• Ford, Michael D.
• Fullerton, Merrilee
• Gallagher Murphy, Dawn
• Ghamari, Goldie
• Gill, Parm

• Grewal, Hardeep Singh
• Hardeman, Ernie
• Holland, Kevin
• Jones, Trevor
• Jordan, John
• Kanapathi, Logan
• Ke, Vincent
• Kerzner, Michael S.
• Khanjin, Andrea
• Kusendova-Bashta, Natalia
• Leardi, Anthony
• Lecce, Stephen
• Lumsden, Neil
• MacLeod, Lisa
• Martin, Robin
• McCarthy, Todd J.
• McGregor, Graham
• McNaughton, Monte
• Mulroney, Caroline
• Oosterhoff, Sam
• Pang, Billy
• Parsa, Michael
• Piccini, David
• Pierre, Natalie
• Pirie, George

• Quinn, Nolan
• Rae, Matthew
• Rasheed, Kaleed
• Riddell, Brian
• Romano, Ross
• Sabawy, Sheref
• Sandhu, Amarjot
• Sarkaria, Prabmeet Singh
• Sarrazin, Stéphane
• Saunderson, Brian
• Scott, Laurie
• Smith, Dave
• Smith, David
• Smith, Graydon
• Smith, Laura
• Smith, Todd
• Surma, Kinga
• Tangri, Nina
• Thanigasalam, Vijay
• Thompson, Lisa M.
• Triantafilopoulos, Effie J.
• Wai, Daisy
• Williams, Charmaine A.
• Yakabuski, John

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): All those opposed to the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

• Andrew, Jill
• Armstrong, Teresa J.
• Begum, Doly
• Bell, Jessica
• Bowman, Stephanie
• Brady, Bobbi Ann
• Burch, Jeff
• Fife, Catherine
• Fraser, John
• French, Jennifer K.
• Gates, Wayne
• Gélinas, France

• Glover, Chris
• Gretzky, Lisa
• Harden, Joel
• Hsu, Ted
• Hunter, Mitzie
• Karpoche, Bhutila
• Kernaghan, Terence
• Mamakwa, Sol
• Mantha, Michael
• McMahon, Mary-Margaret
• Pasma, Chandra
• Rakocevic, Tom

• Sattler, Peggy
• Schreiner, Mike
• Shamji, Adil
• Stevens, Jennifer (Jennie)
• Stiles, Marit
• Tabuns, Peter
• Vanthof, John
• Vaugeois, Lise
• West, Jamie
• Wong-Tam, Kristyn

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 74; the nays are 34.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I declare the motion carried.

Be it resolved that the bill do now pass and be entitled as in the motion.

Third reading agreed to.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Orders of the day?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Madam Speaker, we will, of course, be cancelling night sittings this evening. At the same time, I’m sure if you seek it, you’ll find unanimous consent to see the clock at 6.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): The government House leader is seeking unanimous consent to see the clock at 6. Agreed? Agreed.

Private Members’ Public Business

Health care

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I rise in support of my motion, which really captures everything our government has been building on from day one. The motion that is before us today is motion number 8: That, in the opinion of this House, the government of Ontario should continue to build and expand hospitals across the province increasing health care services, providing essential care and creating more jobs in the health care sector as part of its plan—

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I apologize to the member. Stop the clock.

I apologize to the member. The member from Barrie–Innisfil can continue.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Do you want me to move the motion again?

1740

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Yes, please.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I move that, in the opinion of this House, the government of Ontario should continue to build and expand hospitals across the province increasing health care services, providing essential care and creating more jobs in the health care sector as part of its plan to build a stronger, more resilient health care system.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Pursuant to standing order 100, the member has 12 minutes for her presentation.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Thank you, Speaker, I know I have much support from my colleagues where we’re seeing hospitals finally built in this province, anywhere from far up north to eastern Ontario, in all aspects of our province. This really builds on what our government has done from day one to not only put the interests of people at the heart—in everything we do, we put the people first, whether it’s addressing the cost of living, whether it’s addressing health care challenges or making sure that students have a school to go to every day to get their achievements and dreams achieved in that institution.

