 It is now time for Oral Questions, the leader of Her Majesty's Royal Opposition. Thanks, Peter. My question to the Premier. Momentarily, the member for Etobicoke Lakeshore, Doug Holliday, the Tabling of Motion, calling on the government to make good on his promise of people of Scarborough in the recent by-election to build the subway line as requested by City Council. I want to congratulate the member for Etobicoke Lakeshore for bringing this to the floor so quickly. Mr. President, back to you, Premieres. Will you support the motion? Will you actually keep your promise to the people of Scarborough? Premier. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And I have to say it is refreshing to hear the leader of the opposition coming forward talking about transit. Opposition knows, since we came into office, we've been investing in transit. There are projects happening all over the province, Mr. Speaker. In fact, there is building going on in Ottawa, in Kitchener Waterloo. There's building going on within the GTHA, Mr. Speaker. There is transit money being used across the province as a result of the gas tax investments that we have made, Mr. Speaker. So there is a lot of work that is happening right now. I think our commitment to building transit is evidenced by the work that is happening, Mr. Speaker. We have been working with the City of Toronto on this file. We've listened to the members from Scarborough. We've listened to the people of Scarborough. We're committed to building a subway in Scarborough, Mr. Speaker. We've committed $1.4 billion and another $320 million. Mr. Speaker, we will build that subway. Well, back to Premier. I listened carefully to the Premier's response. I simply asked for keeping a promise. I didn't hear either a yes or a no. And I'll tell you why I'm concerned. Premier was March of 2012 that we brought forward a motion. My name is the opposition to build subways in Scarborough. That was our motion we brought on the floor over a year ago. I'm proud of that. We've been consistent. You, Premier, and your transportation minister, you voted against it. You referenced yesterday your canoe trip over the summer. You probably saw a lot of carp flipping and flopping in the river that you were in. Are we seeing the same thing here today? You're not going to flip-flop. Are you flip-flopping? Honestly, goodness. It's hard to tell where you stand on the issue. Yes or no, Premier. Are you going to keep your promise or are you going to flip-flop again? Mr. Speaker, as I said, we have been committed to building transit and we will continue to build transit, Mr. Speaker. We're committed to building the subway in Scarborough. But the piece that the leader of the opposition is missing in this is that we have to work with partners. We have to work with the municipalities, Mr. Speaker. And the fact is that the leader of the opposition is coming into this discussion talking about one project to which we're committed. We've said, in answer to your question, we've said... Excuse me. We're back to that little habit that we were in out of during the summer break, which was when the question's being put, I'm hearing people from that side heckling while the question's being put. And while the answer's being put, I'm hearing heckling from this side. So I'd like all of us just to simply stop the heckling. And the member from Renfrew doesn't help his case at all for today. Answer, please. The leader of the opposition is coming in on one project in one region as opposed to understanding that building transit is a systematic approach that has to be taken and we have to work with partners. We're committed to building transit in Scarborough and we're committed to building the subway in Scarborough, Mr. Speaker. A little supplementary. I don't know, Speaker. I've never seen this kind of quality of verbal gymnastics on a simple yes or no question. Are you going to keep your promise or not? The Premier said, well, you have to work with partners. Remind you, Premier, just a couple weeks ago, your Minister of Transportation, Mr. Murray, went out there and all of a sudden launched his own brand new plan that nobody had heard of. Council did not support. The TTC did not support. Scarborough residents support. Natural links didn't support. Nobody supports that plan. The promise of the by-election was absolutely clear. A line going from Kennedy up to Shepherd through Scarborough City Center. Your Minister invents a new project with less money, fewer stops, lower quality. Listen, people in Scarborough ran into brick walls for a fall, two, long. We're going to put you up against that same brick wall with Doug Holiday's motion. Are you going to keep your promise or are you going to flip from right out of the gate? The Leader of the Opposition might want to have a conversation with a new member from Etobicoke Lakeshore and talk about exactly what has gone on at City Council over the last couple of years. Talk about how contentious this issue has been. Understand from the member from Etobicoke Lakeshore where the money is coming from, where the $1.4 billion and the extra $320 million is coming from for the project, and that would be from this government, from the provincial level, not from the city, not from the federal government. So I think if the Leader of the Opposition wants to talk to the member for Etobicoke Lakeshore and just understand the context that has been in place for the last three years, Mr. Speaker, as we've gone back and forth with the City of Toronto, that might be very helpful for him because he's coming in. Lay in the game on one project. We're committed to building the subway in Scarborough and we're committed to working with our municipal parks. Thank you. New question? Firstly, Mr. Speaker, I would like to apologize for calling you Madam Speaker yesterday. That really stems from a long-time habit I've had at some other establishment. My question today, though, is for the Premier. A few months ago, your Minister of Transportation said that it would be difficult for Metrolinx to proceed if Toronto City Council and the TTC are not supportive of the transit options that have received municipal approval. Now, your government has ignored the City of Toronto by offering a shortened version of the Scarborough subway. Madam Premier, why have you decided to move forward without the City of Toronto and the TTC? Minister of Transportation and Construction. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'll be waiting for the last person to try to get the word in because it's quiet. Minister? Mr. Speaker, you know, I also predicted a few weeks ago or a month ago that the member from the Togo Center would be here representing the Mayor's views. And he's from the Tobacco Lakes already. He's doing exactly what we said. And he's doing exactly what conservative politicians in this House, conservative politicians at City Hall and conservative politicians in Ottawa do with subways in Toronto. They pass motions, they never write checks. Here we have, Mr. Speaker, classic civic provincial federal conservatism on subways. Yet another motion. I would suggest to my friend from the Tobacco Lakes shore and his friend Mayor Ford, who have such great relationships with Mr. Flaherty that maybe they can together get Mr. Flaherty to write a check for a subway in Toronto. We are not, Mr. Speaker, going to build subways in Scarborough on motions and rhetoric and press releases. We need money. And the only people putting money into subways, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Supplementary. Mr. Speaker, it's going to be very difficult to build a subway in Toronto or anywhere else, the Government of Ontario support. The trouble here is that the Government of Ontario has done all of it, Mr. Speaker. You cannot be on all sides of this equation. This is not a merry-go-round. So I just want to know, are you really on side this time? Are you really going to follow your plan or you're not? Mr. Speaker, we have come to understand that conservatives love to fill in subways, bizarrely champion them, but they never like to pay for them, Mr. Speaker. And the other thing we know about conservatives, Mr. Speaker, like the honourable member from Octopico Saturday, they don't like to read. They don't read budgets and they don't read plans. Because if they actually read a plan, the Leader of the Opposition would know he was dead wrong again. The line on that map has not changed in one single plan. We're following the same route that we ever had. The only change, Mr. Speaker, we have never changed our position once. The flip-flopping carps are over there, Mr. Speaker. And what is the price tag for that whipped up out-of-the-blue thing that the member for Octopico Center got $3 billion for school prudence for conservatives is when you get all the line point 1.4... I'd like to gently remind all members, when I stand, you sit. And I'll say it again so that the minister is looking at me when I say it. And this is a general reminder for everyone. When I stand, you sit. Final supplementary. Yes, Mr. Speaker. Premier, you wanted LRTs. Then you changed your mind. You asked for support. And then you acted on it against the motion supporting the shepherd subway extension. Then you flip-flopped on LRTs. Then you flip-flopped on the Scarborough subway. Now people in Scarborough, they don't want you to break another promise you made during the election. So we're back to trust. After the gas plant scandal, we know liberals will do anything it takes to win... I'm asking for quiet, and that should be obvious that no one else would add their two cents worth like the member from Durham while I'm speaking. The member from Oxford, I hope, we don't have to go to the medic to take care of your hand or else repair that desk. You have a short wrap-up for your question. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, the people of Ontario do not trust this government. Premier, with your chronic flip-flopping the translators of the City of Toronto can never trust you. You've got to make a solid decision and you've got to stick to it. Mr. Speaker, I have to apologize to the member for Atopico Lakeshore. I had suggested he had moved to the centre. I was clearly wrong. Mr. Speaker, 16.4 billion dollars in 15 rapid transit projects. A consistent plan. Our Premier, we have not moved off of one inch. Mr. Speaker, for a conservative MPs and city councillors and now one MPP and together they can't come up with 4% of the solution. The member opposite and I both were mayors. Both of us know we start conversations with one-third. Why doesn't the member opposite ask the federal government why in Kitchener and Ottawa the federal government pays one-third of transit costs? But in the 416, in his area, 4%, Mr. Speaker, the gap between us and the dreams and the transits to people in Toronto deserve is one word, Mr. Speaker. It's conservative. When you vote conservative, you get a whole filler. Thank you. New question. Leader of the third party. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Premier. The people of Ontario have sent us a pretty clear message. Focus on delivering results that create jobs, that improve their health care and that make life more affordable and that make government more accountable. Does the Premier have a problem with any of this? No, Mr. Speaker. And in fact, that's exactly what we're doing. Our investments in people and in business and in infrastructure are designed to do precisely what the Leader of the third party is talking about, Mr. Speaker, to grow the economy, to create jobs and to make sure that we help people in their day-to-day challenges. And that's the kind of initiative that is included in our budget, Mr. Speaker. That's the work that we have been doing over the last eight months and before and that's the work that we will continue to do, I hope, with the cooperation of people in this House. Thank you. Supplementary. Well, Speaker, people look to the government for leadership and what they're seeing these days are some pretty cynical games. Whether it's playing political games to make their budget numbers look good or using a plan to protect youth from cancer risk as a political football, people actually expect better from their government, Speaker. Will the Premier stop playing these same old political games and start focusing on results that people need? I'm not sure what the Leader of the third party is referencing, but if she is talking about the announcement that the Minister of Finance made yesterday about our over-achievement on our budget and the fact, Mr. Speaker, on our deficit, Mr. Speaker. You may be involuntary yourself. We were released yesterday, I think, should give the Leader of the third party and certainly the people of Ontario some confidence when we say that the 2012-2013 