 It is now time for Oral Questions, the leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. Thank you for sticking my question to the Premier and following up on yesterday's questions where I called upon you to keep your promise to the people of Scarborough when it comes to the subway that you had promised during the by-election. Yesterday I know you met with TTC Chair Karen Stintz who had a very similar viewpoint that I did. So if I didn't convince you, hopefully, Councillor Stintz did, simple question Premier, will you keep your promise to the people of Scarborough from the by-election and build that subway just as Council last? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, our commitment to the people of the DTHA and beyond has been to build transit and we are doing that and we will keep that commitment, Mr. Speaker. We have committed that we have $1.4 billion plus another $320 million, Mr. Speaker, that we commit to building a subway in Scarborough. That commitment is on the table. We will move forward without, Mr. Speaker, and quite frankly, I have to say Karen Stintz has been an advocate for transit. She has been an advocate for transit all along, which, Mr. Speaker, is actually not the case of the party opposite. The party opposite has not supported us on building transit because, as you know, there are many, many projects going on around the province, Mr. Speaker. We have not had the support of the official opposition. I'm glad to see now that they are interested in building transit and I look forward to working with them as we make those investments that are so necessary for the economic well-being and growth of the DTHA and the province. Sir, thank you. Supplementary. Well, let's be direct about the record, Speaker. Leslie Frost built a young subway. Roebars built the Bloor Line. Bill Davis extended the Bloor Line. Lankvintish, Young, North York, the Shepherd Line. The number of subway stops and liberals have built in Toronto, zero. Mr. Speaker, 64. Oh, we're asking. Premier, you said you're going to be different than Dalton and Guincey. Well, you keep your promise to the people of Scarborough, or are you going to wheeze it off them? Mr. Speaker, that was an interesting litany of investing. The member from Prince Edward Hastings come to order. The member from the P.N. Carlton come to order. The member from Renfrew come to order. Oh, you didn't think I missed you, did you? Premier? Since we came into office in 2003, we've been investing in transit. We will continue to invest in transit. We will keep our commitment to the people of Scarborough to build the subway in Scarborough, Mr. Speaker. And that $1.4 billion will go into building that line, Mr. Speaker, on the alignment that has been the alignment all along in the plan. That's the conversation that I had with Councillor Stintz yesterday. We will continue to make that investment, Mr. Speaker, and I hope we'll be able to work with the City Council in order to do that, because the people of Scarborough need that transit. We need to make that investment in order for the people of Scarborough to be able to have the access to their work and to their schools that they need, Mr. Speaker. Can I have something to mention? The Liberals may talk a good game. They may talk about subway stops. They may announce subway stops. Speaker, after 10 years of Liberal government, additional Liberal subway stops, zero. You made a promise in the by-election. Now you're trying to wiggle off the hook of that promise. It's clear. And you sent out your transportation minister, who quite frankly has a stability of the ball and a roulette wheel popping around, but gambling on a subway, that's a hell of a risk. Why don't you actually stick to the plan, the city plan, the original plan, build it from Kennedy, Scarborough Town Center, to Sheppard. It's the right thing to do. Please, keep your promise. Don't pull a Dalton McGinty. Don't flip-flop. Do what you said you were going to do. Peter, please. Peter, please. Thank you. Bring it up. Mr. Speaker, and I know that the leader of the opposition knows that the people who are going to be using the extension of the Spadina Line, Mr. Speaker, are very excited about the opening of that line. I know that the leader of the opposition knows because he actually lives quite close to the work that's being done on Eglinton Avenue, holes that will not be filled in, Mr. Speaker, those holes are actually going to function and we're going to have the Eglinton Cross Town Line because that's the investment that we have made, Mr. Speaker. One of the issues that I talked about with Councillor Stintz yesterday was that the federal government has not come forward to put money into an expanded version of the line that the City Council would like to see. I said to Councillor Stintz, if she can find a way to bring that money forward, then that's one thing. But the fact is that money has not been forthcoming. We