 It is now time for Question Period, the leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Office. Thank you, I speak with my question to the Premier. Premier, you'll recall, and I know we had a personal conversation as well, that the Chief Electoral Officer has pointed out the problem with third-party groups like the Working Families Coalition hijacking democracy, in effect warping the democratic process to advance her own agenda to the expensive taxpayers. You and I had a conversation about that. The Chief Electoral Officer has called for reforms to limit the insidious influence of the third-party special interests. I want to congratulate my colleague from Chatham, Kent Essex, Mr. Nichols, who brings it forward. Who exactly is that? Premier, in the spirit of cooperating to do the right thing, will you cooperate with the Ontario PC Caucus and close this loophole as influence politics are far too long? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would just say to the leader of the opposition that I know he remembers that we are the party that have brought in rules around third-party advertising during campaigns. I'll just go over them in case he hasn't remembered those. In 2007, we introduced third-party advertising rules in Ontario for the first time, so that was in 2007. And under the current rules, third parties that spend $500 or more on election advertising are required to register with the Chief Electoral Officer, Mr. Speaker. And the registered third parties have to also report to the CEO on election advertising expenses. If election advertising expenses are $5,000 or more, then those reports have to be audited, Mr. Speaker. So those rules ensure that there's transparency. And, Mr. Speaker, there were no rules in place before we brought those in. So we're very interested in transparency and understanding exactly who's donating and what is being paid and having those statements audited. Thank you. Well, obviously a disappointing answer from the Premier. That's a little more like Pat Dillon talking than I'd expect from the Premier of the province of Ontario. I'm on firm ground here. You know, Premier, you were actually on the receiving end of the big stick of big labour in the recent Kitchener Waterloo buy election. As you know, Premier, the big labour, including the teachers union, spent $1.1 million in advertising just for one buy election. The combined advertising spending of the Liberals and the PCs was $370,000. This is not a level playing field. It's not in the interest of real working families, taxpayers in our province. The lesson you should have learned is to close that loophole and eliminate the insidious influence of these special interest groups. Instead, the lesson you learned was to leap back in the pockets of big labour and get everything they wanted, including the ability to decide what teachers could hire in the classroom and raise as we can't afford. So, Premier, tell me that you've rethought your approach to get back in the pockets of big labour and do the right thing for people in the province of Ontario, taxpayers and close this ugly loophole and level the playing field for us. Thank you. Premier. Mr. Speaker, I would remind the Leader of the Opposition that we're the party who put rules in place where there were no rules. So, we're very interested in transparency, Mr. Speaker. But I would just say this, that one of the things that really worries me about the current political climate is that there is a serious underestimation and I think almost an insult towards the people of the province, towards voters, Mr. Speaker, that somehow they can't figure out what is going on. And, Mr. Speaker, I believe that they need more information. I've noticed a trend that I'm going to ask that it be stopped and that is as soon as the person stands up to answer the questions shouting happens, shouting down, that's not appropriate. Premier. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I think that... St. Pembroke, come to order. As soon as I sat down, it started again. Don't. Don't. We need to be rules in place, Mr. Speaker. We put rules in place. I believe that the democratic process means that a whole range of people need to have opinions and need to be able to express those opinions. I think the Leader of the Opposition is underestimating the voters of this province, Mr. Speaker. Frankly, Premier, the only insult the taxpayers is that you're letting... That's where the environment comes to order. ...run the province of Ontario. I think you're missing the essential point here, why this is a problem. The problem is that the influence of these insidious third parties is their hijacking democracy. Effectively, they're buying election campaigns and you don't understand that at the end of the day, it's average hardworking taxpayers who pay the price. Their taxes have gone up. The deficit has skyrocketed. Excuse me. Excuse me. Sorry for interrupting. This goes both ways. I want the question put and I want the answer provided without the interference and without the yelling. Please carry on. So you missed the problem here. The problem is that average hardworking families are paying the price. The debt is not much deeper. They don't get the services they deserve. There are fewer jobs available to Ontarians because of bully boys like Pat Dillon, who want to turf protect at the expense and array the pockets of hardworking taxpayers. Why don't we follow the approach that other provinces have done in that interest in federal legislation? Let's level a playing field. Let's restore democracy. And let's take away the special interest influence on your government that is bankrupting the province of Ontario. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And the leader of the opposition is talking about his perspective on the things that have happened over the last 10 years. And I just want to give our perspective, Mr. Speaker. We've created over 600,000 new jobs, Mr. Speaker. We've provided a billion dollars in tax relief for Ontario manufacturers since 2010, Mr. Speaker. 2.1 million more Ontarians have access to family care. 4,000 more doctors are practicing in this province, Mr. Speaker. 60,400 new nursing positions have been created. 23 new hospitals have been built, Mr. Speaker. 480 new schools have been built. 184,000 children are enrolled in full day kindergarten, Mr. Speaker. We have 60,000 new spaces in post-secondary education, Mr. Speaker. Which means 160,000 people, young people have access to post-secondary, Mr. Speaker. That's right. You're right. Things have changed in the last 10 years, Mr. Speaker. The plan of the opposition leader has been rejected three times, Mr. Speaker. I think that's what he's upset about. And I think he underestimates the voters. Is she in it, please? New question? Remember from Chad and Karen. Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Premier. Today in Ontario, we see a situation where more money is being spent on advertising during election periods by third-party organizations than the major political parties. Premier, this isn't fair, nor is this democracy. Elected officials should be accountable to the people who elect them, not the special nitrous groups and powerful unions. Tomorrow I will be introducing the special nitrous groups Advertising Transparency Act, if passed. This bill will put a cap on third-party spending during election periods. Premier, this is about allowing all political parties to have an open, honest debate during elections without unacceptable propaganda we see from these third-party groups. Premier, will you work with us and pass this bill? Premier? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, I think I've answered this question a couple of times, but I'm happy to do it again because we did bring in, in 2007, we brought in rules into an area where there were no rules, Mr. Speaker, so the Member Office talks about accountability to the people who elect us. I agree with that, Mr. Speaker, and having more transparency and more accountability in place is exactly why we brought in the rules that we did in 2007. When we introduced third-party advertising rules in Ontario for the very first time, there were no rules. There had been no rules put in place at all previous to that, Mr. Speaker. So now, $500 or more on election advertising. That's not going to work, and I will tell you, my patience is a little thin on this one because it's simply shouting people down. $500 or more, they're required to register with the Chief Electoral Officer. They have to report to the Chief Electoral Officer on advertising expenses if that is more than $5,000, if it's more than $5,000, those have to be audited. So that kind of transparency is exactly what's needed. Thank you. Supplementary. Premier, you said that you want to be open and transparent and that you want a government that is accountable. Accountable to who, Premier? The people of Ontario or the unions that do your bidding. How do you justify not supporting this bill or not allowing your members to vote their conscience? As each election passes, the amount of money spent by the U.S. style super PACs in Ontario grows. And so does the influence held by special interest groups. Premier, this is not the Ontario that I grew up in. Premier, will you do the right thing? And will you support my private members bill and put an end to the unelected and unaccountable influence currently held by special interest groups? Please, thank you. Let me say again, Mr. Speaker, that I agree that there needs to be transparency on who is advertising in these situations. There needs to be an accountability for the money that's being spent. That's why we put in place rules, Mr. Speaker, where there had been no rules. And I've gone over those a couple of times so that if election advertising expenses are $5,000 or more, then those reports have to be audited. So it's very clear what is being spent, Mr. Speaker. But I will just go back to something that I said earlier to the leader of the opposition. I believe that this gambit actually underestimates the people of Ontario and their capacity, voter's capacity to make decisions. I think that elections, and quite frankly, between elections, Mr. Speaker, there should be broad debate on issues. There should be many, many voices talking about issues to elected officials and to each other within communities. That's the way good decisions get made. That's the way good policy gets made, Mr. Speaker. Cifling that is not our objective. To the final supplementary. Premier, this isn't about underestimating the people's ability of Ontario to make informed decisions. This bill is in the best interest of all political parties. To put a cap on the enormous amount of money being spent by third parties. If you truly believe that your party is right and that your ideas will be accepted by the people of Ontario in the next election, then allow an honest and open debate by putting a cap on third party advertising. Absolutely. What kind of a province do we live in where third party groups are allowed to spend more than political parties? They don't have spending limits. They don't have to report all of their donations and they don't have to report all of their spending. So, Premier. My final question is simple. How can you stand there and say that this isn't completely outrageous? Will you support my bill tomorrow? Premier. Just speaker that we did when we came into office was we changed the rules around the way government advertising could work because one of the things that was the easiest regime under the PCs was that tax dollars were being spent on very partisan advertising with the picture of attribution to a particular individual on issues that really were to do with government decisions. We changed the rules so that government advertising has to go through the opposite. Underestimates the voters of this province. We put rules in place to make sure that there was transparency on the expenditure of dollars by third parties. I think that is what is necessary, Mr. Speaker. And I hope that the third party understands that when private members' bills are brought forward, people on this side of the House make their own decisions, Mr. Speaker. Your question. The leader of the third party. Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Premier. Yesterday the government filed a motion to shut down debate on a number of bills, including one custom designed for Alaston, one of the Liberal Party's biggest donors. Can the Premier confirm that it's still her intention to ram this bill through? Minister of Labor. Minister of Labor. Thank you very much, Speaker. Last Friday the Ontario Divisional Court issued a ruling overturning the Ontario Labor Relations Board decision regarding the Ontario Sheet Metal Workers and Roofers Conference, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 586, and the Alaston Corporation. Our lawyers, Speaker, and the Ministry of Labor have reviewed the decision. I have been advised that the ruling means that the status quo for the company is maintained. This decision, Speaker, achieves the same outcome as intended under Private Members' Bill 74. Thank you. Well, Speaker, that's about as clear as the muddy waters. I'd like to read a quote that could have been written today, Speaker. Quote, The government has grown further and further out of touch with your needs. They have favoured special interests over the public interest. We know that the Government of Ontario belongs to the people of Ontario. Our decisions will be made in the interests of all Ontarians, not those of a select few. Can the Premier tell us who the source of that quote might have been, Speaker? Speaker to the Premier. Premier. So our decisions are going to be made based on a rational process, Mr. Speaker. So as the Minister of Labor, as the Minister of Labor said last Friday, the divisional court made a ruling that quashed the decision of the OLRB, the Labor Relations Board. So in other words, the company can continue to operate under the status quo. So I understand that the parties have been given 15 days to appeal if they so choose, and I've been advised that this ruling achieves the same outcome, exactly the same outcome that was being sought by the member opposite's private members bill, Mr. Speaker. And so I therefore believe that this bill is no longer needed. We will not be supporting it. I will not be supporting it, assuming that the decision is not appealed. As soon as I say it, you then start again. And I'm going to ask that if you're challenging me, I'm going to win. Premier, wrap up. Final supplementary. Mr. Speaker, just to remind the Premier, the quote is, of course, from the platform of the Liberal Party some 10 years ago. Today, as the Premier scrambles to protect the interests of one well-connected company, or maybe not, considering what she just said, as the government scrambles to defend their decision to spend at least half a billion dollars cancelling private power plants in Mississauga and Oakville, as people see well-connected insiders briefing in sight, Speaker, while everyday people are still waiting for results that will improve their lives. Does the Premier realize that she has become exactly what she campaigned against? I'm trying to sort out what's going on over there, because on the one hand, the Tories are suggesting that I'm serving for Master and on the NDP. I'm probably going to do something a little on the unorthodox side and ask everyone if they wouldn't mind standing up and yelling as hard as they can for the next five minutes. There are some interesting solutions that people have recommended that I should be doing, and I continue to fight on your behalf, indicating that I think that you can be self-disciplined and that this is inappropriate kind of comments that elevate the discussion as opposed to bring it down to a civil discourse. So I'll put it into your hands. Premier. In fact, neither of those characterizations is accurate, Mr. Speaker. There was a private member's bill that was brought forward to correct an anomalous situation that had resulted from legislation in 1958. I suggested that that was to be supported because of that uneven ground, Mr. Speaker, in that anomalous situation. The circumstances have changed. The court has ruled that the status quo can pertain, Mr. Speaker, and because the circumstances have changed, I believe, we believe, that that bill is no longer required. That is the situation, Mr. Speaker. Question. Thank you, Speaker. My next question, in fact, is for the Minister of Transportation. Yesterday, the Minister of Transportation refused to answer questions concerning the construction of the Herb-Gray Expressway. Can the Minister of Transportation confirm now that girders used in construction do not meet safety standards? Mr. Speaker, the Independent Expert Review report, which we just received 48 hours ago, was tabled. The complete answer to the Leader of the Third Party's question is in that report. It very carefully measures a very thoughtful evaluation of a complex number of girders, some which clearly are safe, some of which there are questions about. This was an independent review by four of the leading construction engineering experts in Canada and one of our greatest legal minds. The report, Mr. Speaker, was delivered to the Chief Engineer. Mr. Cripps, who is one of the most respected, it is the Chief Engineer of Ontario's decision. He is now moving on the implementation of those recommendations and on a pathway that a group of engineers have made. This is not a political decision. This is an engineering decision. No girder will be installed in that parkway that is not safe, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, supplementary. Speaker, how long has the Ministry known that there were safety issues in this project and when did they inform the public and the Minister? Mr. Speaker, I don't think anybody knew much about this for a very long time because it was not part of a public conversation. No one raised this with me in February or in March or in April. I first heard about concerns from discussions I was having with people in the industry in May, Mr. Speaker. I then took immediate action. I made phone calls to verify the information I was receiving from the Ministry and the Ministry. I then took immediate action. I made phone calls to verify the information I was hearing. I immediately raised it with my officials. My officials investigated. Based on their report back, I felt immediate action and strong action was needed by the government to assemble engineers to get expert advice to ensure the safety and standards. I also ordered work be halted on the project and that no further girders be installed and that no girders would be installed that didn't meet safety standards, but by the standards that are given to Ontario the safest roads and highways in North America decisions of the Chief Engineer of Ontario. My job is to keep the politics out of this Mr. Speaker and keep the engineer in charge of this Mr. Speaker. Well, Speaker, at this point the people of Windsor have a pretty basic question. How could the government on a project of such importance costing billions of dollars, how could a government fail to ensure that safety standards were being met in the first place on this project? Mr. Speaker, the exact opposite is true. This government has on every single project 14 billion dollars in infrastructure projects every year ensured not just moderate standards, Mr. Speaker, but the highest safety standards in North America. Better than New York, California, Alberta or Quebec, the highest in North America. And Mr. Speaker, the minister, we are the watchdogs. The opposition is supposed to be the watchdogs. Mr. Speaker, she has members in that area. Why did the opposition not ask a single question on safety standards in the