deficit is now down to $9.2 billion, that we're $5.6 billion lower than was projected in the 2012 budget, Mr. Speaker. Further reduction of $600 million since the 2013 budget, Mr. Speaker. And that's, for the first time in a decade, total spending fell from the previous year. So, Mr. Speaker, spending is down. As we said, it would be. We are constrained in spending. We are overachieving on our targets. That's good news. Thank you. I'm going to mention the member from Renfrew and the member from Peterborough. I don't want to have to come back to you. Mr. Speaker, this week we started debating the Financial Accountability Office. I'm sure that office will have some things to say about liberal numbers. But as we go forward, we're going to keep working to ensure that home care wait lists are actually going to go down in this province, that auto insurance rates are going to go down, and that youth unemployment is going to go down. People remember this government's track record speaker. They know that liberals only moved to protect youth from tanning beds because it would, according to liberal staffer, quote, make a fabulous headline to detract from gas plants. Now, they know this government is only moving on youth jobs, home care, and accountability because new Democrats demanded its freedom. The trust in this government is the premier ready to focus on results for the people who elected us, or are we going to see more of the silly political games that liberals liked? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, first of all, I just want to say that on this side of the house, we have a lot of confidence in the Auditor General, and when the Auditor General signs off on numbers, we really support that, you know, and that's why that scrutiny is so important. In terms of the deep cynicism around the actions of the government, I just want to say, Mr. Speaker, that our commitment to improving kids' lives, all of the changes that we've made in education, Mr. Speaker, the supports that we've put in place for communities, the fact that we are continuing to implement full-day kindergarten, Mr. Speaker, all of those are evidence of our commitment to the future, to making sure that the investments that we make improve young people's lives into the future. So the measures that are included in our budget, Mr. Speaker, are an extension of that. The leader of the third party chose some issues as we went into the budget last year that she knew perfectly well we wanted to take action on. We've taken action on those, Mr. Speaker, and they will improve people's lives. Speaker, this next question is for the Premier as well. A simple step the Premier could take today would be to ensure that the Committee looking into wasted millions at the gas plant is able to actually do its job. When the Premier was respecting or sorry, rejecting calls for a public inquiry that we were calling for earlier on, she insisted that this Committee was going to be able to have all their questions answered. But, Speaker, we all know that hasn't been happening. And for two days, the Premier has refused to say in this House whether she'll do anything about it. Is the Premier going to open up the gas plant committee so that Ontarians can get answers about liberal political interference, or will she keep protecting her liberal friends? Mr. Speaker, again, I have a lot of respect for the procedures of this legislative assembly, and I do not control committees, Mr. Speaker. And I think it's fairly clear, Mr. Speaker, that the chairs of committees take their advice from the clerk and then the committee makes those decisions. And the fact is, Mr. Speaker, in a minority parliament, we don't control the committees. The committees are a reflection of the makeup of the House, Mr. Speaker. And so, in fact, the NDP and the Conservatives can work in committee and they can make those decisions. I've been clear that my position is that the committees should have the opportunity to ask the questions that it wants to ask. So I turn to the committee and I say, Mr. Speaker, I hope that they will work to ask the questions that they want to have answered, that they will provide opportunities for people to come forward, and I will leave that up to them to make those deliberations. Mr. Speaker. Yesterday the Premier said the Justice Committee has her blessing to ask the questions it needs. Well, that's very nice, Mr. Speaker. That's very nice. But the Premier's blessing does not get Ontarians answers about questions that are being blocked at committee. Now, what we'll get answers, Mr. Speaker, regardless of her refusal to acknowledge it, what we'll get answers is the Premier supporting an expanded scope of this committee. Will the Premier support expanding this scope of the Justice Committee, or will she keep protecting well-connected Liberal insiders? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I really believe that the committee needs to be allowed to do its job, and from my perspective, every person that the committee has wanted to call has come forward, as far as I know, Mr. Speaker, from the Liberal Party. As the committee has asked people to come forward, they have come forward. As the committee has asked for documents, they have received those documents. 135,000 of them, Mr. Speaker. So, you know, I'll just put the sarcasm aside. When I said that the committee has its blessing, I meant that. It has my blessing. I meant that. I meant that if the committee wants to ask particular questions, they want to make decisions. It's up to the committee to do its work with advice from the clerk, Mr. Speaker, but I think that they've had a broad scope and they should be able to continue to exercise that. The final supplementary. Well, it's a pretty interesting day today, Speaker. The Premier has said she wants transparency. On April 25th, she said, and I quote, I said I was committed to being open and transparent. All the questions that were asked were going to be answered. On April 16th, she said, from one quote, from one day, sorry, from day one, when I came into this job, information that was being asked for needed to be available. Earlier this week, she said she will quote, make sure that, as questions are asked, they get answered. She said the same thing again today. But the Premier needs to know, Speaker, we are asking the questions about liberal interference with the Speaker. Will the Premier