And, Speaker, when I talk to folks in and around my community, we can’t turn a blind eye to the health care challenges we do have. We have a growing community in the riding of Barrie–Innisfil, and with that comes the extra challenges of health care services. In fact, the population in Innisfil, in Barrie and in Springwater is expected to double over the next 20 years, with 173,000 new residents—47,000 in Innisfil alone—and that doesn’t even include the 150,000 new residents that are anticipated to live in a great project we have going with the Orbit, which is going to bring a lot of attainable housing to our community.

In Simcoe county, we also have an aging population, and it’s growing at a very rapid rate than the actual provincial average. In 25 years, Simcoe county will have over 107,000 more seniors than it does today, making up 27% of the population. And seniors, as we know, use health care, especially hospital services, four times more frequently than the rest of the population. And so, right now, we’re in the position where my local hospital—in addition to my colleague the member for Barrie–Springwater–Oro-Medonte, our Attorney General—we know that our hospital is busting at the seams, and it’s been put through a lot during the pandemic.

And time and time again, our government has invested supports in the Royal Victoria Hospital, whether it is things like surgical backlog funding, where we announced $14 million to help with that backlog, or whether it’s other initiatives like infrastructure initiatives or other surge funding. So it’s no wonder that when we work with our local Royal Victoria Hospital—and I have to acknowledge our previous CEO, Janice Skot—we were able to work together with the town of Innisfil to get a ministerial zoning order approved for a hospital known as the South Campus in Innisfil, and we were also able to secure $2.5 million for some base funding to get shovels in the ground for that particular location.

I wanted to take this opportunity to thank the former CEO of Royal Victoria Hospital, Janice Skot, for her great service, and I want to wish her a great retirement. But her projects and her dreams and her legacy will continue as we build the South Campus. And now we work with a new CEO, Gail Hunt, and I want to welcome her to her new position.

I was speaking with Gail Hunt about the motion that I was going to be discussing today in this Legislature. She sent me a very lengthy but very important quote that I want to share with the members of this House to really resonate how this particular motion is going to affect not only my community, but actually all communities across this province as we continue to build hospitals everywhere.

Again, we can’t just build hospitals without the personnel, and so, right next door to Royal Victoria Hospital, we have Georgian College, which is actually going to benefit from changes this government put forward through the Ministry of Colleges and Universities where we’re offering the nursing program. And that’s so important for us locally in Barrie for retention, because we know, previously, before Georgian College offered that program that we had many students that maybe did the first two years of their program in Barrie, and then they ended up going somewhere north in the GTA to complete the last two years of their degree; they may have met someone, and then we lose the retention of that particular health care worker. So this is a huge game-changer for us on a regional level, whether it’s Royal Victoria Hospital, whether it’s Southlake in my colleague’s riding in Newmarket and the parliamentary assistant for health, or whether it’s in Orillia. It’s really going to help the whole region.

But back to talking about our new CEO, Gail Hunt. She and I talked about this motion, and she said that Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, also known as RVH, “is already bursting at the seams. Prior to the pandemic, the medicine bed occupancy rate consistently exceeded 115%. Patients were routinely cared for in hallways. The COVID-19 pandemic has taught us that we cannot go back to hallway medicine. Simply put, it is not safe and it’s not the care our residents deserve. To expand services and accessibility to health care for the residents of south Simcoe county, RVH continues to advance its capital expansion plans forward following the March 2022 $2.5 million planning grant and the minister’s zoning order ... approval.

“This ‘one system, two site’ integrated model of care includes redevelopment of the north campus on Georgian Drive in Barrie, which will double in size over the next 20 years, as well as the development of south campus in Innisfil. This will allow the health centre to expand services, add beds and be better equipped to focus on more complex acute care. It’s important to note the north and south campuses are completely interdependent; one can’t proceed without the other. Services within the two-campus plan are integrated, not duplicated. RVH submitted its stage one of its capital plan in March 2022, and is currently awaiting Ministry of Health comments.

