 It is now time for Question Period, the leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opinion. My question is for the acting Premier. I had the privilege... I'm very much aware of the happenings in the province. And I'm going to ask that we suspend a moment just to reflect on what my job is. And I would like to be able to provide all questioners and those giving answers with the appropriate attention that it does deserve, leader. Centre this past weekend in Ottawa. I was moved by the work they do. But the truth is, mental health care facilities in Ontario need the government's help. The geriatric hospital wing at the Royal has a three-month waiting list. Drug addiction services have an even longer waiting list. And I asked the staff, I asked the physicians at the Royal what we could do, what we could raise at Queens Park, and they said, tell the government, tell the Minister of Health to stop touching our mental health facilities. Will the government commit to supporting mental health in the province of Ontario? Minister of Health, long-term care. Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I'm hoping, based on that question, that the official opposition will support us in our budget, because in fact we are increasing our funding not just generally to hospitals, an additional $345 million to hospitals, but specifically to our inpatient mental health hospitals across this province that we have made a substantial new increase this year. And I would hope that the member opposite would recognize that it's important for these hospitals in the context of the transformations that we're undergoing. They're moving with us in terms of reform to funding models, focusing more on outcomes and what truly benefits patients. We're also moving more and more of the patients that we can provide support into the community where they can be best cared for. The province demonstrates the outcomes are better in the community, so we're making reforms with our hospitals. Mr. Speaker, you want to talk about outcomes? The outcome and the reality is the government's not doing enough. You know, there's not enough when mental illness affects one in three people during their lifetime. The funding is not enough when one in three hospitalizations are caused by mental illness. We know that 70% of mental health issues emerging are in the teen years. The government needs to make resources available for our youth, but this government has done the opposite. They have cut mental health. So my question to the acting premier or the minister of health is will you commit to stopping the cuts in our mental health facilities? Well, once again, Mr. Speaker, we're increasing our funding to mental health across this province. We're in the middle of a program, a new expansion, $138 million, new dollars, in our mental health and addiction services in the most recent budget that's being tabled. We've increased specifically an allocation wholly dedicated to our mental health hospitals. The Royal, as well, has benefited from a substantial new investment in a dedicated CT scan, that will benefit patients that are challenged by mental illness. So there are many, many things that we're doing to transform our mental health services across the province, including at the Royal in Ottawa. Thank you. Final supplementary. Mr. Speaker, no one believes this government is doing enough on mental health. The reality is mental health is just as important as physical health. But this premier, this government doesn't recognize how cruel it is that they go out during Bell Let's Talk Month and say, come forward, have the courage to ask for treatment, and then they cut that treatment. How hypocritical? How wrong? You want to talk? The leader will withdraw. Withdraw. The reality is when you ask, when you actually go and visit these centres, when I visited Ontario Shores, they said the cuts were too much. They had to fire staff. At the Royal last year, they had to cut 18 staff members who are needed on the front lines of dealing with mental health in Ontario. 18 people were cut, so the question is, I appreciate you've got your talking points. But every mental health facility is cutting staff. And if you continue, I'll have to deal with you. I've already mentioned it once, I'll mention it in a second time, and that will be the end. While I'm trying to speak and I'm standing giving people instructions, the minute I sit down, I hear heckling, I'm going to go after those individuals. Number two, the member please address the chair. Minister. So, Mr. Speaker, it's right there. It's right there in the budget document on page 117, the important investments, the new investments that we're making in our mental health and addiction services, including in our hospitals. But I think, Mr. Speaker, it's important to also recognize that mental health is evolving in the sense that the outcomes... The member from Renfrew, Nipissing, Pembroke. The member from Leeds, Granville. Carry on. So the finance minister has reminded me more than $16 million to mental health services. In addition to $138 million that we're investing also in community care because I would hope that the leader of the official opposition would recognize that we need to follow the evidence in the science. And what best outcomes exist for those with mental health challenges and often that's moving them into the community and providing supportive care like the 1,000 new supportive... Thank you. Member from Leeds, Granville, second time. New question, the leader of the opposition. Mr. Speaker, since I can't get a straight answer why every mental health facility in Ontario has had to cut staff, let's try something else. A recent forum poll had some interesting information. It said that there is strong disapproval for the liberal version of cap and trade. It said nearly 60% of the people in Ontario disapprove of cap and trade as a cash grab. If you want to get public buy-in, if you... Making references to you means that you're not speaking to me. I need to be included in this, please. It helps. And as far as I'm concerned, if it continues on this side, I'm doing the same thing. Please finish. Mr. Speaker, if the government wants to get public buy-in for their environmental policies, it can't simply be a cash grab. It has to be revenue neutral. Will the government commit to making their cap and trade policies revenue neutral? Thank you. Deputy Premier. Thank you, Speaker. And I do want to start by sincerely congratulating the leader of the opposition for his change of heart on the environment. Your position on that. The tricky part, though, is, Speaker, is this. There have been some flip-flops. Now he's supporting the environment. But for nine years, as a member of the Harper Caucus, he sat on his... No, you do. He sat on his hands when... Member from here on Bruce. Please finish. Speaker, the now leader of the opposition sat on his hands when Harper withdrew from the... Stop the clock. I'm going to take a position on this that I want to talk about government policy here. So if there are going to be responses or questions that lead to that, I'm going to say fine. If it doesn't lead to that, talk about government policy, please. So this is