 It is now time for Question Period, the leader of the Majesty's Law Office. Mr. Speaker, my question is for the acting Premier. Hydro-1 generates over $700 million a year for this province. That's a lot of money flowing into provincial coffers. The FAO has confirmed that Hydro-1 fire sale will see that money dry up. It's a one-time payout with long-term negative consequences. Everyone in Ontario will pay for this bad deal. Mr. Speaker, will the acting Premier tell the people of Ontario which taxes she will raise or what services she will cut? Mr. Speaker, I must say I find the selective reading from the Leader of the Opposition to be quite remarkable. Nobody is suggesting that revenue will dry up. We are retaining a minimum of a 40% share. We will continue to receive revenues from Hydro-1, unlike the deal to sell off the 407 that your party knows intimately. We will continue to receive revenue from Hydro-1. We also did ask the High Assets Council to look at other ways to generate revenue. We are in fact going to be raising $100 million a year from increased taxes on being, for example. So we are looking at... Mr. Speaker, again to the acting Premier, back to the present day, the government is very good at blaming things that were done in past decades. The reality is this is a bad deal for Ontario today. Don't try to justify their actions by blaming things that happened in the distant past. According to a poll done by the Ontario Energy Association, almost 80% of Ontario residents believe the fire sale will raise their hydro bills. When you combine rising hydro bills with the inevitable tax increases this government will impose to make up from the revenue lost from Hydro-1, the people of Ontario will suffer a double hit. Mr. Speaker, does the acting Premier really believe the people of Ontario deserve to be punished twice for this government's incompetence and mismanagement? Well, Speaker, I think it's important that we go back and ask ourselves why in fact did government make the decision to broaden the ownership of Hydro-1. The reality is we have a big infrastructure deficit in this province. We simply must invest in infrastructure because the lack of infrastructure has a significant negative impact on our productivity. So this is all about enhancing our productivity, Speaker. We are committed to building infrastructure. We have to pay to build that infrastructure. One of the things that we're doing is broadening the ownership of Hydro-1 but it's not the only thing that we are doing, Speaker. We have sold the GM shares. We are looking at our real estate holdings. We are looking at other assets, Speaker, because we need to get the revenue to pay for the much needed infrastructure. We need to do that now. Not down the road, Speaker. So we are making those investments because the people of Ontario need those investments in infrastructure. Mr. Speaker, again to the acting Premier and this tired response that this is for infrastructure, no one buys it. Your infrastructure budget for the 10 years was $1 billion pre-sale. Post-sale is $130 billion. There's not one set more for infrastructure. The FAO can show us exactly how much money will be lost. You're losing revenue for infrastructure. This government's pass record of fiscal mismanagement tells us that with the revenue lost from Hydro-1, Ontario will spiral down a path of financial crisis. There are only two ways to replace the $700 million that you're going to lose in revenue. Do taxes or cutting services? Mr. Speaker, why won't the minister tell us which taxes they will raise or what services will they cut? Are we going to see more cuts to golf? Thank you, Deputy Premier. Well, one thing I can guarantee you, Speaker, is that we're not going to be cutting 100,000 jobs which is a problem of that kind. Actually, read the report and when... Thank you. Let's keep it that way, please. And I think you owe it to the public speaker. I think the leader of the opposition owes it to the public speaker to actually present a more balanced view, but I don't think he's going to be doing that, so let me do that. Let me quote page nine of the report. This report does not seek to assess the merits of the decision to sell Hydro-1. Also, the results of this analysis are sensitive to the timing of subsequent sales. These forecasts are subject to changes in the financial performance of Hydro-1. Thank you. Thank you. Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Speaker, since the acting Premier won't acknowledge what taxes are going to be raised or what services will be cut, let me try with the Minister of Energy. Let me read you a quote from the editorial board of your Ottawa citizen. I quote, it's hard to see the benefits of Ontario Liberals decision to sell Hydro-1. Now that we've seen the provincial financial accountability officer's assessment of the proposed sell-off, it goes on to note the report also points out it would have been cheaper just to borrow the money. Mr. Speaker, the Minister didn't see the benefits of the Hydro-1 fire sale when he was Mayor of Ottawa. The Minister must admit he doesn't see them today. Everyone in Ottawa is saying this is a bad deal for Ontario. Will you finally acknowledge it's a bad deal? Mr. Speaker, first of all I want to say that I think the Ottawa citizen endorsed my opponent in all of the 10 elections that I ran in Mr. Speaker and I was able to overcome that. But in any case, what's important Mr. Speaker is to give some reality to the report from the accountability officer. And again I want to say in reading from the report, this report does not seek to assess the merits of the decision to sell Hydro-1. Mr. Speaker, and what's more important does not seek to assess the prospects for perform improvements at Hydro-1 that might result from the partial sale of any future changes at Hydro-1. And Mr. Speaker, the report does not seek to assess the financial impact of any government spending that may be financed from the sale of Hydro-1. These are very important omissions Mr. Speaker and I'll refer to them in the supplementary. Thank you. Supplementary? Mr. Speaker, the same again to the minister, the same editorial goes on today. The Liberals argument seems to amount that we really, really want the money right now and hopefully something good will happen down the line. The minister doesn't have a crystal ball to show him the future, but the FAO has laid out the facts very clearly. He showed that this is a bad deal for the province. Mr. Speaker, why won't the minister come clean to his constituents and stand up against this bad deal? 185 municipalities are saying this is a bad deal for Ontario. Will he come clean and admit this deal is just about temporary cooking the books for the province to look better for the next election? This isn't a good deal for the province. While I'm standing, I'm going to remind all members that the dignified way to acknowledge members in this house is by their title or their writing, and I'm getting a little more frustrated with the barbs that are coming out from either side lowering the tone of debate. Minister of Energy. Mr. Speaker, I'm up to the challenge, the challenge of the Battle of the Newspapers. On the Toronto Star today, Mr. Speaker, there was a very very insightful article which pointed out that in the report they set out a number of scenarios, possible scenarios a number of those scenarios show that it's a very positive result for the province of Ontario, Mr. Speaker. We don't hear from that and given that there are a number of scenarios that actually are included, some of them which are positive, I think it's important to give context to the statement that says this