 It is now time for Question Period, the leader of Her Majesty's Royal Opposition. Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier. On March 24th, the Premier said, quote, when I say I'm going to cooperate and have been cooperating with authorities, I'm talking about the authorities whose responsibility to conduct the investigation. Mr. Speaker, when the Premier says that she is going to cooperate with authorities, does that include the criminal court assigned to the corruption charges against her key fundraiser? Mr. Speaker, will the Premier agree to testify, if subpoenaed, to the trial of Jerry Lahi Jr.? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Obviously, this is an issue that I have taken very seriously. Because I take it seriously, Mr. Speaker, I have cooperated with all of the authorities. I have cooperated in the investigations, Mr. Speaker. You know, I've been very open with the legislature, and in fact, Mr. Speaker, I've answered 96 questions. I've heard enough, and it'll stop. I've answered 96 questions on this issue in the legislature, Mr. Speaker. I've made dozens of statements in the media and answered questions in the media. I have cooperated with the authorities, Mr. Speaker. I will continue to cooperate with the authorities, as we all have. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, again, the Premier has told the legislature 40 times that she will cooperate with authorities during the Sudbury investigation. In fact, on February 26th, the Premier said that she will fully cooperate and work with authorities. The official opposition respects the fact that the Premier met with the OPP investigators, but her duty is to clear there, and that hasn't been done. The people of Ontario deserve to know who ordered Jerry Lahi to make the phone call and offer the alleged bribe. Mr. Speaker, is the Premier prepared, and this is very clear, is the Premier prepared to appear before the court and answer those questions? Thank you, Premier. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As I have said, I have answered all of the questions that have been asked of me. I have answered 96 questions in the House, Mr. Speaker. And if past behavior is indicative of future behavior, and I have cooperated with the authorities, I have worked with the authorities, Mr. Speaker, have cooperated with the investigation, I will continue to do that, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, this is as clear as mud. Again, to the Premier, we know the Premier has the parliamentary privilege to be exempted as a witness. However, the privilege is not meant to impede the course of justice. Mr. Speaker, the people of Ontario deserve to know what really happened with the Sudbury by-election scandal. So I'm sure the people of Ontario want the Premier not to waive that privilege and appear of call to the trial. Mr. Speaker, yes or no, will the Premier testify, if subpoenaed, to the corruption trial of her key fundraising? I am standing, Premier. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have not attempted to avoid answering questions that have been posed to me here, that have been posed to me by- The members of Chris Sammer and Stinks have been posed to me by the authorities. I have worked with the investigation. I have cooperated fully, Mr. Speaker. I will continue to cooperate fully. I am prompted. I have made statements in public about the situation in Sudbury. So I will continue to cooperate, Mr. Speaker. I will continue to respond to requests by the authorities as I have done, Mr. Speaker. That behaviour is not going to change. Thank you. The Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier. Yesterday, one question about health cuts, the Liberal government refused to take responsibility. This year, the Canada health transfer increased by $652 million. The Liberals shifted $54 million away from this transfer, maybe to a different ministry, or maybe to cover up another one of their scandals. No one knows which one it is. Mr. Speaker, because the Liberal government refuses to even acknowledge the $54 million cut to healthcare, the decision to cut $54 million was the wrong decision. Mr. Speaker, will the Premier admit she cut $54 million from healthcare, from the front lines, and exactly the wrong time? Thank you. I just want to comment on this, but let me just go over what has been going on in health in terms of the big picture in Ontario. Since 2003, hospital funding in Ontario has risen from $11.3 billion to $17.3 billion this year. That's a 53% increase, Mr. Speaker. This year, the healthcare budget is $50.8 billion. Mr. Speaker, we committed to a 5% increase in home and community care investments, which will grow over $750 million over the next three years. Funding for community support services increased to almost $514 million this year, Mr. Speaker. That's an increase of $41.9 million over last year, Mr. Speaker. The fact is there are 24,000 more nurses in Ontario than there were in 2003, Mr. Speaker. The number of physicians has increased to over 5,600 and has increased by 5,600, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Supplementary. Mr. Speaker, again for the Premier, these cuts are hurting people across the province and at the CCACs in my own riding. Last year, a 74-year-old Simcoe County woman who was nearly blind and had below-the-knee amputation had twice daily visits by a PSW to help her bathe and deal with these developing sores. When her husband died last summer, the CCAC cut her evening support. Shortly after that, she was notified she would lose her morning visit as well. At that point, she began developing sores. She couldn't reach the sores to treat them herself. Her services were restored, but only after she hired a private patient advocate. Mr. Speaker, where is the Premier's compassion? Does she believe patients should only have to pay out of pocket to get the service restored to hire private contractor to fight for their services? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And notwithstanding the fact that that party, the party opposite voted against our increase of $250 million annually to home and community care for each of the next three years, the Leader of the Opposition has the chance to redeem himself and redeem his party by supporting and I think he will, just given the nature of his question, supporting our 10-point plan that we announced earlier this year, this spring, in fact, of important changes to make to our home and community care sector alongside that increase in funding. It was a 10-point plan that implements in full the results of an expert panel led by the esteemed Gail Donner to help us make sure that the quality of services that we provide is the best that it can possibly be. So I ask the member opposite, I ask the Leader of the Official Opposition will he support our 10-point plan, our action plan to improve home and community care? Mr. Speaker, my question is again for the Premier. Last Friday, we celebrated the day of Francophony. In my riding of Simcoe North, the government is closing the Penitanguishing Hospital. This government is turning its back to communities like Penitanguishing. 