about policy because Canada's reputation was harmed. Stop the clock. I'm not going to debate this. Presidential government policy. Please. Speaker, now the leader of the opposition says that he believes that climate change is a major threat to Ontario. But when he ran for leadership not that long ago, he said it would not be my plan to bring in a cap and trade system or a carbon tax. Now the PC leader says we have to do something about climate change and that something includes putting a price on carbon. Thank you. The supplementary. Mr. Speaker, my question was on revenue neutrality. I wasn't asking for smears or tax or insults. This is a serious public policy question. The reality is this government's proposal will cause the average family in Ontario to pay $387 more. That's not right. This plan must include corresponding tax relief for individuals and businesses if you want to have the public's buy-in. So my question, Mr. Speaker, is the Liberals have to stop making life more expensive for everyone in Ontario? Why won't this government give families a break? Will you commit that this will not be a liberal slush fund and that you will give it back to the people of Ontario? Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Premier. So Speaker, on Saturday we... When I get the attention, it's not the moment for you to then start interjecting. It's actually when you're supposed to stop. Finish please. So the PC leader said on Saturday that there was practically universal support in the caucus for carbon pricing. But just last week the environment critic said that it was PC policy not to support cap and trade. Premier, party of Ontario, and commit to not implementing a carbon tax. So Speaker, it's pretty hard to tell the flips from the plops, but we're glad that you've decided. Final supplementary. Mr. Speaker, again to the acting Premier, once again I did not get an answer on revenue neutrality. And let me say, our environment critic is a phenomenal MPP. And what she said last week was that we don't need a cap and trade policy that's simply another liberal slush fund. So let me say this. Let me say this, Mr. Speaker, very clearly. This plan can't be another Colgate. It can't be another Metrolinx slush fund. It can't be like the business grant program the Auditor General says was completely abused and not transparent. The money can't go to liberal pet projects. A revenue neutral plan must be subject to independent oversight. Will the government agree here today that it will not be another liberal slush fund? It will be conditioned on oversight and that the government will actually give it back. Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Premier. Minister of Environment and Climate Change. Minister of the Government and Climate Change. Thank you. Minister. Thanks Mr. Speaker. You know, there seems to be some big holes in the opposition's position. The first one is, Mr. Speaker, as you know, the financial accountability officer reported last week that by regulation, and I'll send it by the page over to the member of the official opposition, that this is a regulatory fee. This money can only legally be spent on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. And it would be nice if, now that the leader of the opposition knows that, could be honest. But Mr. Speaker, I am curious. I am curious about, did he tell people on Saturday that his tax would be $160 a ton? 10 times what it would be under a cap and trade system. How did that happen with the people that he promised he would never introduce a carbon price tax then? Because a carbon tax doesn't have a cap rate. Thank you. To question the leader of the third party. Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the acting Premier. The Liberals are nearly doubling drug costs for most seniors. On top of that, on page 180 of the budget, it says that the government's cutting $200 million from the Ontario drug benefit that helps seniors pay for their medication, Speaker. How much of that $200 million will be coming out of seniors' pockets? Thank you. Minister of Health, long-term care. Mr. Speaker, we're proud of our drug program that provides nearly 5,000 different medications to Ontarians, including our seniors but many others of low income that are deserving of those medicines. Mr. Speaker, it is a program which we continue to invest in about $150 million a year or a 3% increase in that budget on an annual basis. We've made important changes, measures in this budget, Mr. Speaker, so that an additional 170,000 people will go from paying $100 deductible to paying $0 deductible. And that's, Mr. Speaker, that's an important measure that's going to benefit so many Ontarians. It will bring to, in that category, almost 500,000 seniors who will not pay any annual deductible at all. I would hope that that's something that the third party would appreciate, provides support to those who truly need it. Thank you. Well, Mr. Speaker, what the minister is not admitting to is that under the Liberals' plan, more seniors will be paying more for their prescription drugs. And on top of nearly doubling what most seniors will pay, the Liberals are cutting $200 million from the seniors' drug coverage. Now, why doesn't this government, Speaker, focus on expanding prescription drug coverage and protecting universal access to health care instead of cutting supports for seniors? Mr. Speaker, we continue to increase our drug program, including for seniors, year after year after year. And I think it's important that Ontarians understand that we have the most generous drug program for seniors in the entire country. Mr. Speaker, it's true that the out-of-pocket expenses, on average, for a senior are approximately $277 in Ontario. The next closest province is approximately $600. That includes provinces like Manitoba and Saskatchewan and Quebec, which are more than double the out-of-pocket expenses for seniors. So we have the most generous program. We need to make some changes in order to ensure the sustainability of the program. I believe that Ontarians appreciate that we should direct our greatest effort to those who need the health the most. That's what we're intending to do with this budget, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Not only are the Liberals planning to make seniors pay more for medication, their plan is to cut $200 million from the Ontario drug benefit, and that means less funding for seniors' medication. Why are the Liberals cutting $200 million and forcing seniors to pay more for their prescriptions instead of investing and in expanding coverage so that more seniors have access to affordable medication? Thank you. Mr. Speaker, we are continuing to increase our funding for drug programs, including for our seniors. What we're doing is we're shifting somewhat the responsibility for those seniors who can most afford it to help 170,000 more seniors pay no annual deductible. But it's not all we're doing for our seniors. We're also increasing our funding by $75 million for hospices and palliative and end-of-life care. We're adding the shingles vaccine, a free vaccine, an estimated $170 saving to each senior. We're removing the debt retirement charges, which will save