“Detailed site planning and ongoing community consultation with Indigenous and municipal partners are currently under way for the south campus. We at RVH echo MPP Khanjin’s motion that the government of Ontario should continue to build and expand hospitals across the province increasing health care services, providing essential care and creating more jobs in the health care sector as part of its plan to build a stronger, more resilient health care system.”

Again, that was Gail Hunt, the president and CEO of the Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre. We’re so fortunate to have her support and, of course, the previous CEO too, and working hand in hand with them and the entire community to really strengthen our health care system locally.

As I spoke about the regional growth in the area and how this builds upon what our government has done to date, we’re really putting people at the centre of health care with our family health teams; family health teams that we’re seeing established all across the province thanks to this government’s hard work when we hit the ground running when we first got elected four years ago when one of the first bills we introduced was, in fact, repairing our health care system. That work continues to this day.

Of course, we were hit by the pandemic, which added a lot of other challenges which we had to overcome, but it’s this government’s work in prioritizing the health care sector, making sure we have the staff personnel, investing in training more personal support workers and really valuing our nurse practitioners.

I know in my community I’ve met with the nurse practitioners, and I think it’s amazing how they can take on 20-plus patients each for someone who may not have a doctor, and we know in my community, we have something like 50,000 people already who don’t have a family doctor because they’ve moved to the area—they may have had a family doctor in another region and, of course, they don’t have one in our region, so doctor and physician recruitment is something that we’re always focused on locally, and we recognize that nurse practitioners play a really key and essential role in that.

In a few weeks’ time, it’s going to be Nurse Practitioner Week, so a shout-out to all the nurse practitioners across Ontario for all the work they do. I’m really excited for those who work in the Barrie and Simcoe county community who are able to take on those patients who may not be able to find a family doctor, but know they’re in good hands.

But it’s not just that—investing in some of the services, services like our paramedicine program, really a revolution within the health care system really bringing those services to people’s doors. That way they don’t have to go to the hospital, and of course we already know that emergency services in hospitals need a bit of that relief, so now we’re investing in that paramedicine service.

We’re also the only province in all of Canada to be the one that does newborn screening to add a permanent hearing loss risk test for newborns. We’re the first ones in all of Canada. It’s not just the investments we’re making, it’s not just the personnel, it’s not just the bricks and mortar of building more hospitals, but it’s also changes like this. Someone who is new to the world, and we’re able to do much of that screening and make sure that when kids enter the world they have the best fighting chance and they have the best start in life. That wouldn’t be possible, again, without our health care workers who we’re also investing a lot in.

This is why it’s so important to build health care and new hospitals in our communities, because they really connect everyone together. It’s new jobs. It’s people who are looking to move to the community. In places like where I live where we’re trying to recruit more physicians every day, it’s a draw factor if they know there’s a hospital they can partner up with. It’s somewhere they want to work. If we can expand our hospitals, it’s more services they can offer.

For example, our cancer care facility at Royal Victoria Hospital saves someone a trip from having to come down here to Toronto, where I know many of us do commute, but for someone who is going through chemotherapy, that’s a bit of a far trip for them to go.

1750

Recently the Attorney General—the MPP for Barrie–Springwater–Oro-Medonte—and I announced a new CT scanner at Royal Victoria Hospital, which is going to be a huge game-changer for so many patients, because they no longer have to get on Highway 400, which can be very congested. As much as we love our GO trains and we’re trying to expand highways, currently that can be a very congested highway. For them to get on the road and get their CT scan in the GTA takes a lot out of their day. They might have to take more time off work. Their loved ones might have to take time off work. But now they have that in their backyard.

