Report continued from volume A.

1801

Private Members’ Public Business

Transportation infrastructure / Infrastructure des transports en commun

Mr. John Vanthof: I move that, in the opinion of this House, the government of Ontario should protect Canada’s drivers, east-west trade, national resilience, supply chain reliability and mining projects by working with the government of Canada to declare the expansion and modernization of Highways 11 and 17 a project of national significance.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Mr. Vanthof has moved private members’ notice of motion number 63. Pursuant to standing order 100, the member has 12 minutes for their presentation.

Mr. John Vanthof: I don’t think it’s going to come to a surprise to anyone in this House that Highways 11 and 17 are in a crisis. Northern members have brought it up so many times; had to say condolences so many times.

But where the impetus of this motion came from—if you will recall, Prime Minister Carney made a request of Premiers to come up with projects that would actually unite this country; help this country, especially in a time when we’re dealing with a very erratic neighbour to the south. And northerners thought: You know what? If there was ever a time to make Highways 11 and 17 a priority, it was then, because when Highways 11 and 17 are closed, if you can’t go south, the country—east-west, there is no connection. And it happens so many times.

When we were, as northerners, incredibly disappointed was when the Premier of this province named the tunnel under the 401 as his priority project. I have nothing against the people in Toronto, and I drive on the 401 too. It’s very busy. But where I come from in the district of Timiskaming, you are 10 times as likely to die on a highway in my district as on the 401—your probability of being in a fatal collision. So it is not the same.

And we are not the only ones saying—asking—for this. Over the years, many municipalities—the Northern Ontario Municipal Association, the Federation of Northern Ontario Municipalities and many other groups. We just met with the executive of the Ontario Good Roads Association, who also named Highways 11 and 17 one of their greatest issues.

But it seems, yesterday, the Minister of Transportation and the Minister of Northern Economic Development and Growth seem to have had a change of heart, because they wrote to the federal government. And today, the Premier supported that—great. I am sure that all the mayors across northern Ontario are going to support that very vehemently—great.

But at this point, a letter after nothing in the budget to identify the crisis—nothing—is cold comfort for people who feel they have to risk their lives every day on 11 and 17. One thing this motion doesn’t do is it doesn’t exempt the province from their provincial responsibility, and they have been extremely lacking—I don’t know how else to describe it—in their provincial responsibility to protect the people on that highway, to protect the people who live there, and actually to protect the people who drive across the country on that highway.

I’m sure that we are going to hear from the government—and it’s their job to put the best face forward—that no government has ever spent more, huge infrastructure spending. Our counter is that I challenge you to find people in northern Ontario who say that the highway is safer than eight years ago, because it isn’t, or that the highway is closed less now than eight years ago, because it’s closed much more.

I’ll give you a personal example. I drive down here every week. This week, the highway was supposed to be open. There was an accident around 10 o’clock in the morning, but 511 said one lane was open. But 511 wasn’t accurate, so I sat there for an hour and turned around, went home, and waited for two hours until I saw cars coming and then went south. And 511 still said one lane was open. The week before, I came down on Sunday, and I had to go over to Quebec because Highway 11 was closed.

We have people in our ridings who are considering moving away from northern Ontario because if you have to drive on a provincial highway to get groceries, there’s a good chance you might not make it back that day. This happens more and more and more, so whatever you’re doing now honestly isn’t working—it isn’t. Everyone who lives in the north knows it.

My colleagues and I did a tour across northern Ontario—drove to Manitoba and back—and I was not shocked by what I heard, but some of the responses were that people are actually getting more life insurance because of the risk of the highway, because they don’t want to leave their kids with nothing. That just can’t be, and it’s happening. And not only is it costing lives—as an example, Speaker, last Thursday, I stood in this House for a member’s statement to talk about the debate tonight. I announced that there was an accident on the highway, and I expressed hope that no one was hurt. Three people died in that accident—another three people.

To the government, they’re going to say again, “We’ve never spent more,” and the Premier, with his change of heart with his letter—but the Auditor General tells a different story. In 2022, the government took $158 million out of northern roads and redirected it to the south. We know that, not just anecdotally—because we have been promised so many improvements, and they just don’t materialize. Does the province repave highways when they really need it? Yes, but do they actually do the redesigns that are needed to accommodate the increased traffic? No. They talk about it.

In the last election, the Premier came to my riding and, as an election promise, he was going to extend the 2+1 from North Bay to Cochrane. The next day, we drove to where the 2+1 was supposed to be and put out a video saying, “Perhaps someone should have told the Premier it’s hard to extend something you haven’t started.”

To the government’s credit, they started cutting trees and they put up a huge sign, but that is not saving people’s lives. It’s not. The 2,000 trucks a day or the $125 million a day that goes through that highway—it’s not meeting the challenge for that.

Highway 11 from North Bay to Cochrane, from January to September of last year, cumulatively, was closed for 32 days. Actually, having done the northern tour, man, that’s one of the better parts of that highway, because if you go from Cochrane and go west, there were places this winter where if a truck broke down, they had no choice but to be in the live lane—no choice.

There’s other things the provincial government is responsible for: highway maintenance. No one can deny that highway maintenance is not the same as it was before, and it’s not the people on the plows because, Speaker, the people on the plows die on Highways 11 and 17 too. It’s not the people on the plows. That’s a provincial responsibility.

Licensing of drivers is a provincial responsibility. I have heard that we have the strongest driver-training program in the country and we have the strongest licensing program in the country, and yet there are commercial vehicle drivers on Highway 11 who are not in control of their vehicles, and everyone in northern Ontario knows it. Many of us have been pushed off the road by drivers with no respect and no knowledge of how to drive in northern Ontario. Again, that’s a provincial responsibility.

I hope the government supports this motion, and I hope they’re serious about actually working with the federal government. But we are not going to rest until the government is actually serious about doing the things that they’re responsible for, because they’re not doing them now.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Further debate?

MPP Andrea Hazell: I rise today to address motion 63. Let’s look at the expansion and modernization of Highways 11 and 17, a project of national significance in this motion.