report does not seek to assess the merits of the decision to sell Hydro-1. We believe, Mr. Speaker, that what is not included in here and what's referred to here as not being included is the economic assessment of those investments and the better production of Hydro-1, Mr. Speaker. We're confident this is the right decision and it provides infrastructure, it provides it now and over the next 10 years, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, again to the Minister, no one buys this argument that it's for infrastructure, infrastructure budget doesn't change, you're losing revenue and that's why that editorial has been so critical. I'll continue. That editorial reads, the voters who are sick and tired of big ticket bad outcome projects, something the Liberal parties become famous for. The citizen mentions canceling gas plants investing in money pits like Mars and throwing cash around at teachers unions. Mr. Speaker, that editorial concludes that this fire sale looks like yet another bad fiscal decision from a provincial government with a well-earned reputation for making them. Will the minister continue to defend this sale in the face of all evidence that suggests the contrary? Do the right thing, listen to your constituents, listen to municipalities, stand up to this government, stand up to your Premier and say, don't sell out auto. Mr. Finance. Mr. Speaker, the member opposite makes a stand as though Minister of Finance. Mr. Speaker, the member opposite makes a sound as though 100% of this ground corporation is being sold and that's not the case. We are in fact broadening ownership. The first tranche is 15% of that amount Mr. Speaker. We are going to be credited with deferred tax benefit. That's 2.6 billion. We are going to receive enough money to reduce debt substantively, which also reduces cost. We are going to receive such a standard amount of capital that's going to be reinvested into projects to earn more opportunity Mr. Speaker. The question the member opposite is asking is, the foregone revenue over a period of time, can it be replaced? Of course it's going to be replaced. Unlike what they did when they sold a 407 and gave us nothing in return. We are reinvesting. We are going to get dividends. We continue to own the company Mr. Speaker. Thank you. The leader of the third party. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the acting Premier. The Premier told Ontarians that she'd lead the most open and transparent government in Canada. Instead we see the Liberal government tearing a page from Stephen Harper's playbook by stonewalling independent watchdogs and trying to discredit them when they speak up, Speaker. We've seen it with the Auditor General, we've seen it with the Ombudsman Speaker, and now we're seeing it with the financial accountability officer. Why is this Liberal government trying to discredit the financial accountability officer? Well, I have to make it very clear that the leader of the third party has her facts wrong on this. We completely accept the results of the financial accountability officer. We respect his report. We just wish people would read it, Speaker, because if you actually do a careful read of that report, he's very clear about what he is reporting on and what he is not reporting on. He looks at one side of the deal. He does not look at the advantages of the investments in infrastructure that we will be making as a result of this and other initiatives, Speaker. So I urge the leader of the third party to actually read the report and when she's speaking to Ontarians to acknowledge that what he did say and what he did not say. Thank you. Supplementary? I just have to listen to that response and I ask the same question I just asked because that is absolutely the problem here. They refuse to respect the financial accountability officer and they're discrediting the oversight, Speaker, of the Hydro-1 sell-off. For months the Premier has insisted that Ontarians cannot have public hydro and at the same time new transit and infrastructure investments. The independent oversight shows that if the Premier sells Hydro-1 we could have neither of these things, Speaker. Will the Liberal Government start listening to the people of Ontario, to the business communities, to 185 municipalities, to First Nations and to Ontario's non-partisan watchdogs and start the sell-off of Hydro-1? Thank you. Well, Speaker, I refer the leader of the third party to the report, which I will quote and that's how much I actually respect this report, but I'm very happy to quote it here. What the financial accountability officer discusses on page 9 the scope of the review. He says very clearly this report does not seek to assess the merits of the decision to sell Hydro-1. It does not seek to forecast the impact of the partial sale of Hydro-1 on electricity rates. It does not seek to assess the prospects for performance improvements at Hydro-1 that might result from the partial sale or any future changes at Hydro-1 and it does not seek to assess the financial impact of any government spending financed by the sale of Hydro-1, i.e. transportation projects financed by the Trillium Trust. So we have complete respect for this report. We value this report, Speaker, but we recognize the limitations of the scope as stated by the financial accountability officer. What it does say is that debt will increase and what it does say is that revenues will decrease and what it also says as this is the very worst way to fund infrastructure for the power of this legislature by selling shares in Hydro-1 before the FAO tabled his report, the Premier is undermining an independent officer of the legislature. By allowing the red flags that the FAO has raised, the Premier is under of this legislature. Will this liberal government stop undermining the FAO? Listen to his advice and stop the sell-off of Hydro-1. Thank you. Minister of Finance. Let's be very, very, very clear. We appointed this independent financial accountability officer through the report that we put forward in our budget last year, recognizing the importance of having that independent voice and we respect that. In fact, the report very clearly validates what it is we've been saying all along. We recognize there's foregone revenue. We know that. We've been talking about that throughout the proposals and in the assessment of our budget. We also know that you cannot borrow in perpetuity, Mr. Speaker, without then having other implications on our fiscal plan. So we are taking a balanced approach. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, we are retaining ownership of this corporation that enables us to benefit from future dividends as a crude. More importantly, we're reinvesting dollar for dollar all of what we are receiving into other projects to receive even greater economic prosperity, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. New questions? The Finance Minister knows that this province can't waste in perpetuity either the way the Liberals are wasting for a dozen years. When the Premier appointed her privatization committee, she promised her plan to sell off Hydro One would be independently validated Speaker. Thankfully, the FAO stepped up to do that job because that independent review was not going to be done by the Premier. She had no intention of fulfilling that promise Speaker. But the Liberals, they have another chance now. Yesterday the Keep Hydro Public Coalition and the National Farmers Union called for the Ontario Energy Board to do a review of the sell-off. Will the Liberal government join the call for the OEV to review the deal, Speaker? Mr. Speaker, this proposal is being independently validated. The FAO has validated what we had said we were proposing. More importantly, the most independent of all is the marketplace, Mr. Speaker. They have independently validated the valuation of Hydro One at the high-end level. They are recognizing that the opportunities that exist with the proposal that we brought forward will have positive opportunities for everyone. And, Mr. Speaker, we'll continue to hold a great ownership of this corporation. We'll continue to take great benefit from Member from Essex, second time. Please finish. Reinvesting those monies to one, reduce debt, secondly to create new assets. That's also an opportunity that for every dollar we invest, $1.40 is returned. That is a much greater return than maintaining and holding the shares that are not producing. Thank you. Supplementary? Good for Liberal friends on Bay Street, but it is bad for Ontario and undermine the FAO. Maybe the Liberals are worried that a second review Please finish. Maybe the Liberals are worried, Speaker, that a second review will show the exact same thing that this deal is bad for Ontarians. Will the government direct the Ontario Energy Board to review the Hydro One sell-off before it goes any further? Or is this government afraid that more independent oversight will mean more bad news for the Liberals? Mr. Speaker, the member opposite actually mistakes what broadening of ownership is. 40% of the ownership of the first tranche is actually Ontarians, retail investors, the public of our province. And we still owe 85% of the corporation on behalf of the province of Ontario. More importantly, when speaking of the OEB, it's an important point. It is independently regulated. No one in this operation will be able to set the price unless it's the OEB. Similarly, as they do with the Toronto Hydro, as they do with Horizon, as they do with Brampton Hydro, all of which rivals Hydro One to be more competitive, more efficient, and more effective. That is why we added this discipline and that is why, in the end, it will be of greater benefit to the people of Ontario because we're reinvesting all of that appreciation back into our economy. Thank you. The Liberals promised independent validation of the Hydro One sell-off, but so far they're ignoring the FAO and refusing to hear from the OEB. Hydro One won't raise the money that the Premier promised. It won't lower debt like the Premier promised. Every time we learn something new about Hydro One's sell-off, the deal gets worse, Speaker. The more we learn, the less the deal seems to do with transit. If the Liberals are so convinced that it is a good deal, will they call on the OEB to review it so that Ontarians don't have to rely on blind faith in the Liberals because Lord knows where that gets us each and every time, Speaker. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, a prospectus has been brought forward. It's been reviewed by the marketplace and experts across the province and Canada for that matter. The FAO has validated the process and the valuation and he provided a number of degrees that value could be. Well, that value has now been assessed at the high end by the marketplace. So that part is done. What we now need to do is ensure that we reinvest that money for the benefit of the people and to ensure that we accrue greater returns through those investments. That is only being available because of these transactions and that is exactly what we do. We are not going to be boring in perpetuity that will then enable us to have greater leverage. What we need to do is have greater benefit and we're doing so by reinvesting these assets, a component of which is sourced through this transaction and we will continue to retain a substantive share of an opportunity in Hydro 1 to enable us to have greater benefit in the future. Thank you. New question? Thank you very much, Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Energy. Minister, we've made it clear from the start that the intermittent nature of wind under the Liberals Green Energy Act would ensure that it would never be a reliable source of electricity. We now have evidence that the level of production is actually lower than our worst predictions. In 2005, at considerable expense to the Crown Corporation, installed a 31 meter tall wind turbine at its Lizgar station. However, this past August it was taken down because it failed miserably, producing less than 10% of the electricity that was expected. Speaker, can the Minister explain how if hydrolinx has the common sense to cut its losses with unreliable wind power why the Liberal government continues to invest heavily in this expensive experiment? Good question. Mr. Speaker, the wind component of our energy supply mix is a very significant part of it. Number one, Mr. Speaker, it's clean. Mr. Speaker, in terms of the operating systems that are out there, I remember while I went in estimates last week, Mr. Speaker, one of my colleagues checked the ISO app was able to confirm on the spot that at that time in Ontario there were 20 megawatts of wind being used in the system, Mr. Speaker. That is reflective of the viability and the need for that type of energy mix, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Supplementary. At that high point last week, Mr. Speaker, it was a result of a deadly hurricane in Mexico and Texas. That's not a good time to be bragging about your wind. The Minister knows full well that even if the industrial wind turbine at Lisgar Station had met its projections, that station would still require the stability of the grid on that particular day. This example speaks of the larger problem that this Minister will not accept, namely that wind alone cannot be relied upon. It must be backed up by another form of reliable generation, essentially forcing Ontarians to pay twice. Yet the government continues down this wrong path. Under the price schedule for 2016 come to order. Please finish. Price schedule for 2016, the rate is increasing from 11.5 to 12.8 cents a kilowatt hour. This increased incentive for the grid, which will lead to an even more unstable, expensive energy supply. Speaker, can the Minister tell the House how many more examples like the Lisgar Goal Station will be needed before he stops signing these expensive unreliable energy? Mr. Speaker, I'm having trouble believing that he is even having any credibility in his own premise, Mr. Speaker. He's finding one turbine, Mr. Speaker, owned by an entity that for some reason was dismantled. That's like seeing a Mercedes broken down on the side of the road, Mr. Speaker, and saying we should abolish all Mercedes, Mr. Speaker. It's a ridiculous premise and I can't answer any further than that. Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Acting Premier. My recent Freedom of Information request shows that the number of children on the wait list for IBI therapy this year is 1,192, and the number on the wait list for IBA is an astonishing 13,966. This represents an increase of 75%. Estimates from the Ministry show that only five more kids are receiving IBI this year than last year and for IBA, 926 fewer children are receiving therapy than receiving it two years ago. Yes, fewer children and it's unacceptable. Will the Acting Premier tell the Minister to do the right thing for families and kids and immediately ensure all vulnerable kids on the wait list have the access to the supports they need? Thank you, Speaker. I know the Minister of Children and Youth Services will want to speak to this issue, but I didn't want to take the opportunity to say thank you to the parents who are here today and the kids who are here today for being advocates and for being strong and very important advocates when it comes to services for kids with autism. Speaker, this has been a priority for our government. We have doubled the investment in autism services, but we know that the demand continues to grow and I know that the Minister of Children and Youth Services does want to talk about some of the progress that we've made and some of the challenges that do remain. Thank you, Secretary. For 16,000 kids on the wait list for treatment is not progress. And the government knows this. Today we are joined in the legislature by two families directly impacted by the failure of this government to address the growing wait list for the essential therapy for children with ASD. These are just two of the hundreds of families. Some who have to make those tough decisions like remortgaging their house or moving to another province will the Minister step up to the plate today and make sure that these children receive the therapy they need immediately. Thank you, Secretary. Minister for Children and Youth Services. Thank you, Speaker. Our government and I absolutely recognize that families caring for young people with autism face very unique challenges and we are working very hard to support them. And that's why we invested about $190 million. The member will withdraw. I withdraw. Finish, please. Speaker. And that's why our government invests nearly $190 million annually in autism services, an increase of more than $100 million since 2003. But I know the wait list percent... I think I know what I'm doing. The member will withdraw and when it happens again I will name him. I withdraw. Finish. Speaker, I hear the call from families. I hear the call from parents. I hear the call from autism Ontario and I thank the people who are here today to tell us more about the challenges but we're very familiar that more help needed and I'm committed to doing more, Speaker. And even when kids are on wait lists, we have a number of services to support children and families while they're on the late wait list. We don't want to get those numbers down, Speaker. Thank you. The member from York South Western. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Government and Consumer Services. The Ministry of Government and Consumer Services is responsible for regulating a number of sectors and ensuring Ontario consumers are provided reliable information to make the choices they need without being subjected to unfair practices. A part of this priority, I know, the Ministry is responsible for regulating moving companies. Many Ontarians rely on moving companies. They perform important work and are responsible for protecting the belongings of their clients. However, I have seen reports, Mr. Speaker, about moving company allegedly holding people's belongings from them as a way to demand payment. Can the Minister through you, Mr. Speaker, please speak to the approach his Minister has taken to regulating the sector and provide advice on last practices for Ontarians. Thank you. Thank you, Speaker. And the member from York South Western is asking a very important issue around consumer protection. And movers provide an important service for Ontarians and my ministry has worked to better protect consumers in this sector. Since Ontarians and trust movers with their personal belongings it's important that they conduct themselves appropriately and we hold them to high standards. Ontarians should know that when they do business with moving companies they're covered by the Consumer Protection Act. The Act requires the contracts with moving companies be clear and understandable. It also prohibits misrepresentation and makes it illegal for businesses or individuals to give consumers false information about themselves, the products or the services that they offer and the Act also contains a 10% rule that states in the written contract that a consumer cannot be charged more than 10% of the estimated cost for a moving speaker. These are more protection for Ontarians and will continue to enforce these protections to ensure Ontarians are supported. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Minister for his update on the Consumer Protection Act and its application toward moving companies. It's very interesting to learn that his ministry has identified residential movers as an important area for consumer protection. I am confident that he will work on the behalf of Ontarians and the residents of York South West to ensure that adequate protections are in place. And I understand that the Premier also expressed interest in consumer protection for Ontarians using moving companies as reflected in the Minister's mandate letter. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister please further update the House on steps his ministry has taken to strengthen consumer marketplace fairness with respect to moving companies? Good question. Thank you, Minister. Thank you, Speaker. And again to the member from York South West and who is a great advocate for her constituents. Our ministry has recently implemented a risk-based and proactive compliance strategy for enforcing the Consumer Protection Act. The strategy will deploy resources to the sectors of greatest concern, including the residential moving sector. Our ministry has increased inspection powers to enforce the Act, including the right for inspectors to enter a place of business in Ontario, examine relevant documentation, and wear appropriate issue orders to address marketplace concerns. We've also commissioned a research report by Prism. Economics and Analysis has passed spring to provide insight into the residential moving industry. We've added residential movers to our Consumer Advisory Team's outreach sessions and have maintained detailed records of moving companies in our Consumer Beware List, which is posted online for Ontarians. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased with the steps that we've taken to protect consumers in this important area, and we'll continue to raise the standards for Ontarians. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. Over the past month I've had the opportunity to tour a number of mines operating in the province, and I'm sure that you would agree with me that the work they do is remarkable. By far the number one issue that continues to be raised is uncertainty in the permitting process in Ontario. The Fraser Institute's annual survey of mining companies reflects this, and has again placed Ontario near the back of the pack for mining jurisdictions in Canada in the Investment Attractiveness Index. Ontario fell nine places to 23rd in the world. Minister, even with the changes made with the mining act, why does it take so long to permit a mine in Ontario? Minister Northern Development and Mines. Thank you very much for the question from my critic on the other side of the House. I mean, certainly we continue to work very very closely with industry and with all stakeholders in the mining sector to continue to move mining projects forward as we also work very hard to encourage investment in the promise of Ontario. We see the successes continually as new mines continue to open up despite the reality of the down cycle, particularly in commodity pricing. And one of the things we also do, working very closely with our Ministers Mining Act Advisory Committee that's in place related to moving forward on the modernized mining act is indeed find that balance as to how can we make sure that we put together the right system in terms of the permitting process as well as being sensitive to the needs to find that correct balance. So this is an ongoing piece of work we're very encouraged by the work that we're doing and