That’s exactly what the government is doing. We say we put people at the centre of everything we do. We think of those individuals, to build the wraparound supports they need in their community—that starts with creating a health care hospital network that works for people. We haven’t seen hospitals built in this province for decades. Finally this government is taking it seriously. When we talk about ICU beds or surgeries, well, if you have no more rooms, if you have no more space to put them, what do you think is going to happen? That’s where we get this hallway health care situation. I hear it time and time again from my nurse or nurse practitioner friends that I speak to or doctors at Royal Victoria Hospital: They need more space.

I think it’s incredible that we have a government that is willing to support a motion like we have today where we want to expand hospitals like Royal Victoria Hospital, as we have at Southlake hospital or Soldiers’ Memorial Hospital in Orillia, and building new hospitals to be able to make sure that people have the urgent—because we value our universal health care system. people expect that system to be there when they need it most. Unfortunately, under previous governments, that system has failed them. But we won’t. We are building more hospitals, we’re building up the capacity and we’re building on the needs of our future generation, and for population growth, like we have in my community.

I’m excited for my colleagues who also have hospitals coming online. I’m excited about what that’s going to do for employment and how it’s going to attract so many more people to that community. People will know that they live in a community where they can rely on health care services that are available in their backyard and where they don’t have to get on a congested highway and drive for hours to get the services they need.

I hope I have the support of everyone in this House.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Mr. Wayne Gates: It’s a pleasure to rise to talk to this motion. Our public health system is on the brink of collapse. Our emergency room wait-times are at all-time highs, with some waiting over 18 hours for care, and some communities, like mine, have had several code blacks called due to ambulance shortages. That’s unacceptable.

While we need to build more hospitals, it’s more important to find ways to expand existing hospital capacity. We need public hospitals to have longer operating hours for ORs and diagnostic imaging, to hire more professionals and to have funds to buy better, up-to-date equipment.

If this government was truly interested in building and expanding health care in Ontario, they would repeal Bill 124 immediately and pay our health care workers fairly and respect the work they do on a daily basis. This government continues to drive health care workers out of their jobs, creating staff shortages and record-high wait-times for health care across the province. Instead of wanting to make real investments, this government continues to hold on to Bill 124.

Our community of Niagara Falls is looking forward to that new hospital. I saw that they’ve even announced a new hospital in Windsor. But what I need to talk about to everybody here, going back to when I was in a by-election—this is how long—because I know a few of the Conservatives might have forgotten this. It was under Harris that they closed 26 hospitals and laid off 6,000 nurses. But when I was running in my by-election—I’ve been here for a while. The hospital was announced during my by-election in 2014, and Niagara Health received a planning grant of $27 million. The PC candidate and party refused to commit at the time until the budget was balanced. But from the beginning I knew our community needed a new hospital and have always supported it. We need health care in our community. Two urgent care centres in our community closed recently. People need a new hospital in Niagara Falls.

Through the years since my by-election, we had to push and push for the project to go each step of the way. I was happy to see that, just over a year ago, Niagara Health moved the project from stage 2 to stage 3. The inclusion of Infrastructure Ontario was a promising sign that this project is going to have shovels in the ground. But here we stand today and I’m still worried about the pace of construction of this hospital. We should have shovels in the ground this fall, but they’re not there yet. They’re now talking about the middle of next year. We are still five years away from having a functional new hospital in Niagara Falls. I know that the people in Niagara need this service as soon as possible.

My question to everybody here—and I don’t have a lot of time left; I’ve got a little bit. I can tell you that I’m here for any support to work with this government to get the timeline moved up, even just a bit, so our community can have a new hospital. I have worked with Niagara regional council, city council; we’ve worked with the province—no hospital. This is what’s concerning to me, and maybe you can take this back to your government as well: From the time that it started until now, where it’s going to be built, it’s going to be 14 years. Why does it take 14 years in the province of Ontario to build a hospital when we have highly skilled trades—we could use local people. It makes no sense.