our seniors on average an additional $70 per year. We actually reduce the number of prescriptions that a pharmacist is allowed to charge for from up to monthly, up to 12, down to four. And that's going to save an enormous amount of money in the reduced co-payment cost for our seniors and for the pharmacists less. That's right. Thank you. New question. My next question is also for the acting Premier Speaker. It's been 12 days since the Premier announced your plan to nearly double the cost of medication for seniors in Ontario. It took her five days to realize that that was a mistake. Now she's giving herself until the end of March, Speaker, to figure out whether a senior making $19,500 a year is affluent. Has this Liberal government realized that their plan will nearly double medication costs for struggling seniors, or do they need 24 more days, Speaker, to figure out whether or not a senior earning $19,500 a year is actually affluent? Thank you. That's a good point. You know, Speaker, I was taken aback when the Deputy Leader of the NDP announced that they would proudly vote against this budget, Speaker. What that means is that the NDP is voting against free tuition for low-income students and reduced costs for middle-class families, Speaker. If they're voting against the biggest infrastructure investment in Ontario's history, that's going to create 110,000 jobs each year, Speaker. They're voting against increasing healthcare funding by $1 billion, including $345 million for hospital funding. They're voting against $178 million for affordable housing and homelessness initiative, Speaker. They're voting against lowing hospital parking fees. They're voting against vaccination. They're voting against 170,000 more Ontario seniors getting zero deductible. Thank you. Supplementary. We will proudly be voting against a liberal plan that will leave seniors paying more for their drug costs. It's three more weeks to figure out what everyone in Ontario already knows that struggling seniors cannot afford to pay more for their medication. And on top of making seniors pay more, Speaker, the Liberals are planning to cut $200 million from the seniors' drug benefit. These are things that new Democrats don't support, Speaker. It should be no surprise to the Liberals that new Democrats actually believe in pharma care and in more opportunity. We will proudly will this government stop cutting and instead make medication more affordable for more seniors. Thank you. Thank you, Speaker. It seems to me that the only criticism the third party has of this budget is an item that the Premier has already said we're going to take another look at. So they're voting against making the shingles vaccine free for eligible seniors. They're voting against $100 million to help people reduce their home energy bills. They're voting against eliminating the drive-clean $30 fee. They're voting against reducing auto insurance. They're voting against 250,000 four-and-five-year-olds having access to full-day kindergarten. They're voting against supports to an innovative program for high school students to assist with financial literacy. They're voting against $75 million for hospice and community care. They're voting against $333 million to support kids with autism. Thank you. Final supplementary. The acting Premier doesn't have to worry, Speaker. New Democrats will be talking quite a bit over the next number of days about all of the things in this budget that we have serious problems with. However, today I'm asking specifically about the fact that seniors have seen their drug costs double. Seniors have also seen wait lists for long-term care, Speaker, get longer and longer. They're waiting months-on-months for home care, Speaker. If the acting Premier wants a list, I'll give it to her. They've seen physiotherapy services cut, Speaker. They're struggling to pay their heating bills, Speaker. And now the Premier is increasing their medication costs and slashing the Ontario drug benefit. When will Ontario seniors get the respect that they deserve from this Liberal government? Thank you. Thank you, Premier. The NDP are saying that they are going to vote against $250 million more to home and community care, Speaker. The NDP is saying they're voting against free tuition for the kids in the lowest income. Actually, income up to $50,000 a year. This is a life-changing initiative in this budget. The old NDP would have been standing up and cheering this new Speaker. But the new NDP is just stuck on one issue that we've already said we will review. You know, there are other things in the budget, including Goal Service to Niagara. Now, I am a bit surprised that the NDP would not be supporting Goal Service to Niagara, considering that they've been big advocates of this, Speaker. There's a lot in this budget. It's an important progressive budget. Thank you. New question. The member from Nipperson. Thank you, and good morning, Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Finance. Minister, I have a document here that outlines an RFP issued by the LCBO on February 24th, one day before the budget was released. It states that the LCBO is seeking a real estate vendor to sell 250 LCBO store locations right across the province. Section 3.2.1 states, quote, the LCBO's main intention is to sell properties. And 3.2.3 says the LCBO will consider leasing out properties that are deemed unsaleable, or if they can generate high revenue from a tenant. Speaker, can the Minister tell us just how much money he expects the sale to bring in for the province, what will happen to these LCBO locations, and how many jobs will be cut or otherwise affected as a result of the sale? Thank you, Minister of Finance. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the question for the member opposite, who I believe recognizes that tremendous contribution the LCBO provides our province by way of dividends, recognizing that the expertise of the LCBO is operating a retail organization that has tremendous value. And we recognize the work it does as a distributor for the benefit of Ontarians, who then realizes on some of those proceeds for hospital investments, for education, and for infrastructure investments. That's their priority, Mr. Speaker. They're doing a good job. Right after I asked the member to come to order, he just kept yelling. So I'm going to say second time to the member of Lampton-Kent-Mittleset. Just wrap up, please. Are you finished? Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So, Speaker, I can take from the fact we didn't get an answer about the 250 stores is that they're selling 250 stores across Ontario. That's plain and simple, Speaker. And it's curious that the RFP went out before the budget was released, yet none of those details were in the budget. No details on which 250 locations, no details on how many of the thousands of jobs will be cut, no details on the financial impact this will have on the bottom line. Speaker, I wonder, is this more liberal furniture burning to heat the home? Is this another part of the liberal plan to balance their budget? I asked the minister, why were you keeping details of this sale of LCBO stores secret from the people of Ontario? Thank you. Well, I think you're getting close. Minister. Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. There's no secret. Member for Renfrew, second time. There's no secret that this side of the house supports the LCBO, supports the work that they're doing, and, Mr. Speaker, we are continuing to provide all the supports necessary for the LCBO to succeed. It is why they are the wholesalers of the distribution that's being advanced to grocery chains, for example, Mr. Speaker. The member opposite makes reference to secrecy. Well, there may be some market sensitivities and commercial sensitivities. This, I can say, though, LCBO stores and the distribution network will continue with the same compliment that it has now that benefits all of Ontarians. What may occur in respect to being a lease premise or an owned premise, that will be up to the LCBO determining the best value for taxpayer money, Mr. Speaker, and the best value for our insurance. The member opposite has fine-asked critics, should know better. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Any questions? Remember from London fanshow. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question to the minister of education. Speaker, students and families in London are contacting my office concerned about the possible closure of the Robart School for the Deaf and the Amapha School in London. Families wonder why the minister has cut off enrollment into provincial and demonstration schools if she's really only just consulting. They wonder why this government capped enrollment at 42 when the program has space for 138 students. Children in London have been waiting and hoping for months only to learn that they may never get these specialized services in the schools. The closure of both schools leaves students in southwestern Ontario with nowhere else to turn. Speaker, why is the minister trying to balance the budget on the backs of some of our most vulnerable students? Thank you. So good to see you. Yes, thank you very much. And I want to start out by assuring everyone at the moment we are consulting on the future of the programs to make sure that we actually serve Deaf children in Ontario and children with very severe learning needs in the best way possible. No decisions have been made. I want to emphasize that. While we're doing the consultation we have put a pause on accepting enrollments because we need to figure out what is the best way to deliver the programs going forward. And certainly, as I've been visiting the demonstration schools which deal with children with very severe learning disabilities the demonstration schools have some wonderful programs. And the problem is though that we have thousands of kids in the province who need support with reading. Second supplementary. Speaker, parents are concerned. They're concerned and they're contacting my office and they want us to be the voice so that this minister will listen. Speaker, back to the minister. Students who want to attend specialized schools like robots or amethyst should have the right to do so. These are some of the most vulnerable kids in our province. They deserve better. Their families deserve better. Thousands of parents have signed petitions online, begging the minister and her government to keep these important schools open. This weekend we heard from Becca Haggett a student who attends amethyst and has benefited deeply from it. She is advocating for herself and for the rights of other children with unique needs that need to access these schools. The minister needs to listen to students who are directly impacted by these specialized programs. Speaker, will the minister guarantee today neither an amethyst nor warbarks will be closed because of consultations? Yes or no? Thank you. If I could just talk a little bit about the amethyst school, which just to clarify, for children with severe learning disabilities, many of the children who are at amethyst are six or even eight grade levels behind in terms of their reading acquisition, their reading skills. They're kids who are intelligent kids, but they just haven't been able to learn to read. We know that the kids who are at amethyst are not the only kids in the province who are struggling with learning to read. We know that there are other kids in the province who haven't had the opportunity to go to amethyst who are struggling to learn to read. We need to figure out how do we help all the kids who are struggling to learn to read but have average intelligence. There's a bigger group, and we need to think through our programs carefully. Thank you. New question, the minister model herself. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the minister of natural resources and forest. The 2017 budget contained many positive measures to grow our economy for Ontarians. Among them was continued support for your ministry of natural resources. Mr. Speaker, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry oversees industries that Ontarians rely on every day, industries like aggregates and wood products that build our schools, our hospitals and homes, and the thousands of Ontarians rely on for jobs. The ministry also works to protect the public, its plants, and its wildlife, while providing opportunities to experience natural heritage. Can the minister share how this government's budget is supporting the activities of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry? Thank you. Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry. Mr. Speaker, thank you very much, and I want to thank the member for the question. As most people in Northern Ontario will know, the forest industry really felt the downturn of the recession two or three years before the 08 recession really took hold in the rest of the province. As a result of that, the government came forward with a broad suite of programs, many of which are still in existence, valued at well over a billion dollars, which continue and have supported the forestry industry in Ontario. Currently, we're working very hard, representing the interests of our industry on the international stage. As many will know, the software lumber agreement is currently being renegotiated. We're doing our best to represent the Ontario industry in that regard. We still have a very significant roads funding program in place to support the industry. I'm glad we have created a new program that supports the forest industry here in Ontario, the forestry growth fund, a new program under the jobs and growth fund, the jobs and prosperity fund, which will help forestry on a forward basis with their capital problems. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and I'd like to thank the minister for his response. Minister, there has been some confusion in the media recently with regards to service and license fees within the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. I know that service fees collected by your ministry support activities valuable to many Ontarians amongst the most visible and impactful around Ontario's parks. Mr. Speaker, can the minister correct the record in this legislature around the fees and the activities that such fees support? Thank you. Minister? Yeah, again I want to thank the member for the question and the opportunity to correct the record again. I've done this at least once before, Speaker, further about the things that such fees and the broader budget do support. Wildlife licenses are not going up as part of Budget 2016. Further existing fees are used exclusively to support the management of fish and wildlife for today and tomorrow, Speaker. There's a planned increase of about 50 cents per car, per night for visitors to Ontario parks. These fees as well as seasonal lot fees contribute to Ontario parks ability to be more than 85% self-funded, Speaker. I think that's important to remember. More than that, the budget also contains for important parks infrastructure that will enhance the experience of visitors to Ontario parks. Ontario parks, like in the members riding or near his territory, Redoo River and Fitzroy near the members riding are among my ministry's best contributions to the province and provincial parks. This budget's investments in parks along with a balanced approach to service fees ensure that parks operations are sustainable for future generations. Thank you. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Health and long-term care. Minister, the government's rashing of health care has created a crisis in Ontario. Last week in London, 22 mental health patients were left waiting for beds. They were placed in a classroom because there was no space. Guelph's emergency room was shut down when 11 mental health patients required inpatient admission, but the hospital had nowhere to place them. Minister, mental health patients deserve to be treated. Are you failing our mentally ill across this province by failing to deal with the crisis in our health care system today? Minister, will you stand up and stop rashing the health care system? Thank you. Mr. Speaker, I'm not exactly sure how a $1 billion new investment in our health care system can be described as anything at all in relationship to what the member opposite is alleging. He was in the legislature last week when we talked about the situation in London where I reminded the members of the legislature of the new investment of more than $1 million on capital as well as in operating budget as well to develop a brand new crisis centre for mental health patients in London and in the middle sex area. Mr. Speaker, we're continuing to make these important investments. I would hope that the member again acknowledged that often it is in the community with strong community supports where the best outcomes are achieved. It's not necessarily in the hospital. Thank you. I was here last week when your government turned your back and everybody suffering from rare diseases. Minister, the situation worsened over the weekend. Pete Verburn, who suffers from Alzheimer's spent eight nights sleeping on the Victoria hospital floor while in restraints because there are no beds or enough front-line healthcare professionals to look after them. Your government has had many photo ops promoting mental health support but the government is failing terribly. The healthcare system is being rationed because your government's financial mismanagement. Over $2 billion have been wasted on eHealth $26.9 million on a diabetes registry and billions more on orange. Could you only think of the mental health services we could have in our province if you hadn't wasted that money? Minister, will you stop the waste and rationing and look after our most vulnerable that are slipping through the cracks of your mismanaged healthcare system? Well, Mr. Speaker, the billion-dollar increase to our healthcare system includes many important investments whether they be in palliative care and hospice care, whether they be in mental health and additional multi-million-dollar investment in mental health services in this province, whether they be the capital investments of $12 billion of the next 10 years. But, Mr. Speaker, we've had an independent study by ISIS which has shown that the reforms that we're making are having a positive impact. A shorter length of stay in hospital, increased numbers of patients treated, minimal impact on readmission rates and, importantly, a statistically significant reduction in nurse sensitive adverse events. That's important because that's about the safety of our frontline healthcare workers. And the evidence shows that our reforms, our transformation, our quality agenda over the past few years is making an important and positive impact. Thank you. Further questions? Members from Hamilton East Tony Creek. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister for Health and Long-Term Care. Liberal cuts to healthcare are hurting patients in Hamilton, Minister. Hamilton Health Sciences is cutting nearly 100 full-time positions. One of those is cutting 136 positions. And mental health services are being moved out of my writing and out of East Hamilton. Those services are a lifeline for people in need. But now the whole east side of Hamilton will be without psychiatric care. Patients will be asked to take the bus for an extra hour each way to the remaining facility on Mohawk and Hamilton Mountain. And these additional burdens of time and money will only discourage patients from getting the help they need. Will the Minister explain to us why this government is making it harder for people in East Hamilton to get the mental health care they require? Thank you. Minister for Health and Long-Term Care. Well, Mr. Speaker, I first want to address the allegations the comments made at the beginning of the member's question with regards to Hamilton Health Sciences generally. We do know that they reviewed 230 different options for finding efficiencies within their allocation. They decided on a number of those options of more than 200. They decided on a handful of them. It does result in some job losses approximately 90, but almost 50 of those are unfilled positions. So the true number is closer to 40, between 40 and 50, Mr. Speaker. The Ontario Nurses Association says only a very small number of the effective jobs at HHS are in nursing. There are non-union positions which are being removed as a result of this change. It's an important I think we need to recognize, Mr. Speaker, we need to give the tools to our hospitals to make the changes they deem necessary to provide the best quality patient care. Interesting. Speaker, RNs, RPNs, social workers, childcare workers, technologists and lab staff and many other workers are all threatened by cuts at St. Joseph's and they know the impact this will have on their community. The closure of the East Region Mental Health Services is a body blow to my riding which is the second poorest in Ontario. Minister, poverty breeds poor health including mental health. This clinic exists to provide community-based support. Instead we're asking people to travel an hour each way out of their community to get help. Gary Birch from Bimbrook contacted my office and pointed out these patients have reached a mental or financial recovery rate such that they can only access a mental health service that is near them. They will not venture very afar. Yet this government is telling them to hit the road. This pattern of short-term cuts with long-term costs and consequences is