Let’s take a look at ROMA. The Rural Ontario Municipal Association has been around for over 125 years—strong support for northern Ontario. They strongly support calls for the provincial government to accelerate the expansion and modernization of Highways 11 and 17 in northern Ontario. ROMA also advocates for these upgrades to improve safety, boost economic growth and increase supply chain reliability along these critical national trade corridors.

Speaker, ROMA is also supporting traditional four-laning, twinning and implementation of the 2+1 highway model, which is two lanes in one direction, one in the other, separated by a median to improve safety at a lower cost and reduce environmental impact. They also support the urgent need to address high collision rates on two-lane stretches, which often delay the transport of over $200 million in goods on a daily basis.

Speaker, in 2024, I tabled my second bill in this House, Bill 184, the Supporting Mobility, Affordability and Reliable Transportation in Ontario Act. The third section of that smart bill supports Highways 11 and 17 with four amendments to support road maintenance to ensure that Highways 11 and 17, “including portions of those highways that only have two lanes, are maintained in accordance with this section.”

To support a snow removal standard, “The entire pavement of the highway shall be bare of snow within four hours after the end of a snowfall.” When we have heavy snow, nothing goes out and in on Highways 11 and 17. I don’t even know how emergency vehicles can get through there to take someone to a hospital. If the residents are going for groceries, what will happen to them going and coming? To this government and its members: These might look like small-potato issues, but to the people in northern Ontario, this is life or death.

I also have one amendment for the ice clearing standard: “If ice forms on the pavement of the highway, the standard is to clear the ice within three hours after becoming aware of the fact.”

I also talk about a pothole repair standard: “If a pothole on the pavement of the highway has a surface area exceeding 600 square centimetres and a depth exceeding eight centimetres, the standard is to repair the pothole within four days after becoming aware of that fact”—because, let me tell you, it might take weeks for that pothole to be fixed.

But there’s nothing new here. The government always votes our bills down, just like they do to my colleagues across from me.

Speaker, in 2025, I tried again because I feel the pain of my colleagues in the north beside me getting up in question period, in their statement periods, bringing bills up, hounding this government to take a good look and consideration of the lives that are being lost on Highways 11 and 17. But, again, it doesn’t matter—and again, my second bill with the configuration of 2+1 on Highways 11 and 17 didn’t go anywhere. It was voted down again—nothing new.

I travelled up north, and I travelled on Highways 11 and 17 myself because I wanted to feel what my colleagues across from me are speaking about. Speaker, within seven minutes, I passed 12 trucks that were going above the speed limit. I felt and understood why locals have been pleading for action, including my northern colleagues across from me. My heart was racing because—I want to tell you this—one slip to the left, I would not be in this House. They risk their lives every day on those highways. God bless their hearts.

It is unacceptable for northerners to face such dangerous conditions every single day while this government refuses to respond with urgency. Human lives are priceless, and yet the safety of northerners continues to be neglected.

Speaker, I spoke to northern Ontarians, and they are tired. They need change, and residents are taking matters into their own hands. Recently, a Sudbury man created Northern Road Watch, a website that tracks real-time highway incidents across northern Ontario. The locals are stepping up because this government is doing nothing to save lives on Highways 11 and 17.

1820

Speaker, nothing has changed on these highways since I tabled my bill in 2024; in fact, things have gotten worse. In 2025, we’ve seen a death toll of over 42 on these highways and counting. It doesn’t stop there. And maybe these are the ones we know of.

Just before 12:30 a.m. on December 21, on a dark stretch of Highway 11, a tractor-trailer collided with a pickup truck carrying a family. Doesn’t this mean anything to the government?

One man survived. His wife, Nicole—let’s say her name. His wife, Nicole, 41, and their two children, 15 and 12—they hadn’t even started living—were pronounced dead at the scene. A family went out on that highway and never came back home.

In February of this year, three people died following a collision between a commercial motor vehicle and a passenger vehicle on Highway 11, west of Hearst.

On March 7, a multi-vehicle disaster near Smooth Rock Falls, which is on Highway 11, involving four tractor-trailers and a passenger vehicle, claimed the life of a northern Ontario resident.

By April 1 of this year, the public record shows at least eight fatalities on the northern corridor of Highways 11 and 17. And you know just what happened last week; I’m not going to repeat that because the member that brought this motion through talked about it.

Speaker, these are not just numbers. These are the lives of people with families. These are empty chairs at the dining room table. How can this government not care?

But I get it. This government does not care because it’s helping in the downtown core. If you’re not in downtown Toronto, it’s just too bad for you.

There’s a resident by the name of Marielle Edmond. She sent a letter in to this government and to the minister, and she said the tragedy has also renewed calls for improved road safety in northern Ontario.

Marielle Edmond, a member of the Cochrane Park Pals, wrote two open letters to Premier Doug Ford and provincial leaders highlighting the risk of northern highways and the toll on residents and first responders.

Marielle Edmond’s first letter to the government: “Northern Ontario is not asking for special treatment.” They’re “asking to be seen—and to be kept safe.” She said, “I write this not only as a resident of northern Ontario, but as someone who is grieving. In recent weeks, close family friends lost their lives on northern roads. They were people deeply woven into the fabric of our community—parents, children, neighbours, friends. Their absence is felt every day, and their loss has forced us to confront a truth too often ignored: When northern Ontario is overlooked, the consequences are tragic and permanent.”

Ontario “highways are lifelines. We travel long distances for work, health care, education and connection.”

She continues to say, “Unlike much of the province, there are often no alternate routes, no public transportation options, and no choice but to drive. This reality is compounded by long, harsh northern winters, where snow, ice, blowing winds, whiteouts, and extreme cold turn already vulnerable roads into dangerous corridors for months at a time.

“Yet many northern routes remain narrow, under-maintained, and outdated—despite carrying heavy commercial traffic and essential services.” She continued to say, “Winter maintenance delays, limited visibility, long emergency responses times, and growing concerns around driver qualification and experience on northern roads all increase the risk. In these conditions, a single mistake or mechanical failure can quickly become fatal.”

