October 29, 2026

Report continued from volume A.

1746

Private Members’ Public Business

Highway safety

Mr. Stéphane Sarrazin: I move that, in the opinion of this House, the government of Ontario should review and analyze appropriate deterrence measures, including increased fines and penalties under the Highway Traffic Act, to address motorists who access and drive on fully closed highways during emergency situations.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Pursuant to standing order 100, the member has 12 minutes for his presentation.

Mr. Stéphane Sarrazin: I’m honoured to be here today to speak to motion 79, my private member’s motion, enhancing enforcement for closed highway access during emergencies.

I just want to begin by thanking many of the first responders from my riding. I really had a chance to talk to them, and they brought forward their concerns about safety while responding to emergencies on Ontario’s 400-series highways. In my region, this specifically refers to Highway 417, which stretches from the Quebec border to the city of Ottawa. My riding is actually the most eastern part of Ontario, and as one of my predecessors, the Honourable Jean-Marc Lalonde, would say, that’s where the sun rises in Ontario.

I had the opportunity to discuss this issue with OPP officers from two detachments in my riding—we actually have one detachment in Hawkesbury and one detachment in Russell. I also had an opportunity to talk about this specific issue with three municipal fire departments, the county paramedic services and the Ontario Provincial Police Association. They surely underscored the operational realities first responders face during highway closures, and they reinforced the need for stronger prevention measures and improved tools to ensure compliance.

This motion seeks to strengthen enforcement and deterrence measures under the Highway Traffic Act in relation to motorists who unlawfully access and operate vehicles on highways that have been fully closed due to emergency situations. The intent is to support public safety, protect emergency responders and ensure compliance with highway closure orders during critical incidents.

There have been numerous reported safety incidents involving motorists bypassing highway or road closure gates, barricades and warning signs across Canada and the US. These incidents have endangered first responders, road crews, stranded motorists and the drivers themselves. Authorities consistently warn that highway closures are implemented because conditions ahead are unsafe. They could include collisions, flooding, snowstorms, downed power lines or any active investigations.

1750

I want to share a story of an incident that occurred on December 24, 2022. It was during a severe snowstorm. The Ontario Provincial Police had closed Highway 417 in my riding, the riding of Glengarry–Prescott–Russell, because there was zero visibility. There were heavy snowfalls and extremely hazardous driving conditions. And, of course, as conditions got worse, the highway was fully shut down, and collisions were reported throughout the region.

So the emergency responders were deployed to assist with multiple crashes and to manage stranded and abandoned vehicles along the corridor. And despite the official closure, some motorists reportedly opened barricades or opened the gates and entered the highway anyway. I did a little bit of research, and across Canada, police charged multiple drivers after they bypassed barricades and entered fatal collision scenes, and in one case, motorists reportedly moved pylons aside to continue driving through a closed highway.

We can all surely understand that. We have probably seen a lot of people that would do such a thing. And I have to say that, in some US states’ departments of transportation, they reported increasing incidents of vehicles crashing directly through highway closure gates. Since 2020, at least 23 vehicles struck some gates, and I guess it cost around $180,000 of repair.

So officials said that some drivers ignored the warning system and attempted to continue at highway speeds despite closures. The Ontario Provincial Police have repeatedly warned that driving on closed highways during winter storms can leave motorists stranded and delay emergency response operations. Officers noted that closures are often enacted because tow trucks and rescue services cannot safely operate in those conditions. Officials and safety organizations identified several recurring hazards caused by bypassing closure gates, like entering areas with black ice, flooding, debris or snow drifts; interfering with emergency investigations, striking workers or emergency personnel; becoming trapped where rescue access is limited; and causing secondary crashes in areas not designed for active traffic.

Online discussions from road workers and drivers further describe motorists physically moving barriers, weaving through construction zones or making illegal U-turns to avoid closures, creating near-miss situations and unsafe traffic conflicts. A driver who opens an emergency closure gate and enters a highway that has been shut down because of an accident can create serious and potentially life-threatening consequences, including interfering with emergency operations; obstructing police, firefighters, paramedics, tow operators and road maintenance crews that are actually working on the scene; and increasing the risk of additional collisions, particularly when the visibility is poor and you can’t even see in front of you, and then you see the accident and, next thing, you’re actually part of the accident.