the hallmark of this liberal government and it is occurring across our province. How long will patients in Hamilton have to suffer just because the liberal government can't get its priorities straight? Thank you Mr. Speaker. My understanding is that this is one of the changes that St. Joseph's is contemplating to its mental health system. Of course we know on the mountain there is a more than one billion dollar investment in the mental health services that provide support to people not just from Hamilton but for the entire region Mr. Speaker. We need to also acknowledge the importance of moving those programs and services and supports out into the community and we've been doing that through an investment of $20 million over six years in the medical psychiatry alliance which is going to provide tens of thousands of individuals better access to mental health services or I'm surprised that the member doesn't talk about the mobile crisis rapid response team that's set up in Hamilton which has ride-alongs of mental health workers with our police officers so that if there is a mental health crisis involving someone who otherwise would end up in the justice system they get involved they often divert away from hospitals to begin with to provide the important community supports that also keep that person in prison. Thank you Mr. Speaker. My question is for the minister of children and youth services. This budget made significant investments to help children and youth across the province. Many families in my writing of New Market Aurora are glad to hear that we will be providing $33 million in new funding for autism services. Mr. Speaker, I think often of the parents and children with autism who come to see me and the challenges and struggles they face each day. I am sure they'll support this government's additional investments for children and youth with special needs. Can the minister please inform the house of the important investments her ministry is making to support Ontario's children? Thank you Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the member from New Market Aurora for this very excellent question. He's absolutely right. The new investments that have been mentioned are very very good news for children and youth and families in Ontario. This year's budget increases the children and youth budget by 2.1%. This is very very good news for families across the province. And as mentioned we're investing $330 million in funds to support children and youth with autism. We've worked really hard with the expert speaker to develop a plan for new funding and we'll be announcing those details shortly. We've also invested an additional $17.8 million for children with special needs which is just part of the nearly half a billion dollars we provide to support children with special needs and their families across the province. I'd like to thank the minister for her answer. These investments will certainly make a difference in the lives of my constituents, particularly those caring for children with special needs or autism. And the overall increase for the budget of her ministry of 2.1% is impressive and certainly money well spent. I'm happy that I'll be able to report this good news to my community. I also imagine that these new investments are being well received and the minister please explain how people are responding to the initiatives she's just mentioned. Thank you minister. So I want to thank the member again for the question. He's absolutely right. I'm very pleased to report that our investments in children and youth are being well received and supported by stakeholders in the sector. For example Margaret Spulstra the executive director of autism Ontario said families raising a very long time for this announcement. This investment will set the stage for continuous learning for years to come. Yet speaker the leader of the official opposition called our investments why called them appropriate and well received and he also recognized that the 17.8 million for special needs is a step in the right direction and the NDP member for Kitchener Waterloo called these investments for autism a step in the right direction. So despite all that speaker I'm very disappointed that we've heard that both opposition parties have indicated they will not be supporting our budget. Therefore not be supporting those very important initiatives. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Speaker minister of northern development and mines. Speaker whenever it is time for the prospect for years and developers annual of this year in the budget the only significant mention of the $60 billion Ring of Fire project was a re-announcement from 2014. The same page in the budget has essentially been copied and pasted for three years. This wouldn't be so disappointing except for the fact not a single dollar of these promised infrastructure funds has been used to advance the project. Speaker will the minister explain his lack of urgency on developing the Ring of Fire? Thank you. Thank you very much for the question and that member knows well what a priority not just the Ring of Fire but the entire mineral development sector is and that's why the prospectors and developers Association Conference is such an important gathering. Yes indeed we are very proud of our continued $1 billion commitment towards the Ring of Fire and we're going to continue our discussions with industry as we move forward. There are important discussions going on that the member knows well about they're going to lead us forward and also lead us to other mineral development prospects that we are very very excited about. The fact that we also have $120 million that is committed to the northern industrial electricity rate program is also crucial. The fact that we have a record breaking investment in infrastructure development is also crucial for the mining sector. If the member was down at PDAC yesterday he'll recognize that indeed there's a very positive atmosphere about future development in the mining sector. Again to the Minister of Northern Development and Mine, Speaker the Minister continues to insist that progress is being made but where's the proof? He just admitted that not a nickel is flowing. In fact over the past three years alone you've missed your own government deadlines in every measurable area of the project. The auditor general used her 2015 report to single out your ministry for its ineffectiveness and inaction. Speaker continued talk by this government won't develop the ring of fire. If that were the case we'd already have the 5500 jobs per year that the Ontario Chamber of Commerce estimates will be created by the project. Mr. Speaker, why can't this government get anything right especially on a project as important as the ring of fire? Mike wasn't on. Finish please. Thank you very much Mr. Speaker. As the member knows while we're doing very very important work with the Metographers Nations we've got to put a regional framework agreement in place and allows us to move forward with important discussions. The fact is we need to have the communities embracing this development. This is an extraordinary resource development project in a remote part of the province that has