50 residents' positions have been cut and this is when 8,000 Ontarians need a family doctor. At the same time, this government is cutting $54 million in the health care budget. It's enough. Mr. Speaker, when will our Premier protect the Francophone Hospital in Penitanguishing? Can I go right now? You see the please? You see the please? You promised. Okay. The Premier? Mr. Raquel. The Minister of Attorney's and Francophone Affairs. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's an excellent question that's been asked. I'm very much aware of what's happening at the Georgian Bay General Hospital and its location in Penitanguishing. The Minister of Health and Long-Term Care has said the Penitanguishing site will not close its door while the Francophone Services are not transferred to the Georgian Bay General Hospital. So the liens of North Simcoe during their planning for Francophone Health Care Services are doing are very satisfied with the services at Georgian Bay and I would like to recognize the Minister of Health who responded quickly to ensure that services will be maintained in the new Georgian Bay Hospital. So thank you to the Minister. A question to the Leader of the Third Party. Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Premier. Ontarians are growing increasingly cynical about this Liberal government and politics. It's no wonder, considering that the Sudbury bribery scandal and people's disbelief that this Premier could actually sell off Hydro One without any public consultation. Deputy House Leader, second time. Despite the condescending lectures of the government House Leader yesterday, there is nothing that says that the Premier couldn't stand in this place and accept some responsibility for her role and the role of her office in the Sudbury bribery scandal. Will this Premier finally take some responsibility and tell Ontarians who gave the order for Mr. Lahi to offer a bribe to Mr. Olivier? Thank you. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And as I said to the Leader of the Third Party yesterday, I have spoken on this issue. I have answered questions in the Legislature, Mr. Speaker, between February 17th and April 2nd, Mr. Speaker, and including questions in the House this month. Mr. Speaker, I've answered 96 questions. All of that is unanswered, Mr. Speaker. It's quite clear what my position has been. I've made statements in the media unprompted, Mr. Speaker. So I'm not going to pre-empt the process that is now before the courts. And I think the Leader of the Third Party knows full well that it would be inappropriate of me to do so. Thank you. The Premier is right about one thing. This place isn't a court. Where would she have to answer to a judge? This is the Ontario Legislature. And in this place, she's supposed to answer to the people of Ontario. That people are becoming more and more cynical about politics. If it takes being sworn in by a judge to actually get some honesty around here. Now, will this Premier finally take some responsibility and tell Ontarians whether she, Ms. Sorbera, or someone else in her office, instructed Mr. Lockheed to offer a bribe, Speaker? Thank you, Premier. Well, Mr. Speaker, I have been completely honest with the people of Ontario to questions in the media, Mr. Speaker. I have cooperated with the authorities. I will continue to do that, Mr. Speaker. But this is not the court of law and I am not going to pre-empt that process. There is an issue that is before the courts and we have to let that process unfold, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. The Premier has had opportunities to show leadership. She has had opportunities to accept responsibility for her actions and the actions of people around her. But at every opportunity, she has refused and instead protected Liberal insiders, dragging the reputation of the office of the Premier of Ontario through the mud, Speaker, and increasing that sense of cynicism. That sense of economic development. That sense of cynicism that so many Ontarians are feeling about their government. If the Premier and her office have nothing to hide, in the Sudbury bribery scandal, then why won't she put cynical politics aside, tell Ontarians who was it that directed Mr. Lahid to offer Mr. Olivier a bribe in Sudbury? Mr. Speaker, the questions that the leader of the third party are putting forward are questions that will, I'm no doubt, be asked in the court. I'm not going to pre-empt that process or presume to know what those questions will be, Mr. Speaker. I have cooperated with the authorities. I will continue to do that. I think, Mr. Speaker, that it is extremely important that everyone understand that we are engaged as government in making very difficult decisions in implementing a plan, Mr. Speaker, that is going to build this province up, that is already building the province up, Mr. Speaker. The leader of the third party can laugh because she actually doesn't support investments in transit and transportation infrastructure. She actually doesn't support making a business environment that allows businesses to thrive, Mr. Speaker. She has opposed all of the actions that we have taken, Mr. Speaker, and will continue to take to make sure that this province is competitive and that our economy can grow, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. A member from Renfrew, Nipissing, Pembroke, second time. New question, the leader of the third party. My next question is also for the Premier. Over the summer, I was in every corner of this province, Mr. Speaker. I spoke to new Democrats, I spoke to liberals, and I spoke to conservatives, and I spoke to people who have no partisan interest whatsoever, Mr. Speaker. They all told me the exact same thing. They are frustrated, they are worried, and they are angry that this Premier is selling off Hydro One without ever, ever consulting them, Mr. Speaker. They are growing cynical that simply will not listen. Will this Premier address the concerns that people are raising and hold public hearings on the sell-off of Hydro One, Mr. Speaker? So, Mr. Speaker, I understand that it is in, that this leader of the third party perceives that it is in her political interest to make sure that she stirs up any concerns that people might have. I understand that that is in her best interest as she perceives it. Some might say that is cynical, Mr. Speaker. Some might say that it is cynical, that when people raise concerns, because I know, Mr. Speaker, I traveled the province, I was in every corner of the province, Mr. Speaker, and I am not, Mr. Speaker. It is my responsibility, and I would suggest it's all of our responsibility to tell the whole story, Mr. Speaker, to make sure that people understand that the decision that our government has taken is about investing in this province for a brighter future, a more prosperous future, a more competitive future. That's what the decision is about. You've seen it, please. Thank you. Supplementary. Mr. Speaker, what about the 82% of people who do not want to see hydroelectricities so far oppose the liberal civil war? One of their biggest complaints, Mr. Speaker, is the