So this is really a concern for the first responders. I have to say that in Ontario, driving past these emergency closure gates or entering a highway that has been officially closed can result in a charge under the Highway Traffic Act for driving on a closed highway. Here’s the thing: The commonly issued set fine is approximately $85, but after victim surcharges and court costs, the total payable amount is typically around $110. So I guess we would all see why people wouldn’t hesitate to open a gate, thinking that the worst thing that can happen to them is actually paying $110—and in some cases, they could lose three demerit points. I surely believe that a stronger penalty is necessary and would serve as a meaningful warning, causing motorists to think twice before opening emergency closure gates and entering a closed highway. We’re not suggesting any amount; we’ll leave that to MTO to figure out. But what we’ve seen, in some cases—in other provinces in Canada, we’ve seen as high as $1,000 for a first offence, $2,000 for a second offence, and it goes on.

Far too many times, we have seen vehicles ignore these barricades. And I have to say that hearing about the story that went on, like I was saying earlier—what happened on December 24, when you couldn’t see before you and you could probably get into an accident. I think it’s worth looking at changing the way we give fines in Ontario.

The amendments would bring Ontario in line with other provinces, like British Columbia, Manitoba and Saskatchewan; they all have higher fines.

Provincial governments have the primary responsibility to protect the lives of our motorists and our first responders.

I’ve been talking to some of these first responders, and they told me different stories about what went on on the—I wouldn’t be able to talk for all the 400-series highways in Ontario, but I’m talking about that stretch of 417 from the Quebec border to Ottawa.

Speaker, we have the full ability as a province to act on this right now, and I’d ask every member here in the Legislature if they can vote for this change. I think it would make sure that our first responders—it’s safer for them while they do their work.

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

Mr. John Vanthof: It’s always an honour to be able to speak in the House. This is the first time I’ve risen since we’ve been back. It’s great to be back.

I’d like to thank the member from Glengarry–Prescott–Russell for bringing this important issue forward.

And I’d just like to say, on behalf of the official opposition, we fully support—there wasn’t one thing in your comments that I disagreed with. When a highway is closed, people who go past the barricades endanger not only themselves, but certainly endanger first responders, the people who are trying to save other people’s lives. I 100% agree, and it’s not often that the House—I can’t speak for everyone, but it’s not often that we agree with the government. I hope that the government proceeds as quickly as possible to consider this. It’s a common-sense thing.

The member from Glengarry–Prescott–Russell spoke specifically to the 400-series highways. Perhaps we should look farther and actually take the time to make—because we all want the highways to be safer, but I would be remiss if I didn’t also talk about the things that close highways.

The member from Glengarry–Prescott–Russell did a very good job of talking about the issues in his area on routes that are crucial to the people of this province.

I’m going to take a few minutes and talk about another route that is crucial to the people of this province, and that is Highway 11, the Trans-Canada Highway.

1800

I think we can all agree that closures are dangerous. Closures hurt not only people but hurt the economy. We can all agree on that.

I’d like to thank the people from Northern Road Watch, who track 511.

Since February 14 of this year, on the stretch of highway from North Bay to Kapuskasing—that’s the Trans-Canada Highway. There are thousands of trucks that go through that stretch every day, and what makes that stretch even more dangerous for us—it’s not only the Trans-Canada Highway; it’s our main street. The vast majority of us can’t go to a school, can’t go to a hospital, can’t visit our parents, can’t go anywhere unless we’re on Highway 11—and part of Highway 17, but I’m going to concentrate on the stretch that goes through my riding. From February 14, there were 29 full closures, 24 partial closures, and 16 closures that were longer than four hours, and the longest one was 22 and a half hours. There are no detours, so if you go to pick up the kids and the highway is closed, you can be waiting four hours, 10 hours, 16 hours. And it’s often—it’s not all, but it’s often commercial vehicles, it’s often poorly trained commercial vehicle drivers. I’m going to give credit where credit is due: The government has made some changes on training. But there are a lot of problems happening out there. In those closures and those accidents, eight people were killed. They didn’t die; they were killed. There’s a difference. We know that it’s a very dangerous stretch of highway.

The MTO keeps what’s called crash rating indexes of every stretch of provincial road in this province. When a stretch of road continues to have a very high crash rating index, they look around and see how to fix it so that stops. That’s a good program. That’s how you make the roads better.

Do you know where the highest crash rating index is in the province? On that stretch of road in my riding, year after year after year after year. And do you know what has been done to fix it? Zippo.