She also took her time and wrote a second letter focused on the challenges faced by emergency responders:

“Northern Ontario’s first responders—paramedics, firefighters, OPP officers, tow operators and emergency medical staff—are being asked to witness far too much carnage on our highways. They are professionals trained to help in moments of crisis, but they should never be expected to repeatedly confront scenes of devastation that are preventable.

“Time and again, they respond to fatal collisions on narrow, undermaintained northern highways.” She said, “This is not normal. And it should not be accepted as the cost of living or working in ... Ontario.”

I want to say her name: Marielle Edmond. Your name is now in this House, and I support my colleague across the floor.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Further debate?

Mr. Hardeep Singh Grewal: It’s great to speak on Highways 11 and 17. Our government has been working to support Highways 11 and 17 and our northern members since we’ve come into government. It’s always been a priority for us, and we’ve seen that with the amount of work that our members have been doing, travelling to and from, back and forth from the regions. I visited the area myself multiple times, especially the work we’ve done on the new inspection stations and the new transit enforcement officers that are there—the increases in blitzes and us making sure that road safety is taken as a top priority.

Road safety is not a partisan issue. It’s not an issue that we’re going to disagree on across the aisle; it’s for everybody. It doesn’t matter who you are. We, as a government, want to make sure that you’re safe when you’re travelling through our province’s road network. Road safety just doesn’t sit with one particular government, Speaker; it’s about cross-collaboration between all levels of government, making sure we work together to ensure that the people of our great province and our great country are supported.

That’s why our Minister of Transportation, as well as our Minister of Northern Economic Development, penned that letter to the Prime Minister and the minister of transportation of Canada to work together to ensure that this highway gets considered as a highway of national significance; and as well, that we work together to make sure that we remove and eliminate the duplicative review process that could delay construction and slow progress on this nationally significant corridor.

We’re ready to work with our federal partners, we’re ready to work with members across the aisle, and we always have been because this highway has always been a priority for our government and our members, regardless of whichever riding they represent. When we take a look at some of the work that has been done to date, more than 50% of the corridor has been widened to four lanes, and that’s why we’re making critical investments in our highway network, including the widening from Thunder Bay to Nipigon.

As we improve road safety across the north, we’re also working to make sure that we improve our bare-pavement standards. We have some of the best bare-pavement standards in North America when it comes to highway winter maintenance. Those are just some of the things I wanted to highlight here today.

Our government has put forward a northern highways program, an investment of $650 million, to ensure that we continue to invest in the north and continue to invest in northern highways, whether that be through 2+1, whether that be through collaboration across the aisle. That’s why we’re going to support the motion put forward by the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane and continue to work together to ensure that we protect the north, to ensure that the north is valued and we have the best road network here in the province.

Speaker, I’m going to share the rest of my time with the Minister of Northern Economic Development.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): I recognize the Minister of Northern Economic Development.

Hon. George Pirie: Mr. Speaker, as you know, I’ve been driving these roads since 1959, since I was a six-year-old boy, travelling from Timmins down to North Bay, all the way past Fort Erie. The QEW at that particular time still had travel circles. I’ve travelled across these highways numerous times for personal reasons and on business, even bringing my wife and family from Vancouver back over to Timmins.

Now, more than everything before, our highways are busier than ever before. Because of our policies, the economy is booming in northern Ontario, and what are we doing about that? We’re building the four-lane highway systems in the Kenora area. We’re building the four-lane highway systems in the Nipigon area. We’re widening the highways north of North Bay. We’re building the rest stops. We’re doing this with the full support from FONOM and NOMA.

1830

These highways are truly the threads that unite the social fabric of northern Ontario. We’re doing a lot, we need to do more and we need the help of the federal government. That’s why the Minister of Transportation and I wrote the federal government and requested that they contribute to the work Ontario is doing and invest in the continued four-lane expansion of these highways as a project of national significance. That’s what we stand for.

Over to Mr. Rickford.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Further debate?

M. Guy Bourgouin: Je veux remercier mon collègue d’avoir amené la motion. Mais je veux aussi reconnaître que, là, le gouvernement a annoncé qu’il va supporter la motion. C’est une bonne chose. Il faut reconnaître les bonnes choses quand elles arrivent.

J’ai entendu le ministre dire que si on travaille étroitement puis qu’on fait de bonnes choses, qu’on travaille tout étroitement ensemble—mais j’aimerais lui rappeler que j’ai présenté Chad’s Law. Chad’s Law, c’est un projet de loi que je pensais était un « no-brainer », pour moi, que ces deux lignes solides, tout le monde, quand il a eu sa licence, pense que c’est la loi. Mais la réalité des choses : c’est une suggestion en Ontario. À la grandeur de l’Amérique du Nord, il y a la province de l’Ontario et, je pense, quatre États où ce n’est pas la loi. Mais à la grandeur du reste, à la grandeur du Canada puis à la grandeur de l’Amérique du Nord, c’est la loi. Qu’est-ce que le gouvernement a fait? Ils ont voté contre. On dit qu’on travaille ensemble?

J’ai amené un autre projet de loi—49—qui disait de ramener le déneigement à la province. On disait que les postes de pesée ou les stations d’inspection soient ouverts au moins 12 heures. On sait qu’ils ne sont pas ouverts, au minimum, 12 heures, mais d’être ouvert, au moins, un minimum—on voulait mettre un minimum et essayer de le développer. Après ça, l’autre c’était de ramener aussi le licenciement des camionneurs. Qu’est-ce que le gouvernement a fait? Je vous laisse deviner : ils ont voté contre. Mais on travaille ensemble.

Fait que, je suis content de voir qu’ils vont supporter notre motion. Je suis le premier à le reconnaître. Mais je ne m’arrête pas là.

On a demandé que la 11 et 17 deviennent des classe 1. C’est quoi, classe 1? C’est le déneigement après huit heures, parce que, après tout, c’est une transcanadienne. Ça affecte notre économie, non seulement de la province mais du Canada—mais aussi régionale. Les gens doivent se présenter au travail, doivent se rendre à leur travail, aller aux appointements médicaux, ou si tu as besoin d’aller aux tournois de hockey—écoute, la liste est longue. Qu’est-ce qu’ils ont fait? Ils ont voté contre.