utter lack of any consultation whatsoever by this arrogant Premier. Sarnia Mayor Mike Bradley said that you would have to actually be sure-law foams to figure out that the Liberal pre-election budget was talking about selling off Ontario's hydro utility. The Premier needs to listen, and if she won't listen to me, then she should be listening to the municipal leaders and the people of this province who are telling her that they have what I would say and that they want to say. So will this Premier allow public hearings, either through the OEB or through any other mechanism on the sell-off of Hydro-1? So the leader of the third party raised the commentary that was made by the Minister of or the Mayor of Sarnia yesterday, because Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to attend the Chamber of Commerce in Sarnia, Mr. Speaker. I had an opportunity. A member from Hamilton East, 20th Creek, second time. Finish, please. It was a great opportunity. I think it was one of the first times that a Premier had actually been in recent memory, had been to speak with the businesses in Sarnia, Mr. Speaker. It was a great meeting. I had an opportunity to have a tour. But Mr. Speaker, I will tell you, the number one issue that the Mayor of Sarnia raised with me was the building of a road, Mr. Speaker. The Mayor of Sarnia wants money for infrastructure, Mr. Speaker. The Mayor of Sarnia knows that his and his community's infrastructure, Mr. Speaker, the leader of the third party. Final supplementary. Well, Speaker, it's no wonder that the people of Ontario are growing increasingly cynical about this government, considering the display we just saw. The cancellation of the gas plant speaker, e-health, orange, deleted public records, the Sudbury bribery scandal, and now the sell-off of Hydro 1. It's easy to understand how Ontarians have become so cynical, but it is bad for democracy, Speaker. The Premier has said that she wants to do things differently. Well, I would submit that it certainly is not too late. Will this Premier start actually doing things differently, or will she start trying to regain the public confidence and hold public hearings before she sells off the first tranche of shares of Hydro 1? I have said many times, a couple of things. This was a very difficult decision, but the fact is that we must make those investments, including in infrastructure in Sarnia and in every part of the province, Hamilton, Kitchener Waterloo, Northwestern Ontario, all of the communities that are looking for investment in infrastructure, Mr. Speaker. We made it clear in our budget, Mr. Speaker, in our platform, Mr. Speaker, that we were looking at assets and that we were looking at leveraging those assets so that we could invest in the new assets that we need for the 21st century, Mr. Speaker. And it was clear to people, it was even clear to the leader of the third party that we were actually looking at those assets, Mr. Speaker, and in fact, the leader of the third party on July 6th of 2014 said, the budget says in black and white that the government is looking at the sale of assets, including Crown corporations such as Ontario Power Generation, Hydro One, and the Liquor Control Board of Ontario. She understood it, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Thank you. New question. Mr. Hamilton will assess London. Questions to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Speaker, today the halls of Queen's Park are filled with the most accessible healthcare provider in Ontario, our pharmacist. Here, here. Unfortunately, these healthcare professionals have been an easy target for cuts from this government for the past 12 years. And October 1st is no exception. With your cut in nursing positions throughout the province, your $235 million cut to doctors, pharmacists will see a $150 million cut to their profession. However, due to the accessibility of the pharmacist, the government should be utilizing the abilities of the pharmacist to derive immediate cost savings in the healthcare system, such as implementing expanded ejection authority, expanding smoking cessation programs and enabling pharmacists to treat minor common ailments. Minister, why do you ignore the expanded scope of practice for pharmacists? Mr. Hamilton will assess London. New question to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I know my critic is new at the job, but I would have hoped, given his background, he would know that we have dramatically expanded the scope of practice for our pharmacists across this province as we should. And very shortly, later in the next month in October, our pharmacists are going to join us in vaccinating probably, I anticipate, upwards of 1 million Ontarians against flu by administering the flu vaccine in our pharmacies. It's a wonderful example of increasing scope of practice, but also utilizing our pharmacists to the fullest extent. These are individuals that have such great capacity and are such an integral part of our healthcare system, we're constantly looking for ways that we can take advantage of their expertise, take advantage of their presence in our communities, and take advantage of the fact that they have the trust of our communities and the people that live there to make sure that we provide that quality health service. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Back to the Minister of Health, Minister, I've been a pharmacist for 20 years, and I've been proud of my profession. Mr. Speaker, to just exemplify that pharmacists can only do flu shots is absolute ridiculous. If you listen to my first question, it's an expansion of vaccinations across the board. However, hopefully you can listen to my supplemental and come up with a better response to the pharmacists that are here today. Your government seems to have money to pay out bonuses for Pan Am Games. And according to the Auditor General, have money to create large bureaucracies in the healthcare systems. However, you're continuing to cut frontline health services to the detriment of Ontario's. Pharmacists have proven to create immediate savings in healthcare system while increasing services. Other provinces have implemented expanded injection authority for pharmacists, expanding smoking cessation programs, and other provinces have enabled pharmacists to treat minor common ailments, all of which would create immediate savings in the healthcare system. Minister, why are you so focused on paying the salaries and bonuses of healthcare bureaucracy while you wage a war with... Thank you. Thank you. Can you see me, please? Can you see me, please? Thank you. Minister of Health. Mr. Speaker and to the member opposite, I didn't raise the issue of expanded access to further injectable vaccines because quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, I wanted to leave the best for last. So I announced a number of months ago. In fact, it was in our budget that we are expanding the scope of our pharmacists even further to be able to enable them to provide travel vaccinations, potentially other vaccinations as well. So you voted against that budget, but it was there in black and white. I didn't announce it in a number of months ago as well. Excuse me. Minister of Natural Resources, member from Halliburton. Thank you. So I would just invite the member opposite to come to the reception tonight, hear from pharmacists and from the OPA how much they are celebrating the fact that we're increasing the scope. We've created a table to look at further injectables, and we are moving forward to actually talk to pharmacists. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question to the Premier. Yesterday, the Minister of Energy tried once again to claim he has a public mandate to sell Hydro-1. To reporters, he said that before the elections, quote, we talked about repurposing assets without being specific. He said, quote, there's no government that has ever elected that abides by every single detail of an election platform. The principle was in the election platform. The specifics were in the budget. 166 municipalities now including Peterborough and more than 80% of Ontarians believe that the sale of Hydro-1 is more than just a detail. Since the Minister now agrees that the sale of Hydro-1 was not specifically mentioned in her election platform, will the Premier finally admit she has a public mandate? Thank you, Mr. Minister of Energy. Mr. Speaker, we know that the MVP of the third party has been crisscrossing the province, telling everybody that rates will skyrocket because Hydro-1 is going to broaden its ownership, Mr. Speaker. The reality, Mr. Speaker, that is not the case. Last week, the member from the Pee and Carlton is warned and I'm going to remind everyone that the the Ontario Energy Board has the authority to control rates, to reverse rates, not to give requested increases, Mr. Speaker. In fact, it was the Ontario power generation before the Supreme Court of Canada and the Supreme Court of Canada said the Ontario Energy Board, Mr. Speaker, rolled back their increases and would not give it to them because of unacceptable costs, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think it's very telling that the Minister wouldn't answer the question. I'm going back to the Premier. Before the election, the Premier said she preferred to keep Hydro-1 in public hands. The Minister of Finance told the Economic Club public ownership is the key. Now the Premier says the public should never have trusted her. She says the public should have understood that weasel words like repurposing assets or lever... That's not acceptable. Withdraw, please. Withdraw, please. Withdraw. That code words like repurposing assets or leveraging were code for selling Hydro-1 and because the public didn't understand the code, she now claims to have a mandate to sell Ontario's oldest and most important public asset. Is the Premier really saying that the 80% of Ontarians who oppose the Hydro-1 sale only have themselves playing for trusting her? Thank you. Mr. Speaker, we're talking about whether or not we had a mandate to proceed. He has a convenient memory, Mr. Speaker. He forgets around April and May of 2014. We had a budget prepared, draft budget, what they would not approve. Before the election, Mr. Speaker, we had a budget which indicated very, very clearly. We also had appointed before the election, Mr. Speaker, the Asset Council and they had a specific mandate including, Mr. Speaker, looking at repurposing the assets in the energy sector. We're very, very clear, Mr. Speaker. We're proceeding with that, Mr. Speaker. And one of our main issues in that election campaign was providing infrastructure to the people of Ontario which we're proceeding with. There are two things in the same issue, Mr. Speaker. So, the mandate was there, the issue was there and we're proceeding with it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change. Mr. Speaker, my constituents in Halton are worried about the impact of climate change on our environment and our economy. Our region is a collection of local parks, rich farmland, conservation areas in the escarpment. Organisations like the Halton Environmental Network and the Friends of the Green Belt Foundation are working tirelessly to keep our riding green and clean. Now, we know the earth's temperature is rising due to increased greenhouse gases. It's imperative that all governments take action. Action to protect communities, action to protect the agricultural sector and action to protect the air we breathe. That's why I was encouraged to see yesterday that we unanimously passed second reading of Bill 9, the Ending Coal Act. Mr. Speaker, through you. Could the Minister please inform the House about what action the government has taken to eliminate the use of coal in Ontario? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I actually want to thank my colleague, the Minister of Energy, President and past this was a remarkable leadership by the Energy Ministry and our utilities who contributed the largest greenhouse gas emissions reduction in North American history, Mr. Speaker. And some people have suggested that permanently passing legislation to keep this closed is somehow not serious politics. In fact, Mr. Speaker, two major other OECD countries because of other issues have reintroduced coal. We're actually locking down on something that is very serious, building our credibility, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the member from Halton who came to this House as a mom and as a person who's working communication who well understands the importance of the environmental issues realizing that these things have to be top of mind, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank her for her question. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And thanks again to the Minister. I think we could all agree that reducing coal was a significant step in the fight against climate change. I do find it strange, however, that the federal government who used to be fiercely critical of ending coal is now trying to take credit for our leadership on this key issue. We know that action on climate change is vital for the future of our province and that when it comes to this important fight, there is still more work to be done. I know we are up to the task. Mr. Speaker, through you to the Minister, could he please inform this House about what other action our government is taking in the fight against climate change? Mr. Speaker, one of the things we're doing is we're trying to avoid red tape and regulation that will hurt business. I was interested to hear Mr. Speaker, during the debate take credit for our coal reductions given that he has campaigned against them. He's out there campaigning in British Columbia against the Premier Clark's efforts on carbon pricing. He's out in campaigning in Alberta against Premier Naughtley's efforts to reduce carbon. He's here in Ontario complaining about our climate change strategy. He's in Quebec attacking Premier Clark to reduce it. I'm going to ask the Minister to refer that to government policy. Mr. Speaker, what is he proposing to do? The exact opposite. He said yesterday that he will be proceeding with a sector by sector regulatory approach. This is the antithesis of the cap and trade systems we're involving. As