The last thing I want to raise is P3s, which we’re using all the time. I wish my good friend from—I can’t say that. Anyway, Peterborough built a publicly funded, publicly delivered hospital. It cost $340 million, with approximately just over 400 rooms. The St. Catharines hospital, which was a P3 hospital, took 11 years to build, and the cost of it was $1.1 billion, with almost the exact same rooms. So if you want to build infrastructure and hospitals in the province of Ontario, build them with public funds so that you’re saving money. Can you imagine what we could have done with $700 million when my community needed MRIs, when we had 300 days of wait time to get an MRI?

Thank you very much. I went as quickly as I could to get everything in. Thank you. I appreciate it.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate.

Mr. Lorne Coe: I’m pleased to have the opportunity to speak in support of MPP Khanjin’s motion. What’s clear, Speaker, is that we’re strengthening our health care system by building thousands of acute care and critical care beds through historic investments in Ontario hospitals, including major hospital projects in Uxbridge, Windsor, Ottawa, Chatham-Kent, Brampton, Scarborough and Bracebridge.

Ontario is accelerating its efforts to expand hospital capacity and build up the province’s health care workforce to help patients access the health care they need, when they need it. That’s why Ontario is investing $230 million in 2022-23 to enhance health care capacity, deploying over 3,300 and hiring more than 1,700 additional health care students in hospitals.

Ontario is also investing $49 million over three years to develop new programs to train, recruit and retain critical care workers. We’re investing $77.5 million into our health care system this year alone.

Facts matter, Speaker. Health care funding has increased at 6.2%, year over year, the largest increase on record, including an over $5-billion increase in base funding—an 8.9% increase, which is absolutely unprecedented.

We have a plan which has a five-point strategy to further bolster Ontario’s health care workforce, expand innovative models of care—and there’s many, many examples—and ensure hospital beds are there for patients, when they need them, where they need them. Speaker, the plan outlines what Ontarians can expect, which we think is better health care, as we build a better health care system.

In the region of Durham, where I represent Whitby, there’s many examples where our health care has been strengthened. Lakeridge Health is an example of where care is provided to many, many sectors. Once again, this government is getting it done. We’re getting it done in collaboration with our partners across the region of Durham and other parts of Ontario. We hope the opposition will stand up and support our efforts at building health care and making it better in the province of Ontario.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Ms. Doly Begum: I rise to speak to this motion—and I want to thank the member for bringing it in—for hospital expansion across Ontario. I’m proud to support anything that allows for that in our community.

1800

I’m in Scarborough Southwest. I represent a riding where going to either of the three hospitals in Scarborough or going to the one in East York—it’s a pretty far distance. All of them need a lot of support, especially with staffing and infrastructure. So anything that allows for us to expand and continue to build and provide the support that we need is something that we should be able to support. This is one thing that official opposition does, which is, when you bring in good legislation, we do support that. When you bring in bad legislation, we don’t.

One of the things I do want to point out, though, is that when we talk about the way hospitals should be funded and infrastructure—I just talked about Scarborough Southwest. In Scarborough, we have some of the oldest hospitals in the province—the oldest. If you to go the ICU, if you actually go to a room where people are supposed to get mental health support, for example—I had a chance to visit the hospitals. If you go to whether it’s the general hospital, the Birchmount location or Centenary, you’ll see the conditions of it. They need the support, they need the funding to continue to build and to be able to provide the care that they should be able to. They have some of the best doctors, the best nurses, the best health care workers—because there are other workers, including radiologists. I could go on with the list of it. There are so many others who make up the whole system.

For that, we need to be able to provide that funding. But unfortunately, even just recently we saw a lot of private funding coming in because we are strapped so thin. We are so desperate in Scarborough, for example—and I know in many other parts of the province—for that funding, because we have had years and years of successive governments that forgot these areas where our hospitals needed funding.

And while I say this, I would be remiss if I did not also talk about the importance of staffing. While it’s great to have the buildings, the structure, Speaker, we have to have the staffing. We have to make sure that there are the people, the humans who take care of the patients.

I often visit these hospitals to see what’s going on. I go to their local fundraisers. I go to visit some of the locations, especially when they’re doing some infrastructure building. They have a new diagnostic centre in one of the Scarborough centres.