never seen development before so there are many considerations at play but what we have is positive development moving forward in terms of that regional framework agreement including discussions about regional infrastructure development about resource revenue sharing about socio-economic support and that's a game why we are so encouraged by our relationship with the new federal government. I had an opportunity to see a number of ministries yesterday, a number of federal members and there was great evidence to continue those discussions. We are going to move forward in terms of the mining sector. We're excited about it. We're going to stay positive. We sure wish you would as well because at the end of the day we are going to see a great development in our community. New question member from London West. Thank you Speaker. My question is to the Attorney General. Speaker tomorrow is International Women's Day but in Ontario instead of moving forward women have been made more vulnerable by the Liberal Government's decision to cut funding to partner assault response. If this Government was serious about ending domestic violence it would recognise the need to hold abusive partners responsible for changing their violent behaviours. Last week a provincial survey revealed that almost half of Ontario men believe that victims are to blame if they stay in an abusive relationship. Does the Liberal Government support this view and if not why is the Attorney General cutting funding for PAR the only government program for men who abuse? Attorney General Mr Speaker this program, PAR is a very important component of our Government's plan to end violence against women and I wanted to say to the public that this Government has increased money into this program. In 2014 and 15 more than 11,000 offenders were referred to this program. We are committed to collaborating with stakeholders on ways to further improve PAR. I have listened to stakeholder concerns about the program and some service providers are concerned with declines in referral rates and the data the Government relies on to determine funding allocation. So my ministry took these concerns into consideration as adjusted funding allocation for 1617 in order to minimize the impact on agencies. So we have not reduced the Thank you. Supplementary. Thank you Speaker. The Minister knows that overall PAR funding has been cut as much as 50% for the Windsor PAR program 25% in Elgin. These cuts came after the Premier stood in this house on December 2nd and declared there are no cuts to PAR. Why did the Minister ignore the calls of violence against women experts and frontline agencies to halt any further changes to PAR? Why did she ignore the Premier who said there would be no changes to PAR allocations and instead cut the 2016 allocations for PAR provider agencies? Thank you. So Mrs. Speaker our Government's annual investment in the PAR program has increased by 47% from 7.2 million in 2004-5 to 10.6 million in 2015 and 2016. So there is a concern about this program. We've listened to the concern and we will be convening a stakeholder meeting on April 20th, 2016 with all of our PAR providers, violence against women stakeholders and experts to discuss concern about the program and also hear their ideas for improvement. We always wanted to improve the efficiency of the program and we will continue to listen to the stakeholders. Thank you Mr. Speaker. No question. The member from Brenton Springfield. Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Associate Minister of health and long-term care. Minister, as we all know, the number of Ontario seniors aged 65 and over is projected to more than double to over 4.5 million or 25% of the population by 2041. And with that growth we know the increasing number of our parents and grandparents may one day require specialized care provided by one of the province's long-term care facilities. Mr. Speaker, we also know that this demand for long-term care increases. Organizations like the Ontario Long-Term Care Association are telling us a number of long-term care residents coming into care with cognitive apartments have increased significantly with more than 60% of the residents in our long-term care homes currently having Alzheimer's or some other form of dementia. And as more and more families in my riding are turning their thoughts towards care of their parents and grandparents in the future, I would like to reassure them that loved ones will continue the long-term care. So Minister, can you please tell us how about the new funding and how it will be used to provide the highest level of care. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Let me begin by thanking the member from Brampton Springdale for this important question and her ongoing advocacy for seniors in her riding. Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely right. Over the last decade we have seen hundreds of people with dementia entering long-term care exhibiting what are called responsive behaviors such as aggression, wandering and agitation. And that's why Mr. Speaker long-term care is one of the areas that the Ministry of Health has consistently been increasing funding Mr. Speaker and this year is no exception. In fact, Mr. Speaker, this year we are providing exceptional funding to the long-term care sector including a 2% increase across the board to every single long-term care home in Ontario for their personal care needs for their personal care needs of residents but more importantly Mr. Speaker we are also increasing our investment in behavioral supports in Ontario by $10 million and I have to say this Mr. Speaker if the opposition is really serious about No you don't. Supplementary. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Minister, that's wonderful news. The residents of my riding I'm sure you didn't know how important a priority the safety of our loved ones is for you and for your ministry but Minister I know you're responsible for the wellness of Ontarians and I know that making Ontario smoke free is a goal that you're quite passionate about I know smoking prevalence has decreased from 24.5% in 2000 to 17.4% in 2014 representing 408,000 fewer smokers and as a member of this government I'm proud to say that Ontario has but Mr. Speaker the use of tobacco products remains the leading cause of preventable disease in death in Ontario more than 2 million Ontarians still smoke and thousands of you still take up smoking every year so through you Mr. Speaker can the minister tell this house what our government announced in the budget last week to help us continue striving towards the goal of Ontario achieving the best in the country Thank you Mr. Speaker and again I want to thank the member for the question and as the minister responsible for health and wellness in Ontario I'm very proud to continue the legacy of protecting Ontarians especially young Ontarians from the harmful effects of tobacco and that's why Mr. Speaker I am so pleased to announce to this house that we're going to increase funding for smoking cessation by 5 million dollars if this budget is passed so Mr. Speaker whether it's long-term care whether it's health promotion this government is increasing