Mais je dois le reconnaître : ils ont fait d’autres choses, par exemple. Ils l’ont amélioré. Avant, c’était 16 heures; ils l’ont descendu à 12 heures. Fait que, la pression qu’on a faite—encore, c’est mieux que rien.

Puis l’autre : j’avais amené ces simulateurs pour les camionneurs. Pourquoi est-ce important? C’est parce qu’il y a tellement de camionneurs qui n’ont pas d’expérience. C’était un autre projet de loi qu’on avait amené. Qu’est-ce qu’ils ont décidé de faire? C’était pour les exposer à la neige, à la « black ice » et tout ce qu’on vit pour les routes hivernales, ce qu’on voit au jour le jour. Ils ont décidé de voter contre.

Pour finir, en conclusion, je veux remercier le gouvernement de supporter la motion de mon collègue, parce que c’est grand temps qu’on dise qu’on travaille ensemble et grand temps—quant à la sécurité des gens du Nord ou la sécurité routière—qu’il n’y ait pas de couleurs, pas de partisanerie. Je remercie mes collègues et, encore, qu’on supporte la motion.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Further debate?

Hon. Greg Rickford: I’m going to endeavour to be brief as I share my time with another colleague. First, I should say to the member from Scarborough–Guildwood—great person, has done a great job in here, but I have very little tolerance for the provincial Liberal party chiming in on a debate about highway safety on Highways 11 and 17.

Let me tell a brief story. I was the federal member of Parliament for seven years. Prime Minister Harper and Premier McGuinty at the time had a great idea: “Let’s look at this entire corridor. Let’s twin and 2+1 where it’s possible.”

In fact, for the member from Sudbury, I’ll acknowledge that Highway 69 should be read into this debate around highway safety. It’s fair, but they failed in their negotiations with First Nations.

They took that money and they moved it out to another part of northern Ontario: “We’ve got a political interest in this Thunder Bay–Superior North riding. Oh, they happen to have a federal Liberal there.” So guess what? About $30 million showed up from the federal government.

I went out to announce that portion, and I said to the federal minister, “What are you doing here?” “We’re paying 100% for the twinning from the Manitoba border to Kenora.” “Oh, I see. We’re approaching highway safety on the basis of who holds those ridings”—the same situation was for Highway 69. These are matters of fact.

So I want to welcome the NDP to a discussion about the scope of responsibility for different levels of government. This is a ginormous undertaking. It will take a generation or more to complete the kind of highway safety that will protect people across this province, particularly in northern Ontario.

Mr. Speaker, I run the Manitoba border to Ignace, a full 430 kilometres, like city folk go to the No Frills grocery store or wherever it is they go, so I know a thing or two about it as well. I’m pleased that in the list of east-west trade, national resilience, supply chain reliability and mining projects—topics the NDP have consistently voted against, Mr. Speaker—that we are actually bringing this discussion to a careful and deliberate place.

That is a discussion that Wab Kinew, the Premier of Manitoba, and the Premier of Ontario, Premier Ford, had some time ago—not just recently—asking the federal government to make it a project of national importance and to fund it. We can no longer afford to approach highway safety by ad hockery or the strategic interests of where a riding is held. This is how segments of the highway across northern Ontario have been built. It needs to stop, Mr. Speaker.

So from here on forward, I think it’s an important time for the NDP to finally arrive at a place where all levels of government—First Nations, municipalities, provincial government and the federal government—get serious about this. For our part, you heard my member speak moments ago about the investments that we’re making. Other members will chat about that who have an interest in Highways 11 and 17. I just want to welcome the NDP to a multi-level government discussion about a multi-generational approach to ensuring that our highways are twinned.

We had one job. Eisenhower got it in the United States, Mr. Speaker. They knew twinned highways east-west and north-south would be efficient for trade and great for safety. We need to focus on the same thing.

It’s 2026, Mr. Speaker. Our government is tracking to do that. We welcome the NDP to the conversation about the federal government’s responsibility to this.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Further debate?

M^me France Gélinas: I want to honour my colleagues the MPPs from Timiskaming–Cochrane, Mushkegowuk–James Bay and Kiiwetinoong, who did Highway 17 and Highway 11. They left from Toronto. I met them in North Bay. They drove all the way to the Manitoba border, and then they came back.

Why did they do this? Because we want everybody to know how dangerous those roads are, how many people have died, how many people have been hurt and how many people have been involved in accidents on those roads—a road that is named the Trans-Canada Highway. It is perfect for a nation-building project.

We all know that we live in difficult times right now, with our neighbours to the south. We have to rely on the movement of goods and people across our country way more than before. Lots of trucks used to go through the States; they come through northern Ontario now. That means we have even more trucks.

Highway 17 goes through my riding. The people of Wanapitei, Coniston, Naughton, Lively, Whitefish, Beaver Lake, Nairn Centre—we have no choice but to travel on Highway 17, and we have no choice but to look at hundreds of trucks coming at you and hundreds of trucks following you. It doesn’t matter if you are very careful; it is scary. It is scary, and the statistics are there. There was an accident in Cochrane again today that I just saw online.

1840

Ten people have already died. Speaker, you can go into any large hospital in northern Ontario—whether you go to Sudbury or Sault Ste Marie or North Bay or Thunder Bay, I guarantee you that there are people that are in those hospitals because they were involved in a traffic accident on Highway 17 or Highway 11. This has to change. We deserve to feel safe. I’m tired of being scared every time I drive, and so is everybody else.

The government can change this. They can pass this motion. They can start to put in place steps that the government of Ontario can do to make us safer.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Further debate?

MPP Billy Denault: I’m proud to support this motion, and I want to bring this conversation to my part of the province because if there’s one issue that has been at the forefront in my community, it’s always been Highway 17.

In Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke, Highway 17 is not an abstraction on a map; it is the corridor, it is the artery, it is the lifeline of our communities. People rely on it every day to get to work, to school, to medical appointments and home safely at the end of the day. For many families, this is the transportation system where there are long stretches with no alternative route if something goes wrong.