Windsor-Easterd Parkway? I did my job, Mr. Speaker, and I'm here for theirs. Mr. Speaker, the member from Berry. Thank you. He's actually to the minister of finance today and if I may say, the liberals are anything but watchdogs. Maybe the finance minister previously in charge of the Pan Am games will have some answers for me since the current counterpart abdicated himself from his responsibility from Pan Am yesterday in estimates. Yesterday I was like pulling teeth, minister, Pan Am budgets. We know about the so-called 1.4 billion Pan Am budget. We recently learned about the extra $10 million for the secretariat partying and paperwork budget and the extra $719 million for the athletes village. No doubt today we'll learn about more numerous other extra budgets for security, transportation, and Lord knows what else. Minister, how many Pan Am budgets are there exactly? And what is the four real total Pan Am games? What is the total? What are the games going to cost us? Good question. Minister of finance. Minister of tourism, culture, and sport, minister responsible for the Pan Am Parapan American games. Minister responsible for the Pan Am Parapan American games. Thank you, Speaker. I know the opposition. They want to muddy the water, but they cannot muddy the fact. Speaker, these are the facts. The 2015 budget. 2009 April press release. Stay. Not in the 2015 budget. It's for re-ritalize the west, doorland community. 2013. Provincial budget. Provincial budget. Village ambition. 2015 budget. These are the facts. Back up by public documents. I know through you, Speaker, to the opposite, to the member opposite. We know your leader does not read the budget and say no, but you'll show it. Speaker, amazingly, they've admitted there's multiple budgets, and yes, we knew they were lined up. Thank you for admitting that today, Minister. I want to know what the true cost of the games is. The athlete's village is no different than the other venues that have legacy costs attached to them after the games. You know that? You need to be honest about it. Speaker, to clarify, the current minister of finance was actually the minister of cash, Pan Am parties, and multiple top secret budgets. He even proudly stated to me... Again, I remind the member that you refer to anybody by their exact title or their writing and nothing else. Thank you, Speaker. He even proudly stated to me that the book stops with me, the Pan Am minister, but all the international partying that was reputed for its grandiosity happened with him in charge, and that was in charge of the books. In fact, the culture of entitlement rampant in that ministry didn't happen overnight either. As we heard in estimates yesterday, there's a 10 million dollar Pan Am party and paperwork budget hidden off the books within the secretary act. Minister, how much have the liberals... Thank you. Minister. Thank you very much. Speaker, talk about the bills of expenses. It's one person in this house allowing me to remind to the members he expended 3.20 for a box of chicken nuggets. In August 2009, $87.40 to have a meal with his colleague. In 2009, September, 1.27 for a team-cordoned coffee. He expended the coffee November 13, $77 Irish nachos and chicken wings at Don Tourist Restaurant, the leader of the opposition. He did that 10 years ago and he did that again 4 years ago. He's a repeat offender of abusing $5. Any questions? Remember from when Duke becomes here. Thank you, Speaker. Order, please. Thank you. Member. Thank you, Speaker. My question this morning is to the Minister of Transportation Minister, may I say by the way, thank you for providing me that briefing this morning on the safety of the girders on the Herb Gray Parkway. I haven't read all of the report yet. It's more than 140 pages. But if I can quote from page 132, the girders were fabricated without full and proper compliance with all regulations, codes and standards, with tack welding not approved by a regulatory authority and with welders whose own certification credentials and workmanship are subject to review. Where was the ministry oversight? The quality control when 500 deficient girders were allowed to be installed in the biggest, most expensive highway project in Ontario. Mr. Speaker, it was exactly when that information, Mr. Speaker, this is an important matter of great interest to the people of Windsor and Ontario. Maybe we can have a little quiet in the house deserving of the seriousness of this matter. Mr. Speaker, I can barely hear myself speak or think. The first of all, I want to thank the member opposite. I look forward to working with him. I think we share a concern that the safety and durability standards have to be up to Ontario's high standards and I will commit to him that we will, as I've said before, not open a single bridge or roadway until those standards are achieved to the satisfaction of the chief engineer. It was because of the actions that he described that when I became aware of them, I immediately I immediately took action by taking the inquiry and turning over to the chief engineer. Mr. Speaker, this is a new government. Premier Wynn asked us as ministers to take charge of our farm. Thank you. Supplementary. Thank you, Speaker. 500 deficient girders by the Spanish supplier and the biggest parkway project in Ontario. This report makes it clear that the 500 girders are not up to code yet the minister has chosen not to insist that the manufacturer replaced them at the supplier's cost. Minister, you've chosen a seven point remediation plan instead of replacement. I don't know if this is the least expensive option of the two because I haven't found that in the report yet. But what are the long term safety guarantees of the remediation option? Good. Minister. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I was trying to finish, the Premier has asked each of us to take charge of our files and wait for problems to arise but to get on top of them. And we took that strong action right away. We didn't wait for the Honourable General of the Ombudsman or anyone else or the opposition. We took that action, Mr. Speaker. Those 500 girders, the safety of anything that has been installed or will be installed will not be my choice. These will not be my decisions and, Mr. Speaker, they certainly won't be made on budgetary choices. They will be made purely on engineering and there was not an accountant or a politician involved in this decision. It was the expert engineers and the chief engineer who made this decision free and clear without even a discussion with me who came forward and said from an engineering and safety perspective, this is the right choice. I trust the chief engineer of Ontario. He's the one who should be making these decisions. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport. Basketball is one of the most popular sports of youth in my riding of Scarborough Rouge River. After school and on weekends driving through my riding there's never an empty basketball court. On Monday, constituents of mine, many Torontonians and I were excited to hear the news that Toronto will host the 2016 NBA All-Star Game. The All-Star Weekend is one of the most anticipated sporting events of the year. This annual event showcases the skills of some of the world's best basketball players. For all basketball fans here in Ontario and supporters of the Toronto Raptors, this is great news to know that this event will be right here in our great city. I know that it will showcase Toronto to the basketball world. Can the Minister please explain the government's support for such a great event here in Ontario and how it will benefit us? Minister? Thank you. Yes, the NBA All-Star Basketball Game is coming to life. It will create jobs and strengthen our economy. Allow me to give you some number here. Organisers expect that the festivity will attract 100,000 attendees, 75,000 tourists and 30,000 overnight visits, which will result in almost 28,000 hotel rooms in a span of 10 days. A member from Winfrey, Nipissi and Pembroke, I believe, now is being spoken to twice, if not three times. In over 44 languages, with more than 1,800 media members covering it. The broadcast audience is estimated to be in excess of dropping 200 million viewers. Thank you, Speaker. Thank you, Speaker. The response from the Minister definitely demonstrates the magnitude of this event and also benefit it will have on Toronto's economy. It is good to know that the government has taken an active role in fostering and promoting large-scale events to be hosted here in Ontario. As the Minister said, an event like this will be bringing in many tourists who will not only witness the activities of this event, but will be able to enjoy many of the aspects of our city, such as restaurants, shops and attractions. This is definitely a good thing. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister now tell us what else celebrate Ontario program does to further our province's profile and its initiatives from out of province? Thank you, Minister. Mr. Speaker, I'm more than happy to do that. I'm pleased to advise that Ontario festivals and events attract tourists, create jobs and strengthen our economy. Every year, they support over 22,000 jobs in Ontario and generate millions of dollars in revenue. In 2011, we enhanced the Ontario program by offering a new blockbuster category. This category is helping our province attract major national and international events that will further build Ontario's reputation as a must-see destination. Mr. Speaker, by offering new and improved experiences, event organizers can attract more tourists and increase visitor spending. Your question? Mr. Speaker, my question is the Minister of Finance. Minister, yesterday a committee, Ontarians learned that your government failed to include the cost of the athletes village in the Pan Am Games $1.4 billion budget. Minister, it's the $719 million for the athletes village isn't included in the Pan Am Games budget, then where is the remainder of the money coming from? Mr. Speaker, it's interesting to hear these gentlemen ask these questions when they've been part of the discussions for the last two years. So, I don't know where you guys have been, I certainly don't know where the critic's been, he's been in the office, he's been advised, when we released the Pan Am and the bid, it was very clear it was in regards to the operating venues. The village and all the properties they're in The member from Leeds Greenville will come to order, the member from and Essex will come to order the member from all of you. So, Mr. Speaker, we were very clear from the outset that the Pan Am village was a village made for the residents of Toronto it's going to be a YMCA Mr. Speaker, it's going to help the George Brown College for residents Mr. Speaker it's going to provide social housing Mr. Speaker and their marketable homes in the end Mr. Speaker which is going to provide and to now us to repay some of the expenses. It's a great opportunity for the City of Toronto and for the province of Ontario. Mr. Speaker, again to the Minister of Finance. It's a billion dollar hole. Minister, your priorities are misplaced. Instead of investing money into projects like the subway plan that is approved by the city by the federal government and the people of Scarborough you choose to bank for all the Pan Am games, executive, lavish part of it. Whoever has it, you're taking money out of the industry like affordable housing. When places like Hamilton Barry and Cornwall are in desperate need. Minister, come clean where is the 719 million dollars to build a village coming back? Mr. Speaker the money was already accounted for and we negotiated the tail end of the deal to bring back more value to taxpayers for the province of Ontario. The member opposite is suggesting that maybe we should expense the 407 extension for the Pan Am games or the airline from the union to the airport for the Pan Am games. How about the HOV lanes for the Pan Am games? At what point, Mr. Speaker do we distinguish between what is being done for the benefit of infrastructure and long-term benefit for the City of Toronto versus what's being done for the entire province and that's to help our athletes so that they can train at home and succeed at home and enable us to have a legacy for future generations, Mr. Speaker that's what Pan Am is doing right around the province of Ontario. New question? The member from Hamilton East, Tony Creep. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Tourism. Speaker, yesterday we learned that the cost of the Pan Am games was not 1.4 billion like Ontarians have been told for years for years since 2010 but actually is 2.1 billion and why I say that the fact that this government would create a separate set of books for the athletes village and not include them in the cost reported to the public is beyond infuriating. Speaker, will this Minister now tell Ontarians about any other games costs they may have been transparent about and have not included in the overall budget? Thank you. President, please please stand and support and minister responsible for the Pan Am and Pan Am games. My advice to the member opposite is calm down. Take some time be patient read the 2013 provincial budget calm down again take some time and read the 2009 April release calm down and also with the big boat, the big budget. We will clearly state that the village is outside the Toronto 2015 budget. Speaker, thank you. Thank you. Supplementary. Speaker, with all due respect to the minister, if we calm down, this place would be a bigger mess. Speaker, the minister is acting like it is an achievement of the Pan Am Games executives payback the 91 cent parking claim. Well, Speaker, with all due respect, there's a few more things out there than the parking claim. But with a $700 million cost overrun that we learned about yesterday, Ontario taxpayers are more concerned than ever about the true costs of the games. The lack of accountability and transparency is mind-boggling by this minister. Speaker, Ontario taxpayers demand that the minister come clean and reveal now the real full cost of the games to the people of Ontario that deserve that answer. Thank you for the question. And, Speaker, where we stand at the moment is fantastic. It's great. Allow me to say that all the capital budget is underway. They are on time, on budget, and the early report to us, they are under budget. Under budget, about $15 million. Speaker, our ministry performed an internal audit in 2012. The outcome of that audit, we asked them to tighten up their policy. That means Toronto 2015. Speaker, more recently, I contacted the board in light of the expenses that were brought to my attention and asked them to further find ways to become more transparent and accountable. Speaker, today I'm happy to announce that as a first step they have agreed to start posting. Thank you. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure. Like many across the GTHA, my constituents are concerned with gridlock and rely on public transportation to get to and from work and school. Many in my great writing of Oak Ridge's Markham have reacted positively to the government's investments in our province's transportation system, which have eased their commute, either through a more efficient go, service, or improved highway infrastructure. However, they recognise that York Region is one of the fastest growing regional municipalities in all of Canada, and therefore it faces unique challenges. I would ask the Minister what information he is able to provide to my constituents about other investments being made in public transit and transportation infrastructure in York Region, especially in regard to the York Region BRT. Thank you, Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Before I start, I want to acknowledge three people who have been really foundational to achieving this amazing expansion of transit. The member from Oak Ridge is Maureen, my friend Dr. Jasek. The other doctor, Dr. Merida, the Minister of Research and Innovation, both who have been unrelenting champions for seeing the biggest build-up, and Mr. Bill Fish, the Chair of York Region, Mr. Speaker, who has been really critical. But this is what we're doing, Mr. Speaker. We have committed $1.4 billion for the York Viva BRT project, part of our $50 billion being moved. This is being built now, the lines, the stations. If you've been on Highway 7, it is an amazing piece of infrastructure. We have given another 67.6 under the Metrolinx quick-wind program for municipal capital to help with bus acquisition, Mr. Speaker, and $7.3 million in the move Ontario. This is creating 14,000 jobs in the York Region, Mr. Speaker, and really increasing the marketability, Mr. Speaker. We're very proud of this project. Thank you. Supplementary. Mr. Speaker, and it's certainly important to my constituents that transportation and transportation infrastructure remain a priority for this government. As we know, the subway going to Vaughan is eagerly awaited. As you know, my great riding of Oak Ridge's Markham covers the largest geographical area in York Region and includes four of the nine lower tier municipalities. However, as I drive through my riding, which because of its size takes some time, I can certainly tell you, I notice how congested our highways can sometimes be. What I see with my own eyes reinforces the validity of my constituents' questions regarding easing congestion problems in the region. Mr. Speaker, I'd ask the minister to please inform this House and my constituents in York Region on what else our government are trying to reduce congestion and the current status of its projects. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have a very competitive caucus over here. The member from Vaughan was heckling me that if I don't mention the subway and the 427 extension, I feel like I'm with the other member from York Region I don't want it to feel I love. Mr. Speaker, that speaks to the totality of what is the single biggest build-out of transit across the GTAHA and the history of the province. Why are we doing this, Mr. Speaker? Why are we putting another $634.7 million into York Region since 2003? We're doing that, Mr. Speaker, because there's a cost, not just in the quality of life and families that don't—dads and mums who are home another 40 or 50 minutes late from work—that's a precious price. We don't want people to pay it because, according to the C.D. Howe Institute, this is costing us as much as $11.5 billion, Mr. Speaker. That is in lost investments. That's fewer jobs. The opposition likes to always ask, what's the job strategy, Mr. Speaker? There are hundreds of thousands of jobs being created by the big move and we are reducing the cost of business and feeding more summer jobs for our kids and accelerating employment. They can't support that because they have no economic development or job plan. This is a critical part of ours. Do you have a question? Can we do the opposition? My question to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Minister, the town of Fort Erie has been on the receiving end a lot of bad liberal government decisions. You're moving the slums to race track costing jobs and putting the racetrack in peril. You close down the hospital ER. You close down their tourism office. To their credit, people in the town of Fort Erie want to persevere. If the government is not going to help them, they're going to help themselves. They have an industrial park development along the Queen Elizabeth way to attract new jobs and businesses to a beautiful community with hardworking people. That project has been approved by the town of Fort Erie, by the region of Niagara. It's been appealed by you to the OMB and the OMB decided in favor of the town of Fort Erie. Minister, what I have to ask you is why is the liberal government standing in the way of