make sure that those questions get answered? I'm pretty sure that the particular issue that the leader of the third party's referencing was addressed by you earlier this week, Mr. Speaker. And so I am not going to weigh into that. What I will say is that the committee has the authority to ask the questions that it chooses to ask with the advice of the clerk, Mr. Speaker. If there is a discussion that needs to happen among the House leaders, Mr. Speaker, in terms of changes, as the Premier and the leader of this party, I'm open to that happening. The House leader can meet with the House leaders if there is a discussion in the third party. They can have that discussion. I remain committed to being open and transparent on this issue. I have said that as there are questions that come forward, I want those questions to be answered. This is not about protection of anyone. It's about opening up the process, and that's why the boxes of paper, all of the information that has been made available has been made available, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Premier. Earlier today, part of your caucus and the Public Accounts Committee supported our motion to finally learn the true cost of the reopened negotiations between the teachers' contracts last year. Today in the Toronto Sun, it's been estimated that that cost could be as high as $500 million. But what I am concerned about is the fact that your party is split. And it was very clear in the Public Accounts Committee today that you were split. So my question is, will you finally be open and transparent with the taxpayers to reveal these true costs? And given the Auditors General's report into the gas plants, one of my major concerns is that your party will obstruct legislative officers as well as members of this assembly in getting the true cost. Can we make a commitment from you today very public that you will not get in the way of getting those answers out to the public very desperately? Minister of Education. Minister of Education. Yes, thank you. And I'm very pleased to respond to this because in fact we have been quite open about what the financial considerations are here. We announced in January of 2013 that we had reached savings of $1.8 billion as a result of labour negotiations. And as of today, we continue to achieve savings of $1.8 billion. Nothing has changed. Now, what we clearly are very pleased about is that as a result of our discussions with our friends in the various teachers groups and the various education support workers groups that we have in fact achieved what we wanted to achieve which was a good start to the school year. I can tell you any parents and grandparents that I have spoken to in the last few weeks are absolutely delighted that we have received a good start to the school year. This minister did not provide me with any cost whatsoever. In fact, after six months of asking doing order of paper questions asking questions as an assembly not once did she provide me with a detailed breakdown of what this cost. You will understand when I get concerned as a mother with my child in the public education system when the education minister in this house says that her number one problem is not educating students in our classrooms. It's a very big challenge for us to believe this government on this side because they don't want to tell us what the true costs are. I also am very concerned because this is the Premier who effectively campaigned to get the support of the teachers unions by accepting tens of thousands of dollars from them in the last year. She then decided to repeal bill 115 at the union's request. She decided to appease the unions by pushing out the former minister and all I am simply asking on behalf of parents teachers who want to teach in students and members of this assembly will they do their job? Will they provide us with the information? Thank you. Unlike the party opposite we actually do believe that teachers want to teach and we appreciate that. I must say in terms of confusing numbers the member opposite has claimed we have a 100 million bill a 300 million bill a 500 million bill you know Speaker I want to get the accurate numbers so what we did is we struck an implementation cost estimate working group and we have been working with school boards over the course of the summer working through each item accurately and getting the actual figures from the school board we have one or two items we made and when we have those accurate numbers absolutely nailed we will in fact release the accurate actual cost and I'm quite prepared to do that. Thank you. Thank you Mr. President. Thank you Mr. Speaker my question is for the Prime Minister I think colleagues and I have been urging this government to regulate the tanning industry but for five years this government have let the bills languish despite the fact that we knew of the cancer risk Speaker this bill could have passed in 2008 in 2010 in 2012 right now it feels like a cynical game is being played on the back of cancer patient if the Premier is not playing politics then why didn't she pass this bill when she had a majority government Minister of Health and Launch and Care I am asking all members of this legislature to work together for the benefit of the people of Ontario we have an opportunity to pass this bill by the end of September we need a party to stand with us to get that job done Speaker the member opposite's commitment to this tanning legislation is impeccable she clearly supports this legislation that was first introduced by Khalil Ramal in 2000 for us to take the step that almost every other province has already done Speaker we can get this done by September 30th it's time to put the political game to the side and get this job done good work of the Cancer Society of Kate of the Melanoma Network right now if anyone in this house was to hold up this bill they would be on the front page of every media with a set of red horn and a long quaint detail nobody is going to hold this bill up we've discovered that the only reason that this government suddenly became interested in the bill was to distract Ontario from the gas plants candle instead of actually delivering a result for Ontarian why is the Premier more interested in manufacturing a crisis when in fact everybody agrees that it is time for this bill to move forward Minister of Health along come care Speaker the member opposite was present