I think about those who depend on this road locally: first responders, school buses, truck drivers, local businesses and families just trying to get through their week. When traffic backs up or conditions deteriorate, our communities feel it immediately because there is nowhere else to turn. Our communities are not asking for anything unreasonable. They want safer highways, better passing opportunities and infrastructure that matches the traffic using it every day.

Speaker, I’ll acknowledge that our government is taking action. Just locally, on February 27, 2026, we advanced the next stages of twinning of Highway 17—twinning the 22.5 kilometre stretch from Arnprior to just outside of Renfrew, opening the request for proposals for the design of this stretch and moving into a delivery model designed to speed up construction. We’re widening key sections, advancing future expansion and launching the 2+1 highway pilot in northern Ontario—a model proven to improve safety. That progress matters, but this corridor must keep moving forward.

Highway 17 is the Trans-Canada Highway. It connects rural and northern communities to each other and to the rest of Canada. It supports forestry, mining, trucking, tourism and the industries that keep people working. We need a federal partner at the table to recognize that this highway is of national significance. That designation would reflect what we already know: that this corridor matters not just to eastern and northern Ontario, but to all of Canada, and it deserves support that matches its importance.

For those reasons, I am proud to support this motion, and I encourage all members of this House to do the same.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Further debate?

MPP Lise Vaugeois: I’d like first to thank the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane for bringing this motion forward, and I’d like to thank the government for agreeing to support it because, frankly, 11 and 17 can’t possibly carry increased industrial activity without significant improvements.

Contractors at Greenstone Gold, every time there’s a shift change, which is every two weeks, are terrified about their workers going home and coming back again, that they might not make it.

Three lives were lost last week in a head-on collision in another two-lane stretch. There’s no margin of error. Did the driver fall asleep? Was there black ice on the road? We don’t know, but three people died.

I want to talk about road maintenance because eight years apart, we lost people because there was black ice on the road, which means the road wasn’t sanded in time. Two people died on those, a young 18-year-old and then a young woman—incredibly tragic. Those maintenance things need to be changed.

Now, I want to focus primarily on training, testing and licensing drivers and their working conditions.

First, everyone here needs to go visit the site Justice for Truck Drivers, and go check out the Workers’ Action Centre and their leaflet entitled “Stop Wage Theft.” Then maybe you’ll understand some of the conditions that these drivers are facing.

You would think, since we have a shortage of drivers, wages would be good. However, the opposite is the case. Wages have been driven down massively so that it’s barely possible to make a living. Drivers are not paid for any time that the truck is not actually moving. You add to that the massive increase in numbers of commercial trucks where you’ll have a caravan of 12 trucks at least, a break and then another 12 trucks—so the conditions, and then the fact that there’s no room for a margin of error, encourages desperate, unsafe driving behaviours.

In addition, if you add to that the fact that the drivers are experiencing wage theft—and yet the labour relations board does nothing to pursue this theft—and there’s no enforcement of the labour code either at the provincial or federal levels, well, then we get what we get, don’t we?

We know that more inspectors are being hired—that’s great. I have to say that the Shuniah inspection station, which is lovely to look at, is a laughingstock in our region because it is so seldom staffed. That is gradually changing. We think that’s very good. But frankly, when massive numbers of public servants have been laid off—and we know that’s been going on for a long time—there’s nobody available to mind the shop. And that’s exactly what’s happening.

This is from the Ontario Trucking Association: Eliminate the “satisfactory-unaudited” safety ratings by increasing audit capabilities—so in other words, actually, all the auditing is done online. It’s self-reporting; it’s self-regulated. But the Ontario Trucking Association is saying that 80% to 90% of those fleets have never been inspected.

We know that trucks are unsafe. We know that the drivers are not being prepared. It’s got to change. The province is responsible for all of this, and the province can fix this. They’ve known for a long time it needs to be fixed.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Further debate?

MPP Jamie West: I want to thank the NDP House leader for bringing forward this motion for recognizing 11/17 as a project of major importance.

It may not have been picked up on the mikes, and I don’t think it will be recorded in Hansard, but while he was speaking in his lead, an ambulance went by. We heard the sirens in here. And I want to tell you that in the north, when you hear that a highway is closed in northern Ontario, the first thing you do is think about where your family is—who’s travelling, who’s visiting, where’s grandma. The second thing I do in Sudbury is, I think about when the cage is coming to the surface and when people in the mines are coming back home. And it’s selfish, but you think of the people that you know first and then you feel guilty because you know it’s somebody else. That’s our reality.

My colleague from Kenora–Rainy River talked about the distance that he travels on a regular basis. In Sudbury, the riding, because of the population, is all municipal roads. We visit family, we go back and forth, but in northern Ontario, it’s how you get groceries, it’s how you bring your kids to school, it’s how you get to work. You are constantly driving on those roads that are not safe. Our House leader said Highway 17 has been closed 886 times in one year and Highway 11 has been closed 363 times.

This is the way to drive things forward. It’s the right thing to do for the safety of the people, it’s the right thing for to do for the economic impact. If we want to open mines in the north and we make it so dangerous that people could be killed or snowed in or can’t get back home to their families, we’re going to lose valuable workers. Tradespeople who can work anywhere in Canada, miners who can work anywhere in the world, are going to choose another place to go.

We need to take care of these roads because it’s the right thing to do because of the social reasons, the economic reasons and because it’s embarrassing that Ontario has the only part of the Trans-Canada Highway that is two-laned.

I want to thank the government for supporting the New Democrat House leader’s motion for national importance for the highway. Thank you for the time and allowing me to speak to it.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): The member has two minutes to reply.

Mr. John Vanthof: I’d like to thank all the members who spoke and for the support. It’s not often that we all agree on something and that we all agree that 11/17 should be an issue of not only national significance but I think provincial significance. But one thing I am worried about is that we don’t hear every time, “Well, the feds didn’t want to help, so basically, we’re going to”—that the government’s going to abdicate their responsibility to the federal government. We hear this all the time.

1850

We are not going to stop. We are going to hold whatever government to account to make sure that the people of northern Ontario have a right to safe roads. The people who come through from southern Ontario, from across the country, also have the right to feel safe. When someone is coming against the transport and the transport comes into their lane and they have to veer off—that shouldn’t happen, and it happens all the time. We caught it on video several times.