economic development? Why are you kicking a town going through some tough times? Why don't you stand aside and let them bring good jobs and new businesses in time? Thanks to the leader for the question and certainly I wouldn't comment on a case that's before the Ontario Municipal Board, but I think that certainly we believe that the Ontario Municipal Board plays an important role in land use planning and I think certainly the community has worked hard to provide an economic development case for increased land use planning in that community and certainly I would value your input as to the consultation that we are just about to begin with regards to how we can improve the process. We want to make sure that economic development and trade increases in Ontario and we want to support communities because we respect the municipal sector. We believe it's a strong order of government and we want to support those those decisions that are made by local government so I look forward to how we can improve the process for the Ontario Municipal Board. Thank you. The Mayor has written to you they've met with your officials recently at AMO and if you respect local decision-making then why don't you let this industrial park go forward so they can attract jobs? Again I'll reiterate the town of Fort Erie supports it, the region of Niagara supports it, the OMB decided in favor of this project the only one standing against it is the Kathleen Wynne Liberal government who wants to shut the town down and people in Fort Erie are asking what the heck do you have against the town of Fort Erie? Why are you standing in the way? I mean we in the PC caucus unlike the other two we look at every issue to the lens of what it does to create jobs how will it grow the economy how will people go back to work in the town of Fort Erie? So minister I'll ask you the same question the Mayor Doug Martin has asked you why are you using tax dollars to shut down economic development in the town of Fort Erie? Thank you. Thank you. Thank the member for the question. Obviously I don't know the specifics of why the decision was made with at the Ontario Municipal Board. I'm happy to look into it and at the end of the day I spent hours days in fact dealing and speaking with mayors and reeves across Ontario in August and because of the respect that we have for those elected officials. I'm happy to work with you and find a solution. That's our job. I feel confident that we can find a solution going forward. We want to ensure that all parts of Ontario get good land use planning advice and we will work with you going forward. Thank you. Thank you. My question is to the Premier. For the second time in just over a year workers at the Fort Erie racetrack got pink slips instead of assurances from this government throwing families and local businesses in the Niagara region into turmoil yet again. Fort Erie has already been hard hit speaker by job losses and people there can't take much more bad news. This government talks a good talk but when will it pony up and provide stable long-term funding for the horse racing industry instead of gambling with the economic future of Fort Erie and frankly all of rural Ontario. Thank you very much Mr. Speaker. And I know that the leader of the third party knows that we are working with all of the tracks in the province that there has been a report that's coming forward with a five year strategy. Mr. Speaker, we've always already committed $180 million to support the industry over the next three years. There was racing at all of the tracks in the province this season Mr. Speaker and I'm pleased about that. I know that it is in the best interest of the people of the province not just in not just Fort Erie but across the province to have a sustainable horse racing industry. There are many jobs dependent on that industry Mr. Speaker and there needed to be changes made. The SAR program was not transparent. The industry was fractured Mr. Speaker. There needed to be changes made. We are making those changes but we are moving to a sustainable horse racing industry and $180 million is in place for the transition over the next three years Mr. Speaker. All bets are off for the 117th season at Fort Erie racetrack when the last race is actually held on October the 15th. Not only does Canadian horse racing stand to lose a jewel in its triple crowd but those horse people and track workers stand to lose a whole lot more than the Prince of Wales stakes. They stand to lose their livelihoods. When will this government stop hedging their bets and commit to sustainable funding for the Fort Erie racetrack and tracks in communities across the province so that horse people can plan for the future instead of preparing for the worst? Good question. Thank you very much Mr. Speaker. Well compliments to the writer of the question for the horse racing lingold that says it was very good. Mr. Speaker the reason that I've asked the panel of John Snowblown and Elmer Buchanan and John Wilkinson to come forward with a five-year strategy is that we want that kind of stability. I want the horse racing industry to be part of the overall gaming strategy of the province Mr. Speaker. Well we got to that point the member from Northumberland, Quinty West is worn. The member from Bruce Gray Owen Sound is worn. You know Mr. Speaker there were questions earlier in the week about a particular lack of transparency out of track in the province around the funding of the industry and that's exactly the reason why the SART program needed to be changed Mr. Speaker. So we need a five-year strategy that will have recommendations regarding the distribution of race dates, a revised governance structure that will include the role of the Ontario Racing Commission and the Industry Association and the integration of Thank you. New question to the member for model ourselves. My question for you is to the Minister of Education. Speaker our government has made significant investments in full day kindergarten to ensure our youngest learners get the best possible start. Hear hear. In fact we have invested over 1.4 billion to support the implementation of full day kindergarten to date. In September of this year McMaster, St. Marguerite, Uville, Roberta Bondar and four other elementary schools in Ottawa South offered full day kindergarten for the first time. Great schools. There are now 25 schools providing full day kindergarten in Ottawa South. Progress. I've heard from the families that they're pleased with the progress we've made to date but they want to know how their children are benefiting in the classroom from this investment. Mr. Speaker, will