this morning at a media conference she heard firsthand from the people who were advocating for speedy passage of this bill the Canadian Cancer Society Melanoma of the Ontario Medical Association there is overwhelming consensus Speaker this bill has been introduced new question the member from Ajax Pickering Mr. Speaker my question for the Minister of Health and Long Term Care parents and families in my community of Ajax Pickering want to know if this government is serious in its commitment to protect the health of our sons, our daughters and our children in March the Minister introduced the legislation that if passed would restrict access to tanning bed services for Ontario my question straight forward could the Minister tell us when she expects this legislation to move forward Mr. Speaker I'd like to thank the member from Ajax Pickering for this very important question and as we were saying this skin cancer prevention act represents common ground all three parties agree that this legislation should move forward Speaker there has been broad consensus this is the right thing to do but unfortunately this legislation has been blocked it has not moved forward the policies have been extending debate for 55 hours of this legislation we can no longer allow this legislation to be held up the longer this legislation is delayed Speaker the worse it is for our young people so we will be moving a programming motion I look forward to the support Speaker of the party's office Mr. Speaker thank you Minister Speaker it's great news for all Ontarians that we have an opportunity to pass this vital legislation swiftly it seems to all of us in the house that we agree in restricting young Ontarians access to tanning services is vital to protecting their health however as you have noted this bill has needlessly been delayed can the minister through you Speaker tell us this legislation to move forward dangers of exposure to artificial for young people have been very well documented Speaker I've been disappointed that the leader of the opposition kind of fluffed it off is not an important issue Renfro maybe didn't hear while he was yelling I said he is warned finish your answer Speaker at the end of question period I will be moving unanimous consent number from Perry Salmon School questions for the Premier on the ring of fire Premier government has done a lot of work on the fire to the project in thrown speeches budgets debate and in response to questions here in the Legislature but despite all this talk we are seeing very little progress made on the ring fact things have taken a step backward recently with major players choosing to put their operations on hold punctuated by the decision by Cliff's resource to suspend work on their environmental assessment Premier since becoming leader have you met with Cliff's Naurant or KWG all key players who will create thousands of jobs for Ontarians by developing the ring of fire Mike the question from the member indeed the ring of fire is a very exciting economic development opportunity for certainly not just Northern Ontario but for the whole province of Ontario we are working very very closely with the companies involved in the ring of fire certainly including the companies that the member mentioned but I think what's extraordinarily important for us is to take the good news that's coming forward for example the fact that we are working so closely with First Nations set of negotiations on a regional framework basis led by the Metable First Nations led by Mr. Ray and by having Mr. Aski Frank Yacobuchi to take on the provincial negotiating role which is moving forward in a very positive way just this morning for example members may not know that the application for a judicial review has been actually withdrawn by the Metable First Nations showing real confidence may I say in the process that's moving forward with Mr. Ray and Mr. Yacobuchi so a complex extraordinarily I stand supplementary. Well thank you Mr. Speaker well it's hard for the minister to provide a useful answer to a direct question asked of the Premier so again to the Premier even in the face of prominent minors criticizing delays in the approval process and I quote unresolved agreements with the Government serving the environment in order projects economic viability you insist the ring of fire is moving ahead Premier for claiming your government would make the North a priority your actions have done little to signal that there's been any real change while getting the ring of fire right is important there needs to be a real action to show that you're committed to creating northern jobs with yesterday's ruling of the Land Commissioner in mind why should minors continue investing millions of dollars to stay afloat and the ring of fire when there's so little action on the part of your government Minister what's so absolutely crucial to is that we do have the support of all three parties in the legislature to move the project forward as well certainly what the information related to the withdrawal of the application for the judicial review is a very important piece in terms of moving the project forward there's no question we do indeed agree we all need to get it right and that certainly includes working on making sure that the first nations that are closest to the ring of fire are absolutely going to benefit from this project and that is certainly one of the goals that we have it's also one of the very clear goals of the major companies involved in this project and I think if you're talking about the lives natural resources or you're talking to Naurant resources you're talking to KWG or Canada Chrome they're also working very very closely we are extremely encouraged by the decision to withdraw the judicial review the issue related to the mining and lands commission is one that we are looking for very closely obviously between Cliffs and another company and to and KWG so the long and the short is it's a great project this is a project your question to the minister of transportation and infrastructure yesterday we learned that the minister Scarborough transit proposal one does not have a detailed cost estimate two would likely cause delays and cost overruns in the Eglinton crosstown line three requires Toronto council approval and willingness to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in sunk costs and cost overruns why is the minister undermining transit