Licensing is a provincial responsibility. It’s a provincial responsibility. Highway maintenance—provincial responsibility.

When we were in Thunder Bay—and his name is Jim, and Jim was here. Each time that they talk about doing something on the highway—“Oh, well, the twinning is coming. The twinning is coming.” And that has been for years—30 years, 40 years that has been promised and not happened.

We don’t want this to be an excuse. We all have to work together, but we are going to continue to hold the government to account.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): The time provided for private members’ public business has expired.

Mr. Vanthof has moved private member’s notice of motion number 63.

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

In my opinion, the ayes have it. It’s carried. I declare the motion carried.

Motion agreed to.

Adjournment Debate

Highway safety

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): All matters relating to private members’ public business having been completed, we now move to the late show. Pursuant to standing order 36, the question that this House do now adjourn is deemed to have been made.

The member for Thunder Bay–Superior North has given notice of dissatisfaction with the answer to a question given by the Minister of Transportation. The member has up to five minutes to debate the matter, and the minister or parliamentary assistant may reply for up to five minutes.

I recognize the member for Thunder Bay–Superior North.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: Last week, I expressed dissatisfaction with the minister’s answer to my question about Long Lake #58 because I wanted to give the minister more time to consider the relatively easy fixes that could save lives in this community.

For people in Long Lake #58 First Nation, going to the neighbouring town of Longlac on foot means walking along the Trans-Canada Highway, the notorious two-lane Highway 11: no sidewalks whatsoever, no separated walkway, no lighting, not even a shoulder to walk on in the winter. Transport trucks fly by near inches away. It’s incredibly dangerous, and people are losing their lives.

On November 28, 2025, a 17-year-old community member was fatally struck by a transport truck on Highway 11 between Long Lake #58 and the town of Longlac. It’s about three and a half kilometres.

In April 2023, a young mother lost her life from a hit-and-run incident, leaving her children without parents and leaving the grandparents left to care for the children.

The third incident resulted in an elderly woman with severe injuries after being struck by a transport, leaving her to deal with chronic pain for the rest of her life.

These tragic losses and harmful incidents have deeply affected the community of Long Lake #58 First Nation, and they underscore the very real risks created when a high-speed provincial highway intersects with daily life in this First Nations community.

The risks are obvious when we recognize that Highway 11 is the main truck route crossing northern Ontario all the way from Timmins—and actually, it starts earlier than that—to Nipigon, where it merges with Highway 11. Thousands and thousands of commercial drivers pass through this area day and night, and they are all anxious to get to their destinations.

In the Longlac area, however, Highway 11 is also a community roadway, used daily for walking, cycling, accessing services and visiting families living in neighbouring Longlac and Ginoogaming. The speed limit has been lowered to 70 kilometres an hour, but trucks have been clocked going 130 kilometres an hour through this zone. Minister, through the Speaker, would you want to walk into town to go to the bank with a transport truck whizzing past your head at 130 kilometres an hour? I don’t think so.

So what can be done? The first thing I would do is designate this stretch of highway as a community safety zone, marked by signs with lower speed limits, fines doubled for speeding and traffic violations, and automated speed cameras to protect pedestrians and cyclists. Designating this stretch of highway as a community safety zone would mean further lowering the speed limit from 70 to 50 kilometres—maybe even 40 kilometres—adding high-visibility signage and adding street lighting. If you think of the OPP officers based in Geraldton—there are two, maybe three—they can’t possibly police only this section of highway night and day. So a speed camera would be a really good use of resources.

Second, on a more permanent basis, the community needs a lighted, grade-separated pedestrian walkway along the entire stretch between Long Lake #58 and Longlac; they need a dedicated turning lane into the community; and they need permanent pedestrian-controlled crossings to access the lake and community recreation areas. Can you imagine your children crossing the highway to go swimming and having to navigate through the Trans-Canada Highway?

They want a formal safety audit. In the words of Chief O Nabigon, “Our community and families have already paid the price of unsafe highway conditions. Elders, children and other community members continue to face daily risk simply trying to move safely” within their own community, “their own territory. The present conditions do not reflect an acceptable standard of safety, and we do not intend to wait for another serious injury or loss of life before concrete action is taken.”

The minister can do this now. He needs to commit to directing the MTO engineers to meet with the communities, create the design plans and be ready to build the separated walkway by the 2027 construction season. This can be done if the ministerial will is there to do it.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): I recognize the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Transportation.

Mr. Hardeep Singh Grewal: I’d like to begin by acknowledging the concerns raised by Long Lake #58 and the tragic loss felt by the community. The safety concerns along this corridor are serious, and no family should have to worry about the safety of a loved one travelling to and from their community. Let me be clear: Our government is committed to ensuring that people can travel safely on our highways, no matter where they live in Ontario.

The member asked about immediate measures, including speed management, lighting and signage, and also about long-term infrastructure solutions. We’re aware of the concerns that have been raised about this stretch of Highway 11, and we’re committed to engaging with the community, improving safety and implementing the appropriate measures.

Speaker, there’s no single fix when it comes to highway safety. Our government is acting on every front through stronger laws, public education, targeted enforcement as well as infrastructure improvements. The ministry also works in partnership with local communities because their input is critical to identifying risks and informing the right safety measures.

That same approach is guiding our broader work to improve safety on northern highways. We’re investing $5.4 billion in 2026-27 in support of the multi-year Ontario highways program, which includes 627 highway expansion and rehabilitation projects under way or planned across Ontario. This includes construction funding of more than $600 million for northern Ontario, and, as a part of that, a 2+1 highway pilot project is under way in northern Ontario, with two potential locations on Highway 11. This model adds alternating passing lanes to improve safety and reduce the risk of crossover collisions.

On Highway 11 and Highway 17 we’re making major investments to improve safety and reliability. More than 50% of Highway 11 and Highway 17, the corridor between Thunder Bay and Nipigon, has already been widened to four lanes. Additional sections are in planning and design or moving towards construction.