Just recently I was there with my husband, who was in the hospital for about a week. We were actually just across the street from the Legislature—and I just want to take a moment to say thank you to the staff: to the doctors, to the nurses, to admin staff—to all the staff, to every single person at the hospital who took care of him. They were amazing. A shout-out to Carisa, Renee, to all of you who are out there doing the work every single day to take care of patients. He had an over-105-degree fever. We were very scared. The care he received, that’s what this province is about. That’s what this country is about. We have to make sure that we reward these people. We have to make sure that they’re paid well. We have to make sure we respect them. We have to make sure that they have good working conditions. Which is why we need to go much, much further in terms of helping them, whether it’s funding for the infrastructure or funding for the staffing.

So I want to thank the member for bringing this bill forward. We will be supporting it. And I hope that the government will do better to support workers in our hospitals and health care workers across the board—to do better for all those who are suffering across this province.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Mr. Graham McGregor: Madam Speaker, I am honoured to stand here today on behalf of the good people of Brampton North. Quite frankly, we are people that are sick of being forgotten. For far too long, as the city grew exponentially, our health care infrastructure simply did not keep up. That is why the people of Ontario, the people of Brampton, made a clear decision to support the party that was going to build Ontario and ensure our infrastructure kept up with our growing population.

The hospital I was born at, Peel Memorial, was closed under the previous Liberal government. At the time, it was under the guise of bringing in a new hospital, so that the one hospital we have, the Brampton Civic Hospital—where we have incredible health care staff that are fighting every single day to keep our residents healthy and to help our ailing residents. But at the time, it was always presented as: “We’re going to build Brampton Civic as a new hospital; you’re going to get a second one.” And we kind of got the bait and switch when they shut down Peel Memorial and, quite frankly, turned their backs on my neighbours, my family and the residents of the city of Brampton.

My grandfather had a saying: “The figures never lie, but the liars figure.” When I think about what that did to our city, to literally the biggest shining example of hallway health care, it was a disgraceful decision by prior governments. But it’s one that I’m happy this government is setting right by bringing Peel Memorial back as a full-fledged second hospital for the residents of Brampton. It’s our government that’s committing to deliver the improved Peel Memorial, which will be a second full-service hospital, with a 24-hour emergency department.

Madam Speaker, for over a decade now, the hard-working health care staff at the Brampton Civic Hospital have been serving one of the largest cities not only in our province, but the ninth-largest city in our country. It has been an absolute pillar in the community. But it’s up to us as politicians, as public servants to make sure that we’re planning not just for yesterday’s problem, but that we’re planning for future problems, that we’re setting up future generations for success. The lack of sound decision-making in the 15 years of Liberal inaction is exactly why our government was elected once again with a strong mandate to build up our infrastructure now.

We’re working so that people can have homes to live in, we’re working so that people can have roads to get them to where they need to be and we’re working to make sure that there’s a health care system that will always put the residents of Ontario first. That’s what we’ll do under the leadership of our Premier, and this is why I strongly support the motion introduced by my colleague from Barrie–Innisfil. It’s absolutely crucial to build and expand health care services across the province to make one that is stronger and more resilient.

Just last week, the Minister of Health and the parliamentary assistant for health announced that to stabilize our health system, Ontario’s nursing college will now allow internationally educated nurses to practise while completing their registration. Speaker, this would mean thousands more nurses to support our health care system, while giving those that are ready to support an opportunity to do so. This is just one change introduced by our government that could potentially help nearly 6,000 active international applicants in Ontario.

Brampton is home to one of the most diverse communities of talented individuals—dare I say, all over the world. These are people with previous accreditation in sectors where they’re trained. They’re ready to serve; we need to give them the opportunity to do so. We’re proudly making that happen.

I’ll wrap up my time by also highlighting another thing that we’re doing in our city, where we’re getting a historic medical school, for the first time in almost 100 years in the GTA. We’re going to have a medical school with TMU right here in the city of Brampton. It’s been decades since we’ve seen it; it’s our government that’s giving Brampton students the opportunity to become Brampton medical students and eventually Brampton doctors.