expansion in Scarborough by floating a plan with so many flaws roadblocks and uncertainties Mr. Speaker what we learned yesterday that it's never been the minister's plan it's actually been a plan worked on very diligently between Metrolinx and MTO it's actually the same plan that we've had for a very long time I don't think you need to just click twice on the MTO website it pops up and if you go back through time regression you'll actually see the same line is there we asked the city one question Mr. Speaker do you want an LRT or a subway because our members now for 20 years wanted a subway and it was previous city councils that said they did not want a subway when the council may change its mind to agree with by colleagues like minister do good and my many MPP colleagues from Scarborough have been elected on a subway they said to me as minister can we do it we did it and we're going to do it with as minimal changes as possible we're sticking to the same plan there's no changes the only flip-flops have been in the NDP and the only government that's changed its position as a city speaker what pops up is this the minister is running roughshod over Metrolinx by pushing a proposal that one without knowing how much taxpayer money will be wasted by breaking contracts with Bombardier and other suppliers two without the agreement of Toronto council to cover sunk costs and cost overruns and without confirmation that the plan is technically feasible what price will the city of Toronto the TTC, Metrolinx and above all the taxpayer pay for the minister's arrogance and self-serving scheme Mr. Speaker I have been accused of you know of drawing some hard edges but I don't personally attack people like the member opposite just did second Mr. Speaker very very very very very very quickly Mr. Speaker I know the conservatives and the NDP who like to debate subways they don't like to build them and they propose motions and the member but I know wants us to get into another debate Mr. Speaker we're not debating subways anymore we're not debating transit we're building it and we're building it now and I'm not interested in politicians who want to move motions the people of Scarborough are fed up with the politics of this the people of Scarborough are getting their subway Mr. Speaker on budget on time enough talk Mr. Speaker let the member for a teleco center continue his rants from City Hall and move more motions here we don't need City Hall politics here Mr. Speaker we certainly don't need the NDP who have no position do you have a question the member from Scarborough Guildwood thank you Speaker the question is for the Minister of Municipal Municipal Affairs and Housing I have heard from a number of my constituents in Scarborough Guildwood who live in cooperative housing that they have to go to court over an issue in their co-op they say that this process is expensive and time consuming for both the cooperative and the member involved this is an expense that is often prohibitively expensive for both parties they're frustrated that tenants in rental properties seem to have better access to dispute resolution mechanisms such as the landlord and tenant board than they do and they have asked me why our government has yet to help them reform this process and I think that this is a fair question Speaker through you to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing could you please explain what Bill 14 would do to help co-op and their members I'm going to start by congratulating the member from Scarborough Guildwood this is a very timely question because Bill 14 is actually going to committee today and I know we have a number of members of the co-op housing the hard working members here today I want to remind the entire house about the important role that co-op housing plays in providing affordable housing to Ontarians across this province however cooperatives have what can only be described as a complicated and expensive dispute resolution process having to use the courts that is unlike both tenants and landlords in Ontario who are able to access the landlord and tenant board without involving courts or pricey lawyers it's an issue of fairness for those who are at least able to afford the costly court process that's why our government introduced Bill 14 and that's why we urge the opposition and the third party to work with us and pass Bill 14 it's time to give a supplementary thank you speaker and I would like to ask the minister through you because I've heard from some people in Scarborough Guildwood that they are confused about how this bill is different from an earlier one they have heard about an amendment that would allow the landlord and tenant board to waive application fees this causes many of them to worry that this would only reduce the number of cases being heard by the landlord and tenant board leading to longer delays and less justice for tenants while I am new to the legislature I know there have already been questions in this house about this very issue speaker through you to the minister of municipal affairs and housing could the minister explain how the fee waiver to the landlord and tenant board would work and the rationale for this minister general you know I want to comment also the member from Leeds Granville raised this issue we've had this debate in the house and previously questioned why we included this amendment in short the speaker the reason we proposed this amendment was to ensure fairness for all Ontarians no matter what their income currently all applicants to the landlord tenant board have to pay a fee to have their case heard meaning that a tenant whose only source of income is a disability benefit might have to choose between seeking redress at the landlord tenant board or paying for groceries our government believes that no Ontarian should have to make that choice and at the end of the day Mr. Speaker this amendment would mean that all Ontarians whether they're rich or poor would have the same access to justice thank you thank you very much Mr. Speaker my question is for the premier yesterday in justice committee your predecessors former chief of staff David Livingston once again came up with a case of selective amnesia he had a hard time recalling his role in your liberal gas plant scandal to make matters worse he saw nothing wrong with his deleting emails and breaking document retention laws week after week liberal staffers