1900

Our government has also announced a series of actions to make the Highway 11/17 corridor safer, including increasing the number of transportation enforcement officers, expanding enforcement blitzes between truck inspection stations and deploying new mobile inspection support units this spring. Since January 2025, the ministry has hired 40 new transportation enforcement officers in the north region. We also invested $30 million in a new commercial vehicle inspection station in Shuniah, near Thunder Bay, which opened in March 2024—and I have personally travelled to see the great work that those officers are doing to support that community.

At the same time, the ministry continues to make other safety improvements across northern highways, including better signage, portable variable message signs to warn drivers about closures and weather conditions, and infrastructure measures such as turning lanes, acceleration and deceleration lanes, new signals at intersections and passing lanes.

We’re working hard to improve winter maintenance. Under the ON Trans-Canada standard, Highways 11 and 17 are now cleared to bare pavement standard within 12 hours after a winter storm, which is four hours faster than previous standards. This is just one of several actions our government is taking to improve safety on roads during the winter months in northern Ontario and across the province. This work reflects our government’s commitment to improving safety in northern Ontario and investing in infrastructure that meets the needs of our northern communities. Our government will continue to work with all communities, including Long Lake #58, to better understand local safety concerns and to examine what measures can be taken to improve safety for everyone using that corridor.

Speaker, we will continue to protect Ontario by investing in safer highways, stronger enforcement and infrastructure improvements that save lives, strengthen northern communities and help build a more resilient and self-reliant province.

In closing, road safety, for us, is always considered a non-partisan issue, and we’re more than happy to work with the member opposite to ensure that’s being reflected in her community.

With that, thank you for the time today.

Laboratory services

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): The member for Nickel Belt has given notice of dissatisfaction with the answer to a question given by the Minister of Health. The member has up to five minutes to debate the matter, and the minister or parliamentary assistant may reply for up to five minutes.

I recognize the member from Nickel Belt.

M^me France Gélinas: We all know that the collection, transportation and analysis of community-based lab samples has been privatized and the biggest provider of those services in Ontario is LifeLabs. LifeLabs is owned by an American company, Quest Diagnostics, which wants to take the resources that we have in Sudbury and close them down. When I asked the minister about it, she answered by saying that we have collection centres. Yes, we will continue to collect blood—we will continue to transport the blood, accept blood and other samples—but where all of those collection centres in the northeast used to come to Sudbury, they will now go to Toronto. The idea is that that resource that we had in Sudbury to be able to do that work—not only did it do the work of the analysis, but it is one of the main training centres for MLTs, medical laboratory technologists.

We have two colleges in Sudbury: Boréal, which speaks French, and Cambrian, which teaches in English. Both of them teach medical laboratory technology courses, and in order to graduate and to be allowed to practise, you need to do a year of placement. Because we had this huge lab in Sudbury, most of the students got to do their placement in Sudbury. So they’re people who come from northern Ontario, who go to school in northern Ontario and who do their placement in northern Ontario. But now, that won’t be there anymore. The 40 people who work there all got layoff notices on May 17. The great majority of them won’t be there anymore, which means the students won’t be able to stay in Sudbury to do their placement—they will have to go to Toronto. We know what happens when health care professionals end up having to go to Toronto to graduate: They don’t come back to northern Ontario, and the recruitment becomes more and more difficult.

But this resource, the fact that we had this laboratory technology in Sudbury, helped in so many ways, not only because students got to do their placements in their hometown or in northern Ontario, but also—nobody likes to talk about the pandemic, and I don’t blame you, but I can tell you that all of those MLTs worked 12- and 14-hour shifts 10 days in a row during the pandemic because we had this resource in northern Ontario and we used it. I don’t want another public health emergency, but I know that it will come and then this resource won’t be there.

We don’t have that many health care resources in the north, and this American company is taking away that resource. Why? Just so that they can make more money, never looking at the impact it’s going to have on our community. So all of the small hospitals—you’re talking Espanola, Manitoulin Island, Thessalon, Blind River, Elliot Lake; everywhere from Mattawa to Wawa—all say, “We could do some of that work.” But if they do that work, they do it for free. Why is it that the ministry is willing to pay an American company to collect, to transport and do the analysis, but if a not-for-profit northern hospital does the exact same thing—they do the collection, they transport it, they do the analysis—they are not allowed to bill? Only the for-profit American company can bill to do that work, but the not-for-profit hospital is not allowed to bill.

Think about it. Rather than driving—because, right now, it drives from Elliot Lake or Blind River all the way to Sudbury, it gets repackaged in Sudbury, it goes to Barrie, it gets repackaged in Barrie, it goes to Toronto. All of this could be avoided. You do a blood donation in Espanola, the hospital in Espanola will go pick it up, bring it to its lab and do it right there. But if they do this, they don’t get paid. But if an American company does it, they get paid for the collection, for the transportation and for the analysis.

This has to change, Speaker. It makes no sense. Not only is this American company taking away a resource that is very precious to the health of northern Ontarians, but not-for-profit hospitals have to do that work for free when they could do it better.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): I recognize the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Health.

Mr. Anthony Leardi: LifeLabs, with its Canadian headquarters and management in Canada, is involved in their own human resource decisions and operations, not the Ministry of Health. I’m sure that LifeLabs has indicated that they will continue to operate a dedicated laboratory capacity in Sudbury for specialized and the most time-sensitive types of testing. They will be maintaining their commitment to patients and health care providers in northeastern Ontario. Ontario’s focus is on the services LifeLabs provides to the people of Ontario, and we’ve been assured that there would be no impact to service delivery.

Over the past year, we have also been working to make it more convenient for northern and rural communities to get lab services closer to home. We are expanding access via new collection points in Richards Landing and Sables-Spanish Rivers, among others. Once again, questions about internal matters are internal to LifeLabs.

As for Health Sciences North providing these services, we can say the following: Health Sciences North does not provide routine outpatient blood collection services. This is delivered through community laboratories, which are funded to do so. Health Sciences North’s laboratory services are funded to support patients receiving care in hospital, and we will continue to do so.

As a regional hospital, Health Sciences North’s laboratory processes more than 3.3 million tests each year, including testing for 10 hospitals across northeastern Ontario that do not have a community collection centre. In these communities, patients already rely on their local hospital for access to lab services.