So I’ll be vetting for my colleague’s motion. I encourage all members of the House to do the same. Let’s work together. Let’s deliver better health care for the whole province.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Mr. Tom Rakocevic: I’m always proud to rise and speak in support of health care in this province.

In fact, the issue of health care is something near and dear to my family. My father was very ill growing up, and he passed when I was younger. My family always asks ourselves: Where would we be without a strong system of public health care? How could we have continued on?

We are debating today a motion, and motions generally come at a very high level. They tend to focus on aspirational goals, not so much the details but at the highest level. I appreciate the member bringing this forward, and I trust that she has the best intentions in mind. But I do want to mention a little bit, in the brief time that I have, the challenges that I think we see before us.

It talks about continuing to build and expand hospitals across the province, increasing health care and other things, and it talks about building a stronger and more resilient health care system. But what it’s missing is the word “public.”

1810

I think a cynic could look at the system here in Ontario and say that, to some degree, it is a system of health care that is planned obsolescence, because what, in fact, are we continuing? It is an erosion of public service, especially in the case of health care. We see large P3 partnerships. We see an underfunding of health care, which has resulted in the firing of thousands of nurses and other health care professionals, the closure of sites and many other things that bring us to this day. That is a big concern. It is something that has happened year after year. In fact, Ontario sees the lowest per capita investments in health care across this entire country. That is not something that we should be proud of, and that is something that really needs to be addressed.

We talk about it at the highest levels, but what we are doing is constantly opening doors to privatization and taking health care out of hospitals and putting it elsewhere. There is no language in the motion about timelines. We could propose hospitals, but if residents are waiting for decades to see hospitals opening in their areas, what are they waiting for? We talk about privatization and P3 hospitals; studies have shown that they cost more. We’re not saving taxpayers money.

If we are not investing in our health care workers and respecting them—and we all say that they’re heroes, but if we’re not paying them wages to retain nurses and other health care professionals who take care of us and our loved ones, we are losing them. They are being burnt out and we are losing them in this important field.

There is no articulated plan to deal with this emergency crisis in health care. When this government first sat, day after day we brought in emergency motions asking for unanimous consent to recognize this crisis. We’ve called for $1 billion to be brought in to end the backlog in surgeries. There are people who are waiting on life and death for surgeries right now.

So while I appreciate this and I do definitely support it, I hope—should this motion pass and go to committee—that work is done to provide timelines, but ultimately to address the fact that it does not strengthen public health care. All it does is speak in vague language that opens the door to what I believe is the planned obsolescence of public health care in this province.

Public health care is a jewel, and each and every one of us has an imperative to defend it every day here.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further debate?

Mr. Brian Saunderson: It is a privilege to rise in this chamber to speak in favour of my colleague from Barrie–Innisfil’s motion today. This government is committed to investing $22 billion over the next 10 years for hospital capital projects to build new health care facilities across the province, to create new hospital beds, to expand emergency rooms, to create new surgical facilities. This is all part of an ambitious, proactive and unprecedented plan to build a stronger, more resilient health care system, provide access to state-of-the-art health care facilities for Ontarians and end hallway medicine.

Under the previous Liberal government, the province’s health care facilities had 15 years of neglect, 15 years of inaction and 15 years of saying no to funding new hospital builds, hospital expansions and health care capital investments. The Liberals said no to a new hospital and expansion project in Peel, no to supporting the ongoing planning of a new regional hospital in Windsor-Essex, no to building a new children’s treatment centre in Ottawa, no to building a new children’s treatment centre in Chatham-Kent and no to the redevelopment of older community hospitals in Bowmanville, Markdale, Collingwood and Alliston. I will focus my comments on the latter two community hospitals, as both are located in my riding of Simcoe–Grey. Each of these two hospitals is an integral and essential part of the health care infrastructure and fabric serving my constituents and the many tourists and visitors to the region.