the minister please tell this house how full day kindergarten is improving students success. Thank you. Thank you to the member from Ottawa South and his experience and his writing is the same throughout the province. In fact a few weeks ago I was delighted to announce the early results of a study on full day kindergarten. The study which was conducted in partnership with Queens and McMaster universities measured the progress of students who were enrolled in full day kindergarten compared to those who participated in half day programs. The results showed that students in full day kindergarten are better prepared to enter grade one and will be more successful in school. In fact students with two years of FDK were found to have significant improvement in social competence development in language and cognitive development and in communication skills in general knowledge. These findings shows that we are giving our children a stronger start in life and I look forward to the release later this fall of the whole research report. Mr. Speaker and thank you to the minister as well. I know that full day kindergarten is popular with parents and with educators and I'm pleased to hear about the study which confirmed that full day kindergarten is giving our kids the best possible start. In fact education expert Charles Pascal says the study shows the program is truly a life changer and we know that families are saving thousands of dollars with the introduction of full day kindergarten of Ontario's four and five year olds. I'm also hearing from parents however that full day kindergarten is having an impact on child care supports in our community. Can the minister tell the house how our government is assisting child care operators to ensure a seamless school day for all our kids? Yes thank you speaker and the member is absolutely correct. Full day kindergarten is the most significant transformation that we've seen in early learning in in decades but we know we are having an impact on the child care system. The gradual implementation of full day kindergarten allows municipalities child care operators and communities to adjust to the changes that this initiative brings speaker. We're also providing funding to help transition child care centers to serve younger children. In addition we're providing funding to help non-profit child care centers and school boards to support retrofits and renovations to serve younger children. The 2013 budget included an additional 39 million to support child care modernization bringing our total investment to 346 million dollars in additional investment over four years in our child care system. Question the member from Newmark and Aurora. Thank you speaker my question is to the minister of infrastructure and I want to ask the minister about yet another questionable if not fraudulent activity at another one of the government's agencies. This time it involves go transit and it's dealings with CN rail. In a confidential email to five of his colleagues Mr Darrell Barnett who was CN's divisional manager for Ontario at the time set out in great detail how CN would recover some 385 thousand dollars of CN's over expenditures from go transit. The plan included measures such as using partially worn tie plates and padding invoices. In the end the email reads total exposure reduced from 300 to 75,000 to 78,000. My question to the premier is this who at go transit was complicit with this scheme to fund taxpayer infrastructure dollars to CN to fund its expenditure. Thank you. I remind the member he directed his question in his preamble to the minister of infrastructure not the premier minister of infrastructure and transportation. Speaker I think CN and I hope the member is opposite this is the second time we've heard these allegations CN has put out a comprehensive report as I understand denying all of this and giving evidence. I will further Mr. Speaker we will remember from home we'll withdraw Mr. Speaker so I hope the member has that his homework I will certainly look at it. I want to say one thing Mr. Speaker though about that I mean this is the party that loves to trash go transit today as you probably know Mr. Speaker go transit won the American Public Transportation Association of which they are member this is the U.S. best service award for the best large public transportation system in North America. You see the please thank you supplementary. Speaker that's the same defensive rhetoric I heard from the minister of health when we first asked questions about orange Speaker the email to which I'm referring from Mr. Barnett said this I quote we have run ourselves into some unexpected over expenditures to date and I would like to establish a strategy to mitigate or get out of as many as possible a strategy speaker that I find it difficult to believe that people at go transit were not part of would it surprise the minister to know that the same Daryl Bennett who was the architect of that strategy left as division engineer at CN in 2008 and within days was hired by go transit and that same individual is director of railway corridor infrastructure for go transit I would like to ask the minister this will he defend what went on there or will he do what is right order an investigation into what is going on at go transit and between go transit and CN and ensure thank you thank you minister thank you mr. Speaker as as the member opposite may know we just went through an investigation where similar allegations were raised with CN they per they turned out after an extensive mr. Speaker they turned out after a very thorough investigation that there was no validity to it that the deals between CN and go were not only above board but very valid and very fair mr. Speaker if the member has any evidence at all then he should table it with me and the ministry and as you know from earlier conversations today mr. Speaker we have no fear of opening up an investigation at all we just completed one we are not shy about transparency and my premier make sure that I and every other minister aren't afraid and she supports us in inquiries as we found out with the release today mr. Speaker I have no fear of it the member from new market Aurora on a point of order speaker further to the minister's offer we don't trust him but we do want the auditor general on a on a lighter note it's not my intention to always bring attention to the media but there are two people in the press gallery celebrating birthdays on the same day which is today Richard Brennan and Martin Cole you have to guess who's older there are no deferred votes this house is adjourned until 3 p.m. this afternoon