So I fully support what you’re trying to do, because you’re trying to protect the people in your riding. It’s also my job to protect the people in our part of the world.

There is a lot to be desired about what’s being done in northern Ontario on the Trans-Canada Highway by this government, by the last government, and especially now, because our friends to the south aren’t always our friends, so we need a stretch of highway that we can cross the country with.

I’ll give everyone credit, because when the NDP put forward a motion to make Highway 11/17 a national priority, it was voted on unanimously; everyone agreed. I give everyone credit for that. But we need to keep focusing—and we’re going to keep pushing, just like you’re going to keep pushing. And I hope that you will help us continue to keep pushing, because it keeps happening. Last Saturday, the highway was closed; someone paid with their life. Last Saturday, it wasn’t weather. It was beautiful weather last Saturday. So you have people who are afraid of those highways, and rightfully so—painfully, painfully so. And we all know it.

I didn’t get a chance to speak to Bill 140, but four-laning Highway 69 needs to be done. It’s incredibly sad that the government is putting that as a positive pill in a poisoned bill. Like, that’s part of the problem.

We hear that we should have come back sooner. Bill 140 should have been 10 bills, because there’s a lot of really important stuff in that bill—some of it we totally disagree with it and some of it we really should work together to get it faster. Highways are one that shouldn’t be partisan at all, because none of us want to lose family members.

We talk a lot about poorly trained truck drivers, but they have families too and their families want them home too. It’s up to the government to regulate truck driving schools. It’s up to the government. The government hasn’t done a great job of regulating a few things, right? That’s why we’ve got this big OSAP problem right now. But we need to look at all factors.

The bill, through your motion, is a great step. I fully support it. Anything that I can do, that we can do, to expedite looking at that, we will. But we are not going to stop advocating for northern highways until it’s as safe to drive on a northern highway as on a highway anywhere else in this province.

If your car is registered in the district of Timiskaming—and many of you have been to my area; New Liskeard, Temiskaming Shores. It’s a beautiful area. If it’s registered in the district of Timiskaming and your car is in an accident, you’re four times as likely to be fatal than anywhere else in the province. Now, there are more accidents, probably, on the 401. There are a lot more cars on the 401; I get that. But there are not too many fender-benders in Timiskaming. Why is that? And it’s not just anecdotal; it’s not just Facebook myths, because anyone who has been on a highway in northern Ontario has had one of those “but by the grace of God, there go I.” And sadly, there are so many people who have had the “by the grace of God, I hope my family member is in heaven.”

We need to keep working on this. Once again, in closing, I commend the member for bringing forward something that’s important in his riding, for actually putting a motion forward to try and push his own government. I really commend you for that. You did the work; you talked to the people. I commend you for that. We’ll do everything we can to help you, but please, do everything you can to get the Premier and the Minister of Transportation to not put highway bills in other bills and stand there and “Why aren’t you voting for Highway 69?” when you know there’s all kinds of other stuff in there that should have a long discussion. That’s not forgivable.

That’s not you. It’s politics, I get it. But when people say, “We can do this all in 22 days”—that’s the problem. We should have been here a month, and we could have really talked about landfills. We wouldn’t have had it all mushed in like this and with trick questions, because that’s below both of us.

So, I’m happy to work on this with you. Hopefully, you will work with all of us together and solve the problems that we should be working on together.

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

1810

MPP Andrea Hazell: Madam Speaker, I rise for the second time in this House today on behalf of my beautiful constituents of Scarborough–Guildwood and as the critic for transportation to speak to motion 79. I want to thank the member for Glengarry–Prescott–Russell for bringing this important motion forward.

A highway barricade may be the only thing separating a first responder from an oncoming vehicle. Behind those barricades, first responders are often working in the most difficult circumstances imaginable: a paramedic may be treating a critically injured victim, a firefighter may be extracting someone from a wrecked vehicle, an officer may be trying to secure a scene before another tragedy occurs. In that moment, first responders shouldn’t have to worry about a driver choosing to ignore the closure and put more lives at risk.

Let me make this clear: I will support tougher consequences for drivers who deliberately disregard emergency highway closures. When a road is closed, it is because someone is responding to a crisis, clearing a hazard or protecting lives. The safety of first responders, road crews and tow operators must never be compromised, and respecting a highway closure is not a choice for drivers; it is a responsibility that every driver must take seriously. A highway safety policy must change behaviour, hold drivers accountable when they put others at risk and prevent avoidable deaths on our roads—our highways.