have come before the committee and either say they don't recall or have deliberately misled members of the committee Premier when are you going to start taking your party's flagrant abuse of taxpayers seriously instruct your former staff to cooperate with the committee and finally start providing some answers Premier Mr. Speaker Mr. Speaker the fact of the matter is that on this side of the house those members who have been called to appear in front of the committee have including Mr. Livingston that was mentioned it's very interesting now Mr. Speaker that again to go to the point of an answer I gave yesterday the fact that the PC party so aggressively was opposed to the plants said they were the only party if they form government that they would cancel them what's interesting Mr. Speaker is over and over and over again we have asked those failed PC candidates who had robo calls who had tweets who had press releases who went around saying we are the only ones we've asked them to come before a committee to talk about their costing to talk about their analysis and Mr. Speaker there has been a concerted effort on the part of the PCs to make sure none of them would show up so I asked the honourable member in his supplementary to tell us when he will encourage the PC candidates to show up and tell their side of the story Premier, Premier, transparency is about providing answers and you have failed miserably on that account current and former liberal staffers come before the committee only to have their testimony contradicted by senior bureaucrats there are emails indicating that senior liberal operatives were plotting an attempt to influence the speaker to change a ruling Premier, you don't want to get to the bottom of this scandal because you're afraid you're going to find will you commit today and only the changes can only be made here it's not about letting committee work your House Leader has a job to do will you commit to instructing him today to expand the scope of the committee the mandate of the Justice Committee to include asking questions about your liberal operatives attempts to influence the speaker really tough from this spot I've ruled on this once before and at second time I'm asking the member to stay away from an already ruled upon issue rephrase the question to include what you're looking for but without the issue that has been ruled on as I said before and will you finally instruct your staff and advisors to regain their memory and tell the truth Premier House Leader Mr. Speaker it's a little bit disappointing that that member is engaging in this morning here in the legislature he is an individual who knows the procedures of this House an issue arose before the Justice Committee and there were a number of different avenues that could be taken his House Leader decided to with very appropriate notice to you Mr. Speaker several weeks to move ahead with a notice of privilege as such that was the route that they chose that we talked about at House Leaders meetings were not then available the Honourable Member raised it through a letter and you gave a very clear and fulsome ruling Mr. Speaker and in light of that ruling I am open as the Premier said to having further discussions with the House Leaders but I think your ruling was very instructive about the nature of the meeting and the nature of meetings that you have as Speaker and that of course is a context that we would have any further discussions Thank you Mr. Speaker, my questions to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care Hamilton Urban Corps is a community health centre in my riding that delivers care to some of the neediest people in the province after 17 years of dedicated service it is stuck in a cramped and broken down building because of chronic underfunding now the Lynn wants to cram the CHC into an even smaller facility and cut oral health and foot care from their mandate even though 18 other CHCs in the province offer these very essential services will the Minister show some leadership and step in to protect the vital services provided by the Hamilton Urban Corps or does she agree with the local Lynn that the CHC should be cutting vital oral health and foot care services to my constituents Thank you Minister of Health and Long-Term Care I am delighted to welcome members of the Urban Corps CHC here I am a big champion of CHCs I think you know that we've been able to expend 19 CHCs new capital projects across the province in fact we've almost doubled the number of CHCs in this province it is a fantastic model speaker it provides holistic care to people who might face barriers to receiving the care that they deserve so I know that the CHC and the Lynn are working together to find common ground and I want the Urban Corps to know that I urge them to continue to work with the Lynn to develop a plan to move forward so we can meet the needs of the people of downtown Hamilton Thank you so much For months now my health critic has been urging the Minister to get involved in this issue I finally raised it with her personally yesterday it is not the case that the Lynn is working with the CHC and the Lynn is working against the CHC and against the people in my riding who need vital foot care and oral care services and this is an unacceptable situation that this Minister has known about for a very, very long time and I am asking her very, very specifically does she or does she not believe that community health care centres should have a mandate that include foot care include oral care and does she or does she not believe it's her job to make sure that two of this province get the health care services that they deserve Our commitment to community health centres is clear we have almost doubled the number of community health centres we have almost doubled the number of people served by community health centres we have increased funding by 140% our commitment is very clear nonetheless Urban Corps must continue that is the structure we have put in place I urge the community health centre to continue to work with the Lynn to find common ground I look forward to this moving forward but there is work to do before it can move forward Thank you Mr. Speaker Mr. Speaker Thank you Mr. Speaker Mr. Speaker my question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services Mr. Speaker I am proud of our government's commitment to reduce poverty in Ontario our progress made