continue to work closely with industry. Through the Speaker again to the Minister. Speaker, uncertainty in the permitting process makes it harder for companies to justify investing money in Ontario mining projects, nor on resources trying to develop the ring of fire had to wait two and a half years just to have their terms of reference approved. Just this morning we heard from miners that it takes at least 110 permits to open a mine in Ontario. This uncertainty is compounded when taking into account the costs of high energy rates faced by industrial consumers in Ontario. Through the Speaker to the Minister, how will we be able to bring into production new mines to replace those that will be closing in the next decade if the current permitting process in Ontario is so unpredictable. Thank you. Minister. Thank you very much. I really do appreciate the question and it's an important one today when we do have obviously the miners here meet the miners day in the legislature and we'll all be involved in activities throughout the day. I think the important point to point out is that indeed we recognize that indeed it's important to make sure we do the best job we can in terms of moving the permitting process forward. We have a one window approach which again the member would know well about. And me I say I've already been part of a meeting with the Ontario Mining Association this morning. One of the things that actually Chris Hotz, the President of the OMA said, spoke about was the reality of actually an actual level of certainty in the province of Ontario related to the rules and regulations that are in place which is not to say it's a perfect system. But again that's where the challenge is to finding a balance. When we began the modernization of the mining act we already said very early on this is about balance. Thank you. We need to maintain a positive investment. New question. Member from Algoma, Manitou. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Good morning to you. My question again is to the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. Each year, Minister, we have meet the miners day at Queens Park where mining companies come to enlighten us on the issues they are facing in the mining sector. We welcome them here today. And each year they warn us that hydro prices are threatening their exploration, operation and ability to refine here in Ontario. Their alarm bells appear to fall on deaf ears and several companies have left the province taking good jobs with them. Minister, can you tell our friends here today in the mining sector how the fire sale of Hydro 1 is going to help these companies with their already crippling energy costs? Thank you. Minister, you're all in the mines. Thanks again for the question and I appreciate from my critic from the New Democratic Party. And the fact is, as the member knows well, we are working very very closely with the mining sector and I've worked hard to provide significant breaks in terms of the cost of energy. Recognizing that energy costs are significantly higher, particularly on the smelting side and in parts of the mining industry, which is why we are so proud of bringing in permanency to the northern industrial electricity rate program which has been hugely beneficial. Thank you to the Minister of Finance for bringing that in. That has made a huge difference and there are also other significant incentive programs the Ministry of Energy has put in place as well. So we continue to work closely with the industry to find the best possible way we can to help them increase their energy. And as a result, we're seeing more new mines opening up. That's the positive. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Minister, there is no positive, there is no plan. And this year the message is loud and clear. The mining industry in this province is unanimous that they're worried about the sale of Hydro 1 and they have not been consulted. They expect their cost to go up tens of millions and potentially lose good costs here in Ontario. When industry comes to this government for help they get nothing. And now this, this government is content to sit on the sidelines and watch as mining companies leave this province. Minister, why hasn't this government consulted with one of our biggest resource industries about the sale of Hydro 1? Thank you Minister. It seems that the member across may have a very different conversation, but I can tell you the conversation that we had this morning with the Ontario Mining Association with our caucus members. I'm grateful to all those who are able to show up for it, which is indeed the fact that while there are many, many challenges in the mining sector, there are also so many positive stories and we are continuing to work closely with the Ontario Mining Association and all their members as well as the other very important partners in the mining sector, which obviously includes communities that are going to be impacted by future mining developments. So we are going to continue to work on that. Again, I'm grateful for the Northern Industrial Electricity Rate Program being made permanent. $120 million in rebates of almost $500 million over the last number of years. So, you know, we're going to keep being a good work. We're going to be positive. I wish you'd join me in being positive. Question to the member from Beaches, East York. Well, thank you speaker. And my question is for the Minister of Community and Social Services. Now Speaker, we all know that people with developmental disabilities are very valuable members of our society. We also know that, like everyone else, people with disabilities want the opportunity to participate and be active members of our workforce. And Minister of Speaker, I know that the Minister is committed to leveling the playing field for people with disabilities when it comes to workforce participation. Now, earlier this year, her ministry provided an update about the Employment and Modernization Fund for individuals with developmental disabilities. It's part of our government's $810 million investment strategy for community and developmental services that was approved in the 2014 budget. So, Speaker, will the Minister please provide this house with an update on the Employment and Modernization Fund and the impact this has? Thank you. Minister of Community and Social Services. Well, thank you so much, Mr Speaker. And to the member for Beaches, East York for the question. Our government recognizes and values the important contributions made by individuals with developmental disabilities to our communities and to our workforce. I'm so pleased to say that the investments made through my ministry's Employment and Modernization Fund are starting to yield results on the ground that support inclusion and independence. One of the projects that receive funding is the new Centre for Excellence in Employment Services, which is run by the Ontario Disability Employment Network. They've been working with many businesses to provide training and tools so that people with developmental disabilities are hired for competitive jobs in their communities. I'm hearing firsthand that more employers are starting to understand that hiring adults with developmental disabilities is good for business. Whether it's a grocery store in Port Perry or at your local Tim Hortons, more and more individuals with developmental disabilities are secure. Thank you. Supplementary. Thank you, Speaker. And I very much appreciate the minister's response and the update she's given the House today. And I know that the people of Ontario, and certainly my constituents in Beaches, East York, very much appreciate the hard work she's doing on this file. Because, Speaker, it's clear that by investing in better employment outcomes for people with developmental disabilities, we are investing in their independence, their health, and their overall participation in society. And, Speaker, I understand that there are many more projects that support the employment of individuals with developmental disabilities and that have been approved by the Fund in the past year. And I look forward to hearing more about them in the future. So, Speaker, will the minister then please tell us about the next steps for the Fund and how we'll be moving forward to help build Ontario up? Thank you, Minister. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And as the member from Beaches, East York has expressed, there is great value in working towards greater inclusion for people with developmental disabilities. In fact, while securing a job is certainly one of the best routes to social inclusion, it also leads to better general health for the individuals involved. So, the Employment and Modernization Fund has two objectives. One is to create opportunities for people with developmental disabilities to secure competitive employment in the community. And the second is to support projects that lead to more individualized and responsive services and supports. Live, Work, Play, and Ottawa is a great example, as is the Perot Centre in Thunder Bay. In fact, there were 38 communities and agencies across the province that were successful in their applications to the Fund this year. And my ministry is currently planning for the next call for proposals. And I look forward to many more successful projects. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. And the question, the member from Bruce Gray-Ohn Sound. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My questions to the Minister of Education. Mr. Speaker, I'm asking for meaningful action on this Government's special education formula. I'm asking the Minister responsible to address the program cuts, the staff firings, and most importantly, the serious impacts on vulnerable students whose needs she's not meeting. The Minister needs to explain why she is spending $3.7 million of taxpayer money to pay teachers' unions for negotiations, when she could have used it to hire back fired educational assistance to help our vulnerable students stay in school full days, not just part of the day. Mr. Speaker, we want the money to go to students with special needs, including those with autism. When will the Minister stand up for the vulnerable children and put their teachers back in the classroom? Thank you. Minister of Education. Finish, please. The member opposite mentioned negotiations and I'm very happy to report to the House this morning that yesterday we concluded agreements first of all with CUPI, the Canadian Union of Public Employees, which represents which represents most of the care taking and maintenance and some of the education workers also with ETFO, the elementary public teacher. Thank you. I tell you the parents, the special education assistance and all the children standing up giving you applause right now. Back to the Minister of Education. The Minister must know that her funding formula is not meeting the need. Between 2001 and 2014, the student-teacher ratios and special education have jumped from 22 students per teacher to 37. That's a huge cut in special education teaching staff. The Minister can try to spin and cover up this scandal all she wants, but she must admit that despite repeatedly saying she would not cut, she would not fire, the reality is special education staff are losing jobs and our most vulnerable students are missing out. Mr. Speaker, we want the Minister of Education to treat special education students with fairness and equity. So will she match the platitude she just gave herself with real action and commit to putting students first by reinstating the fired special education teacher? Mr. Speaker, I just want to make it clear that in all five of the collective agreements which we have concluded there have been absolutely no cuts to the classroom. Now specifically with respect to special education, the funding for special education has actually increased up to 2.72 billion this year. That represents a 68% increase since 2003. In fact it's actually an increase of 9% since the 2012-2013 school year. That is a time, that 9% increase is at a time speaker where the overall enrollment in the province of Ontario has gone down. Thank you. Thank you, Speaker, to the Minister of Energy. A privatised Hydro-1 has no incentive to promote energy conservation. It makes more profit when people use more electricity not less. We saw an example of this behaviour earlier this year when Nova Scotia's privatised electricity utility fought against the government's new energy conservation programs. Will the government put energy conservation first, put the public interest first and stop the further privatisation of Hydro-1? Mr. Speaker, of course I don't accept the premise of the question. In November and December last year we had 70 plus LDCs, local distribution companies, signed contracts with the IESO for the new conservation contracts program moving forward. That will save 30 terawatts up to 2032 Mr. Speaker. Very aggressive target. The important thing is Mr. Speaker, the private sector companies sign those contracts and are implementing our conservation program. That includes Fortis. It includes hybrid companies that have partial private ownership. It includes municipal utilities. They are all engaged in the issue. If you look at the gas side which the OEB manages as well, private sector and bridge and union are exceptional in their conservation programs. They are poster child cases for what can happen to conservation. Supplementary. Germany sold off parts of its transmission grid in the 1990s and politicians there now admit that this was an historic mistake. Germans now realize that in order to connect people to renewable energy sources they need a publicly owned grid. Germans have learned the hard way that once the public grid is sold off it is very difficult, very costly to get it back. Will the government learn from Germany's historic mistake and cancel the further privatisation of Hydro-1? Mr. Speaker, the member can dream about how bad things are or can be. Let's look at what's actually happening. Hydro-1 has signed a contract, Mr. Speaker. That contract binds them to abide by the conservation program that we have. Whether it's pre or post IPO, Mr. Speaker, they're bound by it. Mr. Speaker, they have very, very positive conservation programs, including the ductless heat pumps which in Nova Scotia they've installed 40,000 or saving customers an average of $1,000. That pilot project is going on now, Mr. Speaker, and I believe that the pilot project they have will be implemented to the benefit of ratepayers in Ontario. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question this morning is for the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. Mr. Speaker, today the Ontario Mining Association hosts their annual Meet the Miners Day at Queens Park, and this day looks at the positive aspects of mining in our province. And, Mr. Speaker, it's a great opportunity to participate and learn about the incredible role that mining plays in not only my riding of Sudbury, but across the province and in our everyday lives. For instance, Mr. Speaker, Ontario has world expertise in mine financing, geology and engineering, stable exploration in mining industries, and one of the lowest mining rates in Canada. As well, Mr. Speaker, we have the advantages of a strong economy, competitive business costs, and world-class research development in environment and in mining. So, Mr. Speaker, can the Minister speak to the significance of mining to our provincial economy and the current status of mining in our province? Thank you, Minister of Northern Development and Mines. Thanks so much to the member from Sudbury for the great question. Let me begin by saying, Mr. Speaker, despite the real challenges in the mining sector Ontario remains the leading jurisdiction for the exploration and the production of minerals in Canada, major player across the world. There are currently 43 operating mines in the province, 14 base metal mines, 16 gold mines, and, of course, a one-diamond mine. The mineral development sector plays an incredibly important role in our economy. I think as it does very much in our in our day-to-day lives, and the mining sector, none of us knows this, the mining sector directly employs over 26,000 people in the province of Ontario, and 50,000 in the mining supply and services sector, and the value of mineral production in Ontario in 2014 was $11 billion, which has been unprecedented high. Much more I'd like to say it. I look forward to this. No, you will stop. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is part of our government's plan to build up Ontario by creating a dynamic and supportive environment where business can prosper. The Minister of Northern Development and Mines has made it clear that our government is doing just that when it comes to the mining sector. The global mining economy is evolving, and our new competition is always emerging. I know our government is committed to ensuring that Ontario remains a world leader in mining exploration and mining investment. So, Mr. Speaker, can the Minister tell this house what our government is doing to maximize Ontario's mineral potential and support a modern and innovative industry, ensuring that Ontario's mining sector continues to thrive for decades to come? Thank you. A great question. Let me just say as strongly as I can that our government is absolutely committed to supporting a strong, healthy, and a prosperous provincial mineral sector. It's important for people to know that we've invested over $160 million in Ontario mineral sector activities since 2003. I referenced an earlier response speaker. The Northern Industrial Electricity Rate Program continued investment of about $120 million per year, and of course made a permanent program because we recognize how important the mineral sector is. Long-term investments that are incredibly important, and that's why the Miners' Day is so important to us, and it helps us reflect on the role of the mines and mineral sectors in our lives. So, certainly on behalf of our ministry at Northern Development of Mines, I'm pleased to join the Ontario Mining Associates that will meet the Miners. I invite all members to come to the this afternoon in Room 228-230. It's going to be a terrific day. Thank you. Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Minister responsible for seniors. Many seniors in our province want to stay in their homes for as long as possible before moving to a long-term care home. They rely on home care services and the help of family and friends to receive the support they require. Speaker, we know that Health Quality Ontario's measuring up report that one-third of informal caregivers report to stress, and some are unable to continue providing care. Can the Minister please explain why these burnout numbers continue to increase despite the government's dedicated provincial secretariat focused on improving the quality of life for seniors and their families? Minister responsible for seniors. I want to thank the member for the question, and I'm sure that the Minister of Health wants to address the issue. But let me say that I think we are all familiar with respect to our seniors' population today. As of June of this year people over the age of 65, they are more than the people under the age of 14. We have done a lot with respect to looking after our senior speaker, and I have to say that a lot of seniors in the members community as well, they enjoy some of the programs that we have been able to put in place Speaker. The community grant program for senior speaker has been reaching some 116,000 senior speakers, and they are in every corner of our province. But with respect to the seniors in long-term care home, I'm sure that the Minister wants to address the issue in the supplementary speaker. Thank you. Thank you Speaker, back to the Minister for Seniors. We know from the measuring up report that this government's strategy, if it has one, is just not measuring up. Sadly. This government made a deliberate effort to keep seniors living at home but they haven't provided the support necessary to do so. The auditor general said the government needs to take a hard look to improve CCAC home care services. Without the home care they need, many seniors term to the long-term care system where they end up waiting around 116 days for a spot. That's unacceptable. The end result, informal caregivers are reporting record levels of burnout, doubling over the last four years. Can the Minister provide any hope to seniors' loved ones who, through no fall of their own, can no longer provide the care they need? Yes, Associate Minister of Health Speaker. Associate Minister of Health and Long-term Care. Thank you Speaker and I want to thank the member opposite for his question and I want to assure this House and the member opposite that in fact we are investing in the care of our seniors. I just want to give you some examples. $2 billion in funding and a 2% increase in 2015-16 for resident care needs. We have opened 10,000 new long-term care beds. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I was in London on Friday. I was in Kitchener on Friday with the Deputy Minister and with members opposite from your caucus were there as well and I was there for the opening of a brand new long-term care facility. Happy to do beds to our footprint. That is just the example of how we are expanding care for our seniors. Thank you. Thank you. My question is to the Acting Premier. In 2012, this government cancelled our only passenger train in Northern Ontario and the reason was because they have an equivalent bus line and they were going to provide enhanced bus service. Since then they've closed bus stations and yesterday we learned that now they are canceling bus routes. Why is it acceptable for this government to deny public transit to people in Northern Ontario? Mr. Speaker, I mean the member knows as we spoke about it we are very proud of the fact that we made a decision a little over a year and a half ago to keep four of the five lines of the ONTC in public hands and that certainly included the motor coach service. What we also made clear was that we were going to be working closely with the communities to make sure that we provided services to all the communities where the Northland are no longer operated and right now the ONTC is identifying changes to the way that they operate to maintain and ensure that sustainability but our commitment to the motor coach service remains as strong as ever. The member also knows we put $6.2 million over three years to purchase new motor coaches almost all of which have been put in service over the last short period of time. The long and the short is that we are going to continue to make sure we ensure that sustainability is no longer at the same building while we provide an efficient and well run open service for people in Northeastern Ontario. To the minister or to the acting creamer while they claim their commitment