In my riding of Scarborough–Guildwood, highway safety is part of everyday life. Highway 401 connects our residents to jobs across the region, supports local businesses, connects our families to communities across Ontario and, more than ever, we need to make sure that Highway 401 is safe. At major exits along Highway 401, including Neilson Road, Morningside Avenue and Kennedy Road in Scarborough, we have seen the dangers—many dangers—that arise when collisions, constructions and emergency situations disrupt traffic. When barricades are put in place, they are there for a reason: to protect drivers, emergency responders and road crews working in very, very dangerous conditions, especially when we have horrible weather conditions.

It only takes one driver ignoring a barricade to turn an already dangerous situation into another tragedy. That is why respecting highway closures is not just about following the highway safety measures; it is about protecting the lives of everyone who shares our roads.

Speaker, on March 16, 2026, in approximately one hour and 45 minutes—listen to this—the OPP charged 19 drivers for travelling on closed sections of a highway. That should concern every member of this House. If you think that this is not a problem, it is an issue. It is a big problem. These are not drivers who miss a sign; these drivers encountered a closure and decided to just drive through it. When this happens 19 times in less than two hours, we must ask ourselves whether the existing penalties are enough to deter the dangerous behaviour.

The current penalty for driving on a closed highway is $110 and three demerit points. The real question is whether these consequences are enough to prevent drivers from putting our lives in danger.

Drivers who repeatedly disregard highway closures must face tough consequences that reflect the seriousness of their action. I want to make this clear again: Penalties must send a clear message, enforcement must be consistent and every driver must understand that ignoring a highway closure has serious consequences.

I am happy to add this to my debate speech: In 2023, the Northern Ontario Transportation Task Force called for better real-time road information and expanded electronic signage to give drivers advance warning of highway closures and enough time to respond safely. We cannot expect drivers to make informed decisions without timely and accurate information. Highway safety must begin long before a driver reaches a barricade.

On March 8, 2026, the Federation of Northern Ontario Municipalities raised serious concerns about the lack of progress on critical safety improvements along Highways 11, 17 and 69, including recommendations that had already been presented to this government years earlier.

Speaker, how many more collisions will this government allow to happen on Highways 11, 17 and 69? How many more families must lose a loved one before these long-standing safety concerns are properly addressed?

As the critic for transportation, I have a responsibility to advocate for the safety of every Ontarian who depends on our highways. Whether it is a worker commuting along Highway 401 or a family travelling on Highways 11, 17 and 69 to access health care, employment and essential services, every Ontarian deserves safe, properly maintained and reliable roads. Highway safety must never depend on postal codes. A family in northern Ontario deserves the same commitment to road safety as a family living in Toronto.

This government must also take responsibility for the conditions of our highways, the adequacy of safety infrastructure, and the implementation of recommendations that have been sitting before it for so many years. Saving lives requires more than reviewing penalties; it requires action, investment and accountability from this government, who is responsible for keeping our highways safe and making sure our families get to their homes safely and can sit at their dinner tables and eat a meal with their families.

Motion 79 calls for a review of deterrence measures, including increased fines and penalties for drivers who disregard highway closures. If this government is serious about saving lives, it must go beyond simply increasing fines; it must examine why drivers continue to disregard highway closures, whether existing penalties are doing enough to deter dangerous behaviour, and what concrete actions are needed to prevent more deaths on our roads.

Speaker, I will support motion 79. I support an in-depth review of deterrence measures, evidence-based solutions, and stronger penalties where they are justified. Let me be clear: Higher fines alone will not change the behaviour of these drivers going through highway barricades that are set up to save our lives. We need effective enforcement, properly maintained infrastructure, timely communication, and a government that takes responsibility for delivering real improvements to road safety, especially in the north.

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

Mr. Ric Bresee: Speaker, I rise today to speak in wholehearted support of motion 79. My honourable colleague from Glengarry–Prescott–Russell has hit the nail on the head with this one. It addresses a problem that has plagued our rural routes and major arteries for far too long. To put it plainly, this motion is trying to solve a bizarre behavioural mystery currently sweeping across Ontario: a sudden, temporary stupidity that strikes drivers at the exact moment that they see a giant, flashing, orange “road closed” sign.