1910

There was a response from Health Sciences North and that was clear on their position that their focus is on their core mandate of providing excellent care. Health Sciences North is a trusted provincial partner, working with the Ministry of Health to improve access to high-quality care across northeastern Ontario and close to home. Over the past year, provincial support has enabled Health Sciences North to deliver meaningful improvements in care that are making a real difference in the lives of patients and communities throughout the region.

In June 2025, Health Sciences North opened the region’s first dedicated hemoglobinopathy—that’s a mouthful—clinic, providing specialized care for patients living with sickle cell disease. These blood disorders have historically been underrecognized and undertreated. This clinic represents an important step forward in advancing health equity and ensuring patients can access expert, culturally responsive care without having to travel long distances.

This year, Health Sciences North also introduced new services for patients with hemophilia, improving quality of life for both children and adults. These enhanced services support better disease management, ongoing monitoring and coordinated care for individuals living with complex, lifelong conditions.

Through provincial support, Health Sciences North has also strengthened access to care through the hospital-to-home program. This initiative has reduced alternative level-of-care pressures, improved access to hospital beds and enabled patients to be safely discharged so they can continue their recovery at home with the supports they need. The program benefits patients while also improving overall system efficiency.

Access to mental health and addictions care has been expanded with the opening of the Greater Sudbury HART Hub. Of course, HART hub stands for homelessness and addiction recovery treatment hub. This was made possible through support from the government of Ontario. The hub provides timely, coordinated access to mental health and addictions services and plays a critical role in ensuring people receive appropriate care in the community, reducing reliance on emergency departments.

In addition, investments from the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund are supporting cancer research and treatment advancements at Health Sciences North. This work not only benefits patients in Sudbury and across the north but also has the potential to deliver global impact through innovation and research excellence.

Government jet / Avion du gouvernement

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): Finally, the member for Orléans has given notice of dissatisfaction with the answer to a question given by the parliamentary assistant to the Premier. The member has up to five minutes to debate the matter, and the minister or parliamentary assistant may reply for up to five minutes.

I recognize the member for Orléans.

Mr. Stephen Blais: When this government was caught trying to buy a $30-million private jet for the Premier, their first instinct was not to apologize. Their first instinct was to defend it. Today, the Premier said he needed a new luxury jet because sometimes, there is turbulence on his current government plane.

Well, Speaker, Ontario families are facing turbulence every single day: turbulence at the grocery store; turbulence when their mortgage comes due; turbulence when they open their hydro bill; turbulence when they sit for hours in traffic because this government has still not widened Highway 174 or fixed Ottawa’s LRT. And while families were dealing with that kind of turbulence, cabinet was unanimously approving a luxury business jet for the Premier.

Le premier ministre dit qu’il avait besoin d’un jet privé parce qu’il y a parfois de la turbulence dans les avions qu’il prend maintenant. Mais les familles à travers l’Ontario vivent dans la turbulence tous les jours : la turbulence au supermarché; la turbulence quand elles doivent payer leur hypothèque; la turbulence quand elles ouvrent leur facture d’électricité; la turbulence quand elles passent des heures dans la circulation parce que ce gouvernement n’a toujours pas élargi l’autoroute 174, ni réparé le train léger.

Et pendant qu’elles vivaient cette turbulence, ce gouvernement a approuvé un jet privé de 30 millions de dollars pour le premier ministre.

We learned today, from the Premier himself, that not one minister said no. Not one minister said, “This is inappropriate.” Not one minister said, “Maybe this isn’t what Ontarians expect while hospitals are overcrowded, schools are underfunded and people are struggling to make ends meet.” Instead, every member of the Premier’s cabinet went along with his request, unanimously.

And then, today, now we know something else: The Premier already had access to private, government-owned business jets. The OPP recently purchased, I’m told, a new Pilatus PC-24 business jet that can be used for government travel when necessary. So this was never about necessity; it was about wanting something bigger, something newer and something more comfortable.

The Premier says that American governors have jets, so he should have one too. Mr. Speaker, I think that says everything, because Ontarians don’t expect their Premier to act like an American governor; they expect their Premier to act like a Canadian. They expect a Premier who understands that public office is a responsibility, not a reward; a Premier who understands that just because you can spend taxpayers’ money, it doesn’t mean that you should; a Premier who remembers what he said when he ran for office in the first place. He said he was going to end the gravy train; he said he was going to respect taxpayers; he said he was going to do things differently. But after eight years, this government is tired, it’s worn out and it has become exactly what it once claimed to oppose.

There is something deeply revealing about this story. At the very moment the government was telling students that there was no more money for OSAP, no money to properly fund hospitals, no money to help students, no money to make life more affordable, there was somehow always money for a new private luxury jet. And not just any plane: a Bombardier Challenger, the kind of aircraft most Ontarians will never, ever step foot on; the kind of plane used by celebrities and CEOs and billionaires. That’s what this cabinet unanimously decided the Premier needed.

When a government begins to believe that its own comfort matters more than the struggles of the people it serves, we know that government has lost its way. When a Premier looks at families who have been told to tighten their belt and says, “I deserve a better plane because the old one is bumpy,” that Premier has stopped listening. And when a Premier says he should have a private jet because American governors do, he’s telling us exactly how far his government has drifted.

Ontarians don’t want an American-style governor; they want a Premier who understands that leadership means sacrifice, that leadership means setting an example, that leadership means getting on the same plane, driving on the same roads and living the same reality as the people he represents.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): I recognize the government House leader and the parliamentary assistant to the Premier.

Hon. Steve Clark: I appreciate the opportunity to respond. The member for Orléans took a bit of a different approach this evening than he did in question period. I’m reading his notice of dissatisfaction under standing order 36(a). What he wrote after question period was, he indicated that I didn’t answer what the Premier used to fly to Ottawa earlier this week, so I want to give him the opportunity to listen to the answer. I’m sorry he was dissatisfied. The Premier flew to Ottawa in a charter.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ric Bresee): There being no further matters to debate, pursuant to standing order 36(c), I deem the motion to adjourn to be carried.

This House stands adjourned until 9 a.m. tomorrow morning.

The House adjourned at 1919.