a matter of fact the Ontario Chamber of Congress came out and said that the government is proposing policies can offer maximum flexibilities. Carbon pricing policies are much preferable and offer maximum... I would deeply appreciate all questions and all answers to be relevant to government policy. When we move over to any other level of government it's not appropriate in the House during question period. New question, the member from Nipissing. Mr. Speaker, the public accounts of Ontario was released yesterday confirming what we all know. Ontario is the most indebted sub-national borrower on the entire planet. But we also had confirmed one other item the Liberals denied for over a year. They sold Ontario the telecommunications arm of Ontario Northland for $6 million. We stood in the House legislature and said it would actually cost the taxpayers between $50 million and $70 million if they went through with this fire sale. And now public accounts has confirmed this Speaker, they declosed that the Liberals lost $61 million selling off Ontario. Speaker how can this government justify this insulting loss to Northern and this outrageous loss to taxpayers? Mr. Speaker, first of all member from Nipissing, Pembroke is warned. Carry on. Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the fact that we made a decision about a year and a half ago to keep four of the five lines of the ONTC in public hands. The decision to move forward with the sale of Ontario telecommunications arm is very much believed to be the right one. A necessary step to enable our government to focus strategic investments on the we were determined to focus on the strategic transportation services that are so crucial to moving forward with a sustainable long-term efficient ONTC. And while there were short-term costs associated with the sale of Ontario, the costs of the sale Thank you. Supplementary. Back to the Premier. I can't see how this was well thought out Speaker. The government took a 100-year-old $70 million Crown asset and gave it away for $6 million. This sounds hauntingly familiar to what they're about to do with Hydro One. But Speaker it gets worse. The total doesn't include the $6.5 million and the consultants who were paid $6.5 million to advise the liberals. You heard it Speaker. They were paid $6.5 million to tell the liberals how to sell something for $6 million. They're a laughing stock Speaker. They bungled the sale. How do the liberals expect the people to trust them with the sale of Hydro One like Ontario? Thank you. Minister. It's at least a tad ironic. The member asking this question is the one that was calling for the privatization of the Ontario and Northland Transportation Committee. The fact is I can pull the quotes out you know you're not against privatization. We know that well Mr. Speaker. The member knows why he's been reluctant to ask questions to the legislature. The bottom line Mr. Speaker is that we made a decision that isn't the best long-term interest of the corporation. We will continue to support the ONTC as it transforms its operations and focuses on core transportation services. We worked long and hard to make those decisions working with a municipal advisory committee and those decisions were to keep forward the five lines of public hands and to move the Ontario into the private sector. Our government remains absolutely committed to ensuring the thriving communities and industry benefit from a viable, efficient and... Thank you. The member from Windsor-Ducumpsie come to order. New question. The member from Windsor-Wist. Thank you Speaker. My question is to the Premier. Speaker it's simply not enough to stand up and say you value our province's teachers and education workers but continue to ignore them at the table. Members of this House heard this morning from education workers who have been without a contract since September 2014 and are still seeking a fair deal. They still don't have one. Education workers can clean and repair schools, make sure that all the proper forms go out and records are kept and they provide one-on-one care for students with special needs. A crucial bridge between the students' complex needs and their educational outcomes. These students deserve to be successful too. I agree with the member opposite on one issue that we in fact do we do think that coming to agreements with our education workers is urgent and essential. In fact, that's why we have been in negotiations for the last two weeks. Not just both CUPI, which represents the education workers. I agree with the member opposite on both CUPI, which represents many of our education workers, caretakers, maintenance, secretary clerical, education assistants, early childhood educators, professional student supporters, lunch hour supervisors, all sorts of roles that are quite essential in our province's schools. We've also been negotiating with the Ontario Secondary School Teachers Federation which also represents a large number of education workers. And it's because we recognize the role that those workers play as being so important to our schools that we have been negotiating. Thank you, supplementary. Thank you, Speaker. Again to the Premier. Speaker, we heard this morning how hard, how complex and how diverse the roles of our education support staff workers are in our schools. But they've been clear in bargaining about what they want, what is best for not only workers but students as well. Not a bottom line, not a final answer but respect. Speaker, why won't this government get back to bargaining in earnest with elementary teachers and education workers? Why is this government content to create crisis in our schools? Minister? Yes, and I can only repeat that we have been focused on negotiating with our education workers because we respect them, because we value them. So, as I said before, we have been negotiating with CUPY. We're looking forward to establishing more dates with CUPY. We have been making good progress and I think that there's real opportunity there for us to come together because CUPY has been quite clear about what it is they're asking for and I think we'll be able to come together on our negotiations with that group. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Attorney General, Madeline Mayer. I know that in our province our justice system uses both official languages, French and English. In my constituency I sometimes receive comments regarding updates regarding the challenges that people are facing in our judiciary system in Ontario. Mr. Speaker, could the Attorney General update us on the activities of by her ministry and the services that we provide for the people of Ontario? The minister, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you to my colleague from Glen Gary Prescott Russell. I know that he is a proud defender of Frank Coffey in his constituency so Mr. Speaker, our government works on several files. We have a great report on access to justice in French by the advisory committee that was led by Justice Moulou as well as Paul LeMay, a lawyer enabled us to bring a strategy to go forward. We put in place a lot of work. We have put in place their recommendations regarding my ministry. That also included the creation of a pilot project that was supported by the Commissioner for Language Services French Language Services and we have launched that pilot project in May in the Ottawa Courthouse. Question. Thank you Mr. Speaker and thank you to the Attorney General for her answer. Last Friday was Franco-Ontarian Day in Ontario and was celebrated throughout the province here in Queen's Park with the flag that was raised on our court is equal. There were lots of francophones there and I've met with a lot of francophones in my constituency. I've went to Alexandria and Augsbury to events that were held in these towns and the Attorney General mentioned a recommendation regarding the creation of a pilot project. Could the Attorney General tell us what was the goal, the aim, the scope of this pilot project? The Minister. This pilot project in Ottawa will last one year and its aim is to be spread throughout the province. We already have a project team that should put these recommendations in this project in place and it should start it actually started in spring 2014. So what we want is a better French access to this justice system. We want people to be aware of their rights in French in our judiciary system. I was in Sudbury last Friday for the flag raising and it was the 40th anniversary of our Franco-Ontarian flag. I was there with my colleague, the member for Sudbury and it was really an amazing celebration with a lot of emotions. I would like to thank all of those who celebrated September 25th in their constituency. Thank you very much. Thank you very much Mr Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Environment and Climate Change. Today we learned from the Ontario Chamber of Commerce that they have some very serious concerns about the Liberal cap and trades tax scheme. A system that we have yet to hear any details about. The Ontario Chamber specifically mentioned has yet to release any economic analysis of their cap and trade tax and that businesses across Ontario remain completely in the dark about plans for revenue and carbon credits. Speaker, what Ontario businesses need to succeed is certainty. Yet your government, the Liberal Government is rushing into its introduction in time for the Paris photo op. Mr Speaker when will the Minister listen to the Chamber and the greater business community and address the concerns outlined in this report. Thank you. So Mr Speaker I would like to read from the Chamber of Commerce report. It's very insightful. Among strategies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, business prefer market based approaches that put a price on carbon such as a cap and trade system. In contrast to the strict regulatory approach that denies business flexibility and innovation, Mr Harper and your leader stand with the following position. We're proceeding with a sector by sector regulatory approach. Mr Speaker the government of Ontario and the Liberal Party stands with business opposed to a job killing regulatory regime which Preston Manning and John Charin say will restrain the economy by 3.7 percent GDP growth. When will the member stand up against Mr Brown and the member for Simcoe North and Mr Harper, the Prime Minister of this country and fight the regulations that business doesn't serve and work with this government. Supplementary. I think we've just seen a new revenue tool for this government. They should be taxing hot air. I'm going to ask for temperate language please. Thank you Speaker. The last thing Speaker, back to the Minister the last thing Ontario needs is to rush into a system that will cripple business and cost more jobs. In California the government took seven years to design their program and in Quebec it took five years to come up with their cap and trade tax scheme. However this government is steamrolling ahead with plans to announce Ontario's cap and trade details in just seven months after the 2015 budget. Mr Speaker we've seen the legacy of what happens when these liberals rush into programs. Just look how Sam's turned out for everyone. Mr Speaker, businesses need to know what to expect. They need to know how to plan accordingly. Will the minister commit to publicly releasing an economic analysis of the cap and trade scheme before Paris? Thank you. Mr Speaker, that's a rather passing strange comment for the member opposite. We've been at this for years. We passed legislation back in 2008 that involved years of consultation. We've been meeting with business on a weekly basis Mr Speaker and we're in the middle of a local consultation that goes on for... The member from here on Bruce's second time you ask the question listen to the answer. So we've been working with business on a weekly basis but I've confused Mr Speaker by the member's office's questions. Business has said they don't want a regulatory sector-by-sector approach which the leader of her party and the Prime Minister believe in. President Manning, Jean Chiray, Chris Reagan, the entire Eco-Fiscal Commission a matter of fact City Bank of the US major study on cap and trade shows that you would lose 3.7% of GDP growth over the next five years with the cap and trade system that you think would... Thank you. The member from Essex Thank you very much Speaker my question is the Premier Speaker in the past two weeks through media reports we've learned that you can be a top procurement executive at Infrastructure Ontario you can admit to procurement fraud and absolutely nothing will happen to you in fact senior executives at Infrastructure Ontario and possibly the board can know about your fraud and you still get to stay in business and the Premier's Chief of Staff can know about your fraud and instead of being fired as would be the reasonable approach you get a promotion and get put in charge of procuring a $300 million patient center at St. Mike's Hospital Speaker, will the government commit to a truly independent investigation of this fraud and cover up and make the findings available to the public? Minister of Economic Development Employment and Infrastructure Minister of Economic Development I appreciate the question there's a little bit of different information that the members are sharing with the House that's not exactly accurate but the fact of the matter is this is a serious matter and a matter that not only does this government take seriously so do the hospitals that have had some association with this individual all the hospitals involved to date are conducting third party analysis and review of the time that individual staff has been involved with this department in their hospitals are working on projects there we're doing the same prudent and diligent review in fact we've hired a forensic accounting firm to look at the transactions the person was involved in we've hired a legal firm to look at the issues that the gentleman was involved in as well as the issues around his departure and I've hired a third party so I think we're taking the prudent actions we must and I think we'll continue to proceed in that way Thank you Speaker the Minister knows that an outsourced investigation is not the same as