Speaker, I spend a lot of time driving around my riding, driving around Hastings county and Lennox and Addington county. If you’ve ever driven up Highway 41 through Roblin and up to Denbigh, or taken Highway 7 across Marmora, Madoc, Tweed, then you know these are absolutely beautiful drives.

1820

But you also know that when a severe winter squall hits eastern Ontario or a major collision locks down the 401 near Napanee, then things get serious very quickly. When whiteouts hit or when a tractor-trailer jackknifes across the lanes, the Ontario Provincial Police, our local volunteer firefighters and our MTO snowplow operators have to make a tough call. They have to choose to close the road. They close the gates on the ramps to the 401, they put up barricades, they deploy bright orange cones, and they make it as obvious as humanly possible that the road ahead is temporarily a danger zone.

And yet, Speaker, there’s always that one guy. You know who I’m talking about. They’re sitting in that all-wheel-drive SUV, and they look at that police barricade, they look at the flashing lights, and they think to themselves, “Bah, that sign is just a polite suggestion for everyone else. Me, I have winter tires and all-wheel drive. I have driving skills. I can handle it.” And they steer right around the gate or the pylons; they sneak onto a fully closed highway.

What happens next, Speaker, is completely predictable: 10 minutes later, our brave first responders—in my area, from Belleville, Tyendinaga, Greater Napanee or Loyalist township—who are already out there trying to manage a critical emergency scene, possibly already freezing, exhausted—they get that radio call. They have to dispatch another rescue team to go dig out that exact same numbskull out of a snowbank, three kilometres down the road because that invincible SUV turned out to be quite vincible after all.

Speaker, this isn’t just a funny anecdote; it’s also a massive drain on and added risk to our emergency services. Just like the mover spoke of: When a motorist behaves with that level of entitlement, they aren’t just taking a personal risk. They are actively stealing scarce emergency resources away from the original crisis. An ambulance or an OPP cruiser that should be handling a major accident on the 401 is now stuck babysitting a driver who thought they were smarter than the Ministry of Transportation. Worse yet, it puts our first responders and tow truck operators at an even higher risk of being struck on a dark, icy highway.

Right now, the penalty under the Highway Traffic Act for driving on a closed road is a relatively minor fine. And frankly, unfortunately, it’s treated by some as a premium toll fee to bypass traffic. If you’re running late, some drivers might view a small fine as a gamble worth taking. Speaker, that needs to change. The penalty needs to match the sheer recklessness of the action.

Motion 79 calls for this government to review and implement real, heavy-hitting deterrence measures. We need fines that make the driver’s jaw drop. We need demerit point penalties that make them seriously consider taking a nap at the local truck stop instead of risking their licence. We need a clear message sent from this Legislature: If you choose to bypass an official emergency barrier in Ontario, it’s going to cost you dearly.

This isn’t about penalizing people who get turned around or lost on a back road in Tyendinaga township. This is about targeting willful, stubborn defiance of our public safety orders.

Our first responders in Hastings–Lennox and Addington and all across the province put their lives on the line every single day to keep us safe. The very least we can do in this House is to ensure that when they decide to close a highway to do their jobs, the law actually backs them up. Let’s make “road closed” mean closed.

Speaker, I urge all members of this House to vote in favour of motion 79.

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

Mr. Dave Smith: I appreciate that—$110 is what the fine is. But it’s really not $110; it’s $85 and then you add on court fees and the victim surcharge to bring it up to $110. So I took a look to see when this was actually set and it looks like it was back in 2000 that the $85 fine was set. There was a change made to it when they put the victim surcharge on, but effectively, there hasn’t been a change in the cost on this. And $85 today, if I back that up to 2000, is less than 50 bucks.

The whole reason that you put fines in—it’s not really for a punishment; it’s for a deterrent. And when we look at that in today’s dollars, 50 bucks, that’s not a deterrent. That’s not changing someone’s behaviour. I don’t like the idea of charging someone more money simply to charge them more money. But when we look at this—somebody who is doing something that selfish, who thinks, “My snow tires are good. My four-wheel drive is good. I’m a great driver. I can get around this. I don’t care that the road is closed because of snow or poor visibility or anything like that. My time is more important. I can do this and the fine is basically nothing anyway, so why do I care?” We need to change that mindset, and the only way that you change that mindset is making the consequence a lot more severe.

I applaud the member for coming forward and saying, “We need to be taking a look at this.” We need to actually use this as a deterrent. We need to find a way to change that behaviour.