The Stevenson Memorial Hospital in Alliston serves the residents of New Tecumseth, Adjala-Tosorontio, the township of Essa and others. The hospital board and senior staff, under the capable guidance of their CEO, Jody Levac, have been working tirelessly on the five-stage redevelopment process for a number of years. They received stage 2 approval and a $6-million planning grant from this government in March of this year. The stage 3 design process will culminate in Infrastructure Ontario issuing a RFP for the construction of the expansion, which will double the total square footage of the hospital, increase the number of in-patient beds from 38 to 47, and expand the emergency department’s footprint to three times its current size, with a separate entrance. The hospital foundation has already raised over $26 million of the local share for this much-needed expansion.

The Collingwood General and Marine Hospital is a regional facility and is working towards a new hospital to serve the residents of south Georgian Bay. In August 2021, the hospital received stage 1 approval and a substantial planning grant of over $15 million from this government. The hospital board and senior staff, under the leadership of former CEO Norah Holder and current CEO Mike Lacroix, are working diligently on the stage 2 application and plan to submit that application in the first quarter of 2023. The new hospital will increase the number of beds from 74 to 140, will provide new surgical facilities and access to state-of-the-art health care facilities for the residents of south Georgian Bay.

Speaker, the town of New Tecumseth and the town of Collingwood are both identified as growth nodes under A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the provincial planning policies. These municipalities are among the fastest growing in Ontario and they can expect their populations to grow by as much as 40% in the next 30 years.

This government is committed to ensuring that the communities in Simcoe–Grey, and communities like those across this great province, have access to state-of-the-art health care facilities to serve Ontarians where they live, work and play. That is why I will be supporting this motion and I will be asking all the members of this House to do the same.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Back to the member from Barrie–Innisfil for her two-minute reply.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I think it’s clear, and it shows today, that this government has a clear vision for building up our hospitals and building onto future successes. Much of the work that we’re doing in the Legislature today as parliamentarians, we will see the fruits of that labour in the future, and hospital infrastructure is one of them—historic money going into hospital infrastructure; historic money going into training those professionals and building up our health care capacity. Why, Speaker? Because we’re saying yes to investments in hospital health care; we’re saying yes to investments in our public health care system to keep health care universal; we’re saying yes to building hospitals in Uxbridge, Niagara, Windsor, Ottawa, Scarborough, Bracebridge and, of course, in my riding of Barrie–Innisfil.

When it comes to improving our health care system, solving health care, it is our government that has that bold vision. We hit the ground running, and as I heard from the members of the opposition, the construction sector can’t keep up with the pace of this government’s approvals of these new hospitals. But that’s why we have a bold vision. We’re getting it done, and we’re also investing in building up the skilled trades workforce that we’re going to need to get the shovels in the ground, that we’re going to need to build these wings of these hospitals, so that all of us can look back on our time as legislators and say, “We got it done. We have the state-of-the-art hospitals, providing a state-of-the-art public health care system. We have workers in there that we’ve invested in to work in these health care facilities.”

Thank you to everyone for their comments, and I’m proud to stand with a government that is getting it done for the health care system, making investments today to make a better tomorrow.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): The time provided for private members’ public business has expired.

Ms. Khanjin has moved private member’s notice of motion number 8.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour of the motion will please say “aye.”

All those opposed to the motion will please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

A recorded vote being required, it will be deferred until the next instance of deferred votes.

Vote deferred.

Royal assent / Sanction royale

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I beg to inform the House that in the name of His Majesty the King, the Administrator has been pleased to assent to a certain bill in Her Honour’s office.

The Deputy Clerk (Mr. Trevor Day): The following is the title of the bill to which His Honour did assent:

An Act to resolve labour disputes involving school board employees represented by the Canadian Union of Public Employees / Loi visant à résoudre les conflits de travail concernant les employés des conseils scolaires représentés par le Syndicat canadien de la fonction publique.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): All matters for the day being completed, this House stands adjourned until 10:15 a.m. on Monday, November 14.

The House adjourned at 1820.