an independent investigation we have evidence of a culture within Infrastructure Ontario that tolerates and covers up procurement fraud but the government has trusted IO to investigate its own cover up last December the Auditor General found that conflict of interest guidelines at Infrastructure Ontario are routinely ignored the Premier has also stacked the IO board with former executives of companies that do business with IO Speaker will this government take this investigation away from Infrastructure Ontario and commit to a truly independent public investigation or at the very least will they invite the OPP to set up a permanent detachment here at Queens Park to investigate the never ending list of scandals that this government is embroilable Minister unlike the member opposite we actually are taking this very very seriously unlike the member opposite who seems to want to just play politics with this which I understand it's the role of the opposition but Mr. Speaker we've got to keep in mind that the actions of the legend actions of this individual took place outside of his work at IO and the other actions that we're talking about took place after this individual left IO which leaves us to the question was there anything untoward or was there anything any anomalies that took place during his time at IO and that's why we've hired a forensic accounting firm to take a look to see if there are any anomalies that's why we brought in independent legal advice to do the same thing and that's why I've brought in an independent advisor to oversee the process to ensure that the public interest is protected I think that's the right actions to take at this time I think it's being very prudent really as I know really the member is and I think we're doing what we ought to be doing at this stage Mr. Speaker this question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Mr. Speaker this house has been debating the smart growth for our communities act which proposes important changes to the Planning Act and the Development Charges Act the minister and other colleagues are aware that before coming to Queens Park I was a city councillor to the Planning Committee and my driving passion in an elected office has been urban planning city building and now province building for this reason I'm delighted to be part of a government that has proposed important changes to both the Planning Act and the Development Charges Act that will improve the processes communities and residents use to determine how their neighbourhoods grow and how to plan and pay for this growth Mr. Speaker through you can the minister tell this house two examples Mr. Speaker thank you Mr. Speaker and thanks to the member from Etobicoke Lakeshore for his long standing and enthusiastic approach to municipal planning Mr. Speaker Ontarians deserve a predictable fair and transparent system guiding how their communities will grow over the last 18 months we have consulted widely with stakeholders we've held more than 20 public workshops and we welcomed over 1200 mailed in and electronic submissions and what did we hear we heard that Ontarians want to have a greater say in the planning process that shapes their communities changes to the Planning Act if passed would ensure residents are better consulted on the future of their communities at the beginning of the process so there's less than the late in the game appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board will encourage more park planning green space across the provinces because of that municipalities will need to put in place a parks plan thank you supplementary thank you Mr. Speaker and thank you to the minister for that answer if passed these changes would make the planning and appeals process more predictable and give more municipalities independence and this is what residents of Etobicoke Lakeshore across the province have been asking for Mr. Speaker this legislation proposes changes to the development charges act that will also be critical for smart community growth and it fits into several related steps put forward by the minister of municipal affairs and housing as directed by the premier and her mandate led her to the minister Mr. Speaker through you will the ministry now tell this house how the smart growth for our communities act also proposes to change the development charges act and in addition what next steps the minister will undertake in the coming months that will also allow for important changes in municipal planning thank you minister thanks Mr. Speaker through you the changes we propose to the development charges act aim to give municipalities more opportunities to fund growth related infrastructure like transit and recycling it would also support curbing urban sprawl communities that will help to create jobs and grow our economy and as the premier instructed in my mandate letter we will also be reviewing the scope and effectiveness of the Ontario Municipal Board and updating our long term affordable housing strategy both of these parallel projects will contribute to our work in fostering vibrant and complete communities with abundant green space thriving economies and a range of housing choices Mr. Speaker those future initiatives will build on the strong foundation we've been busy weighing over the last several years thank you Mr. Speaker thanks Mr. Speaker my question is to the minister of tourism culture and sport every day ontarians see more proof this liberal government just isn't in it for them anymore the premier's office so embroiled in scandal and has set the bar so low on ethical behaviour that even the Toronto star has had enough meanwhile this minister rewards well paid and am games executives with extravagant bonuses while our home care services are in a shambles again their priorities are out of step with hard working ontarians where I come from you don't pay a bonus without proof it was earned if the minister is so confident games executives delivered are being accountable and transparent by having an independent audit before cutting those challenges well thank you Mr. Speaker the last time I checked the Pan Am Parapan Am games were the most successful games in the history of this province and Mr. Speaker Mr. Speaker the member knows opposite that we put together we put together a plan working with TO 2015 and Mr. Speaker I have to remind the member opposite that the leader of the opposition his government was equal partners of the table for TO 2015 when those incentives were put in place but more importantly Mr. Speaker these were the greatest games that were ever held in Canada 217 medals for our athletes the Parapan Am games were the most successful Parasport games in the history of this province we saw an increase in spending right across the GTA and within the 50 minutes of values in Toronto in fact Mr. Speaker we saw an 8.8% increase in debit card and electronic transfers of spending Mr. Speaker it's obvious the minister is confused about the issue we know the athletes perform because we can count the medals and the personal best we can't do that when it comes to knowing that the games were on budget even the premier admits she