I can’t tell you the number of times I have heard from my own OPP on these types of things. I meet with my police chiefs, both my OPP and the city of Peterborough police, every month, and we go through a number of different things. Over the past eight and a half years, the number of times they’ve brought up, especially the OPP, foolish accidents that were avoidable—and it’s because we don’t have some of those deterrents.

I’ve got Highway 7 where—lots of times in the winter, Highway 7 between Peterborough and Havelock gets closed for different reasons because of snow. I’ve got Highway 28 that goes from my riding all the way up to the member from Hastings–Lennox and Addington; we share a section there as you get up to Bancroft. We have that closed a number of times throughout the course of the winter, and we always have people who drive on that because they think that it’s not a big deal, they’re safe and they know what they’re doing.

Effectively, having a fine that is the equivalent of 50 bucks in what it would have been worth in 2000, it doesn’t mean anything. We do need to be taking a look at this. We need to be changing some of that behaviour. We need to make sure that when those first responders have to go out, they’re going out because it wasn’t an accident caused by stupidity and laziness; it was an accident that was unavoidable.

These are avoidable types of accidents, so I applaud the member for coming forward with something like this so that we can take a look at it to prevent it, to make sure that this actually is a deterrent.

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

Mr. Joseph Racinsky: I am pleased to add my voice in support of this motion calling for enhancing enforcement for closed highway access during emergencies. A large portion of the 401 runs through my riding and the volunteer Puslinch fire service is the one that manages that portion of the highway, so it’s very important to my riding.

Speaker, when emergency officials make the decision to close a highway, it is never done lightly. These decisions are made because conditions have become too dangerous for travel. Whether it is a severe winter storm, flooding or major collision, a wildfire or another emergency, highway closures are put in place to protect lives.

Unfortunately, there are times when individuals choose to ignore those closures. They see a barrier, a gate or a road closed sign, and they believe that they can make it through, save some time or find a way around the danger. In doing so, they not only put themselves at risk, but also put first responders, road crews and other motorists in danger.

We have seen situations across Ontario where highways have been closed because conditions became simply too dangerous for travel. During these events, police officers, firefighters, paramedics, road crews and other first responders often work in extremely challenging conditions to assist stranded motorists, manage hazards and restore safe access to our transportation network. Yet there have been instances where motorists have chosen to ignore clearly posted closures, bypass barriers or enter restricted areas despite the risks.

If the current penalties for accessing a fully closed highway are not serving as an effective deterrent, then it is reasonable for us to examine whether those penalties remain appropriate. Laws and penalties should reflect the seriousness of the risks involved. This is not about punishing people for making an honest mistake. It is about addressing situations where individuals knowingly bypass closures and ignore clear warnings during emergencies. Along with reviewing fines, there may also be opportunities to improve public awareness, strengthen messaging and ensure closure signage is as visible and effective as possible.

Compliance is always the goal. We want people to understand the dangers and make the right choice before they put themselves and others at risk. At the end of the day, emergency responders deserve to know that, when they are called upon to protect our communities, they can do their job safely and effectively. Police officers, firefighters, paramedics, tow operators and road maintenance crews already face challenges during emergencies without having to contend with motorists deliberately ignoring road closures.

So I’m very happy to support this motion, and I thank the member from Glengarry–Prescott–Russell for putting it forward.

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

I return to the member for Glengarry–Prescott–Russell, who has two minutes to reply.

Mr. Stéphane Sarrazin: Well, thank you to everyone who spoke on this motion today. I believe we all recognize the importance of introducing this motion and making sure that our first responders can do their job in a safer manner.

I would, of course, like to once again thank the first responders from my riding. I’ve talked to many of the fire department, OPP officers. That’s something that we talked about a couple of years ago, and we wanted to reach out to every first responder, like paramedics, even the tow truck drivers.

We all watch these shows on TV, like Panic on Highway 401, and we realize that these highways can be really dangerous, especially in the wintertime. So what I wanted to say to all of you is: I’m hoping you will support this motion, and if you do, on behalf of all of the first responders in Ontario, I thank you for doing so. Thank you very much.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): The time provided for private members’ public business has expired.

Mr. Sarrazin has moved private members’ notice of motion number 79.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried. I declare the motion carried.

Motion agreed to.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): All matters relating to private members’ public business having been completed, this House stands adjourned until Monday, November 2, at 10:15.

The House adjourned at 1833.