funding and this is what I have to say to the opposition Mr. Speaker if they're really serious about supporting our seniors instead of asking sanctimonious questions in this house I would ask that they stand up and support this budget because Mr. Speaker talk is cheap but they have the opportunity to really support seniors by standing up for this budget Thank you Mr. Speaker No question the member from Kitchener Kitchener Conestoga My question to the Minister of Transportation Minister why are you allowing Metrolinx to give away millions of taxpayers dollars in grants Thank you Minister of Transportation Thanks very much Speaker I thank the members I always do for the question it was unfortunate I didn't hear the last part of the question Speaker I understand it was about Metrolinx and the tremendous work that Metrolinx is doing right now to make sure that we continue to build and continue to invest in transit Speaker there are a long list of item speakers since 2003 that the team at Metrolinx and GO Transit have worked very hard on Speaker for example we have built 14 new stations we have rebuilt four existing GO stations we have extended our rail network Speaker by more than 90 kilometers since 2003 we've added more than 31,000 parking spots across the network Speaker we've added over 200 new rail cars over 150 new single level buses and over 250 double decker buses Speaker will be added over the next five years this will support communities right across the greater Hamilton area including Kitchener Waterloo Speaker Speaker it was only recently when Metrolinx was wrapped up in a scandal when it made public that they were using taxpayer dollars to sponsor TIF Buffalo Bills Game in Toronto in a deal where staff were given free tickets today we've learned that Metrolinx has operated outside their mandate once again by giving away millions of dollars and grants of taxpayers money scandal after scandal and you still haven't learned your lesson UP Express has empty trains there are sheds too small for their electric trains at Union Station and now we have this slush fund Metrolinx's sole job should be to plan, build and manage transit and it's the minister's job to provide oversight and transparency Speaker how much more taxpayer money do we have to watch Metrolinx toss away before they finally do something about it Question? Thank you Minister? Thanks very much Speaker I mean from my perspective I appreciate again the members follow up question I understand that there were changes that were made by my predecessor more than a couple of years ago Speaker with respect to some of the concerns the member opposite is raising Speaker with respect to Metrolinx not only having that clear mandate but also frankly Speaker delivering on that mandate a couple of other items I didn't mention earlier for example Speaker other recent investments include 14 new weekday train trips added on the Kitchener GO Corridor between Mount Pleasant GO Station and Union Station during off-peak midday hours new and enhanced GO bus service that's being added in the Milton Highway 407, Barrie, Lakeshore and Stovill Corridor Speaker the opening of the West Harbor GO Station last June Speaker in time for the Pan Am Parapan Am Games announcing the extension of GO Transit Service on the Lakeshore West GO line to a new GO station at Centennial Parkway and Stony Creek Speaker and the list goes on and on this is a government and this is a premier that are committed to building the province up Speaker and I would expect that member to support our Thank you just a comment for those that continue to seek from the Speaker advice on whether or not an answer is satisfactory I don't have the authority but I'm going to make it clear to you that I will deal with people that are not dealing with policy after that it's up to them to decide how to answer their questions so just remember that new question the member from Nickel Belt My question is for the Minister of Environment It is the really really sad day it is the first anniversary of the explosion and the oil spill in Gogama in my riding the residents woke up at about 3 am the morning of March 7 to a wall of flame that turned the sky orange and the smell of burning oil but an Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change have been extremely quiet quiet while the people of Gogama are seeing their real estate price tank and they are concerned about their environment their food and the water quality the situation is bleak this is the biggest derailment in the history of Ontario yet no amount of trouble suffering seems to trigger a response from this government people of Gogama want to know when will the Minister commit to standing up for them and answer a simple question are the fish caught in the Makamee River safe to eat yes or no the Minister of Environment and Climate Change thanks very much Mr Speaker and we are very very concerned about the folks in Gogama who have now seen not one but two trained derailments with CN this is a standard of safety we do not think is acceptable and I in the Minister of Transportation have raised this issue with the government responsible in Canada that's the federal government I appreciate her leadership and her work on this and her the sincerity of her question we have been trying to get the federal government to do its job in this area and under the previous government we got very little progress Mr Speaker my ministry has done something it hasn't done before which has now taken the fish and has been testing them themselves this is not normally what we do in our labs it's not a provincial responsibility but we got so fed up and so frustrated with those actions and we're hoping that my parliamentary my legislative assistant is hearing me and we'll rush over those results for the end of question period for me thank you Mr Speaker point of order during question period today in response to our Leader Patrick Brown the Minister of the Environment claimed that the PC climate change policy would cost an additional $160 a time with the Minister thank you first that is not a point of order I'm trying to rule here please first that's not a point of order and second any member has at any time the ability not quite any time if it's question period to correct their own record and I thank you for that I excuse me I do have I'm going to take a moment to re-engage the House along with my deputy speakers we've had this discussion and I want to redirect the idea that you're speaking to the chair please if you need some lessons or if you need some guidance the table is always willing to do that it does not help I'd like to finish it does not help the debate by moving into finger pointing the tables telling them what they have to do it actually escalates things so if you're going to help in this place direct your questions and comments to the chair the deputies have been advised and they're going to be working on that if you need some help the table has indicated that sometimes it's very difficult to speak in the third person so do so by speaking in the first person to the chair and design your questions and answers around that the vote for votes this House stands recess until 1 p.m. this afternoon