doesn't know so I've made a reasonable request in the interest of transparency and accountability tomorrow my motion asking the auditor general to audit the Pan Am games will be debated at the public accounts committee Speaker will the minister write to the committee to support my motion and will he put a freeze on those bonuses until the auditor can hear it Minister the member opposite knows that these have been the most transparent games in the history of any sporting event in this country in fact when you look around the world and you compare our practices we've had five technical briefings many in which the opposition didn't show up to actually get the data everything was open to FOI and we've had a lot of those requests come through these have been very transparent games we've reported a $56 billion surplus in infrastructure months ago and Mr. Speaker it's only been a month and a bit since these games have been over we will have a technical briefing and we have I believe we will have some great rules to share with the opposition around the success from a financial perspective for these games the member from London West my question is to the president of the Treasury Board yesterday former Justice Stephen Gouch released his review of presidential compensation packages at Western University the review was conducted because of a double salary payout that legally allowed the president to earn almost a million dollars last year a payout that Justice Gouch believes should no longer be permitted this is yet another example of this government's failure to rein in executive compensation in the last few months Ontarians have learned about a $4 million wage package for the CEO of Hydro One, million dollar salaries for CCAC home care contractors and $5.7 million in bonuses for Pan Am Games executives Mr. Speaker will the minister act now to prohibit million dollar salaries in the post-secondary sector by implementing the private members bill I introduced in April Mr. Speaker we on this side believe that the people of Ontario do have a right to know how compensation is structured for the broader public sector that's why we introduced the broader public sector executive compensation act Speaker it is still a mystery to me why the party opposite did not support that bill it was one of the more surreal moments in this house I have to say but what I can tell you that is this act enables the government to directly control the compensation of designated senior executives in the broader public sector by establishing compensation frameworks that work is underway now we are taking a thoughtful and balanced approach to it we are balancing the interest of the of the Ontario taxpayers and the need to properly compensate senior executives in our public sector we have a deferred vote on the motion the closure of the motion is second reading of bill 73 call in the members this will be a five minute bill all members please take their seats all members please take your seats on April 21st 2015 Mr. Mcmeaghan moved second reading of bill 73 an act to amend the development charges act 1997 and the planning act Mr. Cole has moved that the question be now put all those in favour of Mr. Cole's motion please rise one at a time be recognized by the clerk Mr. Nackley Mr. Carton Mr. Meehr Mr. Sousa Mr. Mackey Mr. Hoskins Mr. Sandler Mr. Dugas Mr. McCharles Mr. Quinter Mr. Cole Mr. Dillan Mr. Bribello Mr. Mcmeaghan Mr. Murray Mr. Bulkas, Ms. Albanese, Mr. Dixon, Ms. Dixon, Ms. Manga, Mr. Crack, Ms. Hunter, Ms. Hunter, Mr. Sergio, Mr. Sergio, Mr. Morrow, Ms. Jassik, Mr. Del Ducat, Ms. Dahmerle, Ms. Dahmerle, Ms. Wong, Mr. Frazer, Mr. Andersen, Mr. Andersen, Mr. Baker, Mr. Baller, Mr. Baller, Mr. Don, Mr. Don, Ms. Hogar, Ms. Hogar, Ms. Koala, Ms. Koala, Ms. Martin, Ms. McGarry, Mr. Miltjen, Mr. Miltjen, Ms. Nidoo Harris, Mr. Potts, Mr. Rinaldi, Ms. Verneal, Ms. Verneal. All those opposed, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the clerk. Mr. Wilson, Mr. Wilson, Mr. Arna, Mr. Hardiman, Mr. Hardiman, Ms. McLeod, Mr. Brown, Mr. Brown, Mr. Clark, Mr. Fidele, Mr. Yacobusky, Mr. Miller, Perry Sound, Ms. Copa, Mr. Scott, Mr. Thompson, Mr. Barrett, Mrs. Monroe, Mr. Monroe, Mr. Yurek, Mr. McLaren, Mr. McLaren, Mr. Bailey, Mr. Bailey, Mr. Walker, Mr. Smith, Mr. Smith, Mr. Nichols, Mr. Nichols, Ms. Marteau, Mr. McDonnell, Mr. Pettipies, Mr. Hattfield, Mr. Hatfield, Mr. Singh, Ms. Horvath, Ms. Horvath, Mr. Vantog, Mr. Tabins, Mr. Miller, Hamilton, East Stony Creek, Ms. Sattler, Ms. Thompson, Ms. Taylor, Mr. Natasheck, Ms. Armstrong, Ms. Angelina, Ms. Fyfe, Ms. Forster, Ms. Montau, Ms. Gretzky, Mr. Gates, Ms. French, Ms. French. The ayes being 53 and the nays being 39. I declare the motion carried. Mr. McNieken has moved second reading of Bill 73, an act to amend the Development Charges Act 1997 in the Planning Act. Is the Pleasure House the motion carried? I heard a no. All those in favour, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. Aye. In my opinion, the ayes have it. Calling the members, this will be a five-minute vote. Members, please take their seats. Mr. McNieken has moved second reading of Bill 73, an act to amend the Development Charges Act 1997 in the Planning Act. All those in favour of the motion, please rise one at the time and be recognized by the clerk. Mr. McNieken. Mr. McNieken. Bradley. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shamire. Mr. Sousa. Mr. Sousa. Ms. Nguyen. Ms. Nguyen. Ms. Matthews. Ms. Matthews. Mr. Hoskius. Mr. Hoskins. Ms. Sandals. Ms. Sandals. Mr. Hiberw非常的, Mr. Ellison. Mr. Gumentin. Mr. Zyr solic về. Mr. Squintard. Mr. Quintard. Mr. Quozia. Mr. Cole. Mr. Twkel. Mr. Quizquistro. Mr. Tyитесь. Mr. tableau. Mr. Gerv кош., Mr. dennil. Mr. Grevel. Mr. Grevel. Mr. Murray. Mr. Murray. Mr. Zimmer, Madame Lalonde, Mr. Quadrie, Mr. Bulkerson, Ms. Albanese, Mr. Dixon, Ms. Mangat, Mr. Crack, Ms. Hunter, Mr. Sergio, Mr. Morrill, Ms. Jasek, Mr. Del Ducat, Ms. Dahmerloch, Ms. Wong, Mr. Fraser, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Baker, Mr. Ballard, Mr. Don, Ms. Hogarth, Ms. Kuala, Ms. Martin, Ms. McGarry, Mr. Miltjen, Ms. Naidu Harris, Mr. Potts, Mr. Rinaldi, Ms. Rinaldi, Ms. Verneel, Mr. Hardiman, Ms. Hartiman, Mr. Arnott, Ms. McLeod, Mr. Wilson, Mr. Welsen, Mr. Brown, Mr. Clark, Mr. Fidelli, Mr. Yakibusky, Mr. Miller, Perry Sound, Ms. Mascoka, Ms. Scott, Ms. Thompson, Mr. Barrett, Ms. Munro, Mr. Eurek, Mr. Bailey, Mr. Walker, Mr. Smith, Mr. Nichols, Ms. Marteau, Mr. McDonnell, Mr. Pettipies, Mr. Hatfield, Ms. Horvath, Mr. Vanthoff, Mr. Tabbins, Mr. Miller Hamilton, East Stony Creek, Ms. Sattler, Ms. Taylor, Mr. Nadashak, Ms. Armstrong, Ms. Angelina, Ms. Fyke, Ms. Forreston, Ms. Yamanta, Ms. Gretzky, Ms. Gretzky, Mr. Gates, Ms. French, Ms. French. All those opposed, please rise. One at a time be recognized by the clerk. The ayes being 90 and the nays being zero. I declare the motion carried. Second reading of the bill. Does the election proceed a lot? Shall the bill be ordered for third reading? The bill is to be ordered for third reading. Referred to a committee. So there are no further deferred votes. This house stands recessed. 3 p.m. this afternoon.