remains strong as we speak services are being cancelled. Once again, why isn't acceptable when this government keeps talking about increased access to transit, increased access to transportation that they continue to cut access to transit in Northeastern Ontario. The facts are that we are working with the communities and with the public to make sure that we provide the services for motor coach services that are in place. We made a significant investment of $23 million and most significantly and I know this received support from many in the house and certainly those on the opposition side when we were able to keep four of those five lines in public hands. There was a time when that was not the case. The bottom line is we are providing services to all the communities that were certainly previously served by the Northlander and we are indeed maintaining those services. There are decisions that need to be made by O&T management to ensure the long term sustainability because that's what's most crucial is that we make sure we provide the services and remain as sensitive as possible to the realities that are faced through the traveling public and that's what we are doing and we are going to continue to do it in the best and most sensitive way that we can. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to correct the record in one of my answers to the Leader of the Opposition. I referred to an article in the Toronto Star, in fact it was in the Globe and Mail. Member has the right to correct his record. Attorney General on a point of order. The pleasure to present a group from France in project, reciprocity, France, Canada, a company by an organization. Welcome to Queensborough. I will offer, I neglected to mention someone in the Speaker's Gallery, my other brother, the brother of the former Speaker of the House, Peter, Joe Peters is here. My constituent assistant from the writing of rant, Bob Uhauss. We have a deferred vote on amendment to the motion for allocation of time on Bill 115, an act to enact representation act 2015, repeal the representation act 2005 and amend the election act, the election finances act and the legislative assembly act. Call on the members this will be a five minute bell. Would all members please take their seats. On November 2nd, Mr. Gravel moved government notice of motion number 43. Mr. McNaughton then moved that the motion be amended as follows, that the motion be amended by striking out dispense. Alright, Mr. McNaughton then moved the motion be amended as follows, that the motion be amended by striking out everything following the second paragraph up to and including Monday, November 30th, 2015 and replacing it with the following dispense, that the committee be authorized to meet on Wednesday, November 25th, 2015 from 9 a.m. to 12 noon from 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. in Ottawa on Thursday and on Thursday, November 26th, 2015 from 9 a.m. to 12 noon and from 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. in Thunder Bay for the purposes of public hearings on the bill. That the clerk of the committee in consultation with the committee chair be authorized to arrange the following with regard to Bill 115, notice of public hearings on the Ontario Parliamentary Channel, the legislative assembly's website and Canada Newswire, and that the deadline for the request to appear be 12 noon on Friday, November 13th, 2015 and that the following, the deadline, the clerk, the committee, provide the members of the committee with the list of requests to appear and that a member from all three recognized parties prioritize and return the list by 6 p.m. on Friday, November 13th, 2015 and that the clerk of the committee schedule witnesses from these prioritize lists and that each witness that will receive up to 15 minutes for their presentation followed by 9 minutes for questions from committee members and that the deadline for written submissions be 6 p.m. on Thursday, November 26th, 2015 somebody wanted to hear this and that the deadline for filing amendments to the bill with the clerk of the committee shall be 12 noon on Friday November 27th, 2015 and that the committee be authorized to meet on Monday, November 30th, 2015 at its regularly scheduled time for the purpose of clause by clause consideration of the bill. On Monday, November 30th, 2015 at 5 p.m. those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved and the chair of the committee shall interrupt the proceedings and shall without further debate or amendment put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto at this time the chair shall allow 120 minute waiting period pursuant to standing order 129a and that the committee shall report the bill to the house no later than Wednesday December the second 2015. We are now dealing with Mr. McNaughton amendment to the motion. All those in favour will please rise one at a time to be recognized by the clerk. Mr. Sain, Mr. Sam, Mr. Horvath, Mr. Vantop, Mr. Vantop, Mr. Taba, Mr. Taba, Mr. Miller Hamilton East-Stonecrete, Mr. Miller Hamilton East-Stonecrete, Ms. Sattler, Ms. Taylor, Ms. Tailor, Mr. Nadeshaw, Ms. Armstown, Ms. Armstown, Ms. Armstown, Ms. Armjeliina, Ms. Fite, Ms. Fost, Ms. Fost, Mr. Montt, Mr. Montt, Mr. Hadfield, Mr. Hadfield, Ms. Gretzky, Ms. Gretzky, Mr. Gates, Ms. French, Ms. French. All those in favour will please rise one at a time to be recognized by Mr. Blackley, Mr. Bradlin, Mr. Shirelli, Mr. Shirelli, Madame Mayor, Mr. Sousa, Ms. Matthews, Mr. Hoskins, Ms Sandals, Ms. McCharles, Mr. Quinter, Mr. Coil, Mr. T'Car, Mr. Bardneti, Mr. Dillon, Mr. Azeti, Mr. Garvelle, Mr. McMeekon, Mr. Murray, Mr. Kotel, Mr. Cooteau, Mr. Leo, Mr. Flynn, Mr. Zimmer, Muzaffar Zimar Madam la Long Ma'am La Long Mr Quadri Mr Quadri Mr Barton Mr Balferson Mr Polqu empties Mr Alb 설명 Mr Dickson Mr Dickson Mr Manga Mr Manga Mr Kraft Mr Crack Mr Crack Mr Hunter Mr Hunter Mr Surgey Mr Surgey Mr Surgey Mr Moorow Mr Moorow Mr Jasse Mr Jasses Mr Dalduca Mr Dalduca Mr Darmarlaw Mr Darmarlaw Mr Frazier The ayes are 42, the nays are 51. The ayes being 42 and the nays being 51, I declare the amendment lost. Are the members ready to vote on the main motion? The item Mr. Gravel has moved government notice of motion number 43. Is it the pleasure of the House of the Motion carried? I heard a no. All those in favor please say aye. All those opposed please say nay. In my opinion the ayes have it. Calling the members this will be a five minute bill. The ballot's moved. Government notice of motion number 43. All those in favor please rise one at a time and be recognized by the clerk. Mr. Gravel. Mr. Gravel. Mr. Nackley. Mr. Bradley. Mr. Shurelli. Mr. Shurelli. Mr. Shurelli. Mr. Shurelli. Mr. Shurelli. Mr. Shurelli. Mr. Shurelli. Mr. Shurelli. Mr. Shurelli. Mr. Shurelli. Mr. Shurelli. Mr. Shurelli. Mr. Hardnetti. Mr. Dillon. Mr. Dillon. Mr. Joselli. Mr. Joselli. Mr. Storezette. Mr. Mccme CHO. Mr. Mcmeekand. Mr. Murray. Mr. Murray. Mr. Coteau. Mr. Coteau. Mr.vereal. Mr.ereal. Mr. Fynn. Mr. Zimmer. Mr. Zimmer. Madam Laloni. Madam Laloni. Mr. Quadri. Mr. Quadri. Mr. Vascosa. Mr. Vaskosa. Mrs. Albanese. Mr. dixie. Mr. Dixie. Manga. Miss Anga. Miss Pr yanga. Mr. Miller, Hamilton East Stony Creek. Ms. Sattler. Ms. Taylor. Ms. Taylor. Mr. Nattishak. Ms. Nattishak. Ms. Armstrong. Ms. Armstrong. Ms. Angelina. Ms. Fykes. Ms. Fykes. Ms. Forrester. Ms. Forrester. Ms. Shamanthah. Ms. Shamanthah. Mr. Hatfield. Ms. Gretzky. Ms. Gretzky. Mr. Gates. Ms. Gates. Ms. French. Ms. French. Mr. 51, the nays are 42. The ayes being 51, and the nays being 42, I declare the motion carried. There are no further deferred votes to the South Stance Reassess until 3pm. This afternoon.