through the efforts of the poverty reduction strategy this strategy aims to give children and their families the tools and support their need there is a lot to be done when it comes to poverty and giving children youth the best opportunity to reach their potential measuring our success is just as crucial as it allows us to enhance our strategy moving forward my question Mr. Speaker is what have been the results to date of the poverty reduction strategy and how it has assisted Ontario families Minister of Health Lynn Lynn Thank you Mr. Speaker I would like to thank a member from Scarborough Rouge for this very important issue one that I know resonates with many members in this house and across the province I am proud of the progress that we have made through the poverty reduction strategy to date and our support for children and families current data indicates that 61,000 children have been prevented from falling into poverty additionally 47,000 were lifted out I am very encouraged by these results we have been able to accomplish this through a range of programs and initiatives for example over 950,000 children in 510,000 families are being helped by the Ontario Child Benefit as well our open minds healthy mind strategy has helped an estimated 35,000 young people deal with mental health and addiction these are the ways in which we are investing in children and their families building stronger communities and a healthier Ontario Thank you I would like to thank the minister for that response I am pleased that we remain committed to reducing poverty and has delivered results for families in Ontario in 2009 this government made a long term commitment to combat poverty through poverty reduction act a requirement of this act was that a new strategy would be developed every 5 years it is my understanding that consultations have begun across the province on the development of a renewed strategy to continue to reduce poverty over the next 5 years I am personally taken part in the consultation next month along with my other Scarborough MPPs to gain valuable input from our communities on the next strategy could the minister please inform the house the member from Hamilton Mountain and the member from Hamilton East Stony Creek come to order continue please could the minister please inform the house on the progress of these consultations the steps being taken to reduce poverty in the province thank you Mr. Speaker and thanks again to the member I have to say that I am proud that it is this government that brought forward the first provincial poverty reduction strategy to help develop our second strategy I personally kicked off consultations in Windsor on August 6th and also held one last week in Thunder Bay what I am finding is that people are pleased with the opportunity to provide their feedback on this issue and their input is important to this issue poverty is a complex issue and we need to hear from all voices our goal is that we hear from as many people as possible and that is what we are working on and the steps that need to be taken I want to encourage people across Ontario to participate in these consultations or provide feedback to us online Speaker we know there is much more work to do we all know there is and these members from the UC also health and long-term care minister many Ontarians living with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis are not able to obtain the medication that will help slow the progression of this terrible disease Esprit a drug that has been proven to help manage the symptoms is not at this time on the approved drug formulary patients have applied to the exceptional access program to get funding for Esprit but have been denied with no clear for the denial this issue has been before the committee to evaluate drugs for a very long time yet no decision has been made and no indication when a decision has been made minister will you commit today to speaking with the committee with a view to obtaining a positive answer with respect to funding as soon as possible Thank you speaker and I do welcome people who are advocating for this drug today to the legislature I do want to say once again though that these are not political decisions we make decisions on what drugs to fund based on the evidence speaker there is a process that we go through when we make important decisions about what drugs to fund and with regards to Esprit speaker the Canadian Drug Expert Committee has recommended that Esprit should not be funded because of inconsistent results we remain open to new evidence speaker but at this point the evidence to support the public funding of this drug does not has not been presented to the committee to evaluate drugs so we clearly are open to new evidence but at this time the evidence does not support funding Thank you Member from Timmons James Bay on a point of order Mr. Speaker I seek you and Adams consent in order to pass the tanning legislation Timmons James Bay has asked for unanimous consent to call second reading of the bill without debate and a vote do we agree March the 19th 2013 Ms. Matthews moved second reading of bill 30 is it the pleasure of the house that the motion carry Second reading of the bill does the election approach it a lot shall the bill be referred for third reading recognize we got this I heard a no therefore the bill is referred to committee Minister of Health I move that third reading of bill 30 I'm not sure if the member from Wren remembers something I hope he does and I think you were reminding me having said that we still have to finish what we started I need to this bill has been for second reading into a committee the minister has an opportunity to put it into the committee that she so desires excuse me excuse me I got this I got this it doesn't preclude the minister from doing something else but I need to get it to a committee I would like to refer this to general governments I was now referred to the general government committee minister of health thank you speaker I move unanimous consent for third reading of bill 30 I'm working through this it's quite right I got it I think we mean land where we want to land you're seeking unanimous consent to discharge the bill from committee put it to third reading with no debate and passage is the unanimous consent do we have unanimous consent I heard a no there are no deferred votes this house stands recessed until 3pm this afternoon