have made the commitment. We're the only level of government that has made that commitment and we will stick to that commitment. $1.4 billion, Mr. Speaker. Now, Mr. Speaker, my question is again for the Premier. Madam Premier, you just said you met with the chair of the TTC yesterday. Why didn't you meet with the chair of the TTC before you made your announcement? I'm waiting for them to go back to Johnny McDonald and the railroad, Mr. Speaker, but the reality is these new Tories haven't built a subway. That group never ever laid a line. That group, Mr. Speaker, only filled them in. Thank you. Minister. Thank you. And yes, I have had several meetings over the summer with Karen Stintz, my dear friend over there, and the last time we offered them $1.4 billion, the only money we had for a subway, the chair of the TTC answered us by declaring while the press conference was going on that it was dead on arrival, Mr. Speaker. She wouldn't take the money. She couldn't take yes for an answer and fail to support a joint strategy to get the federal government to the table. I was just speaking to Mr. Kent, pointing out that Ms. Ray and Ms. LaBelle haven't met with me in six months, Mr. Speaker. Your federal members won't have a conversation? Thank you. Madam Premier, every time the Minister of Transportation opens his mouth, he either insults someone or releases a new plan. That's right. I wouldn't trust him to run a one-car funeral. It's how do you plan on getting this transit built without the support of the TTC in the City of Toronto? Good question. Mr. Speaker, I have great respect for the member off of the member for Ottobicoke Lakeshore, but I think we disagree on one thing. His idea of subway building, Mr. Speaker, is to pass a motion. Ours is to write a check. And Mr. Speaker, we don't need to go back to 1867 or 1967. All we have to do is look at the record of the member's opposite. Lots of motions, not a single check. Lots of subway stations closed. Lines canceled and filled in. This government has boring machines right now under Eglinton on the university line. We have more work. We have $16.4 billion, Mr. Speaker. We're the only party, the only government with serious money into this 90% of the funding. They owe an apology to the people of Scarborough and Mr. Speaker for misleading them again. Thank you. Final supplementary. Mr. Speaker, this plan is full of holes. There isn't the money here to do what's needed. They're counting on the City of Toronto to put up money and they haven't even discussed the matter with them. They've also put forward a plan that the TTC says is not feasible technically. Terrible. Now how in the world can you responsibly go to the people of Scarborough and tell them you've got a plan that you haven't even researched? Here it is. I continue to try to find the decorum that... I continue to try to find the decorum that I seek. And when I'm speaking and having people have to use the earpiece means that others are speaking while I'm trying to make a point. I'll remind members that I do not like when members' names are used in the House. I want writings to be referred to or titles to be referred to. It does not elevate the debate. It actually lowers it and it becomes personal. So please stay on focus with what that request is. It'll help the decorum rise. Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure. On this side of the House, Mr. Speaker, we kind of like engineers. As a matter of fact, we like evidence and we like engineers. The Metrolinx has a very competent set of engineers and when proposals came forward, they were asked to evaluate them, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Collins and the Metrolinx Board have said very clearly that technology is feasible. This works. We did not ask City Council for a new plan or an alternative route. We said we want to stick with the existing route. We asked them whether they wanted an LRT or a subway. They said they wanted a subway. We said we will build the subway. We have a process called I Corridor, the Minister of Transportation. It is the most advanced engineering and planning tool I think in North America for planning it. It says that a subway doesn't make much sense. It's actually the original plan for LRT after Scarborough out to Shepard, is that it? Councillor Thompson and Minister Dugut are going to look at those issues as a thorough study and look at connectivity and take the time to do that. In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, we'll listen to the engineers. New question? Thank you, thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Premier. Before the session began, new Democrats put our priorities on the table. We want to ensure that the results that people were promised are actually delivered. That home care times, wait times will go down. That youth unemployment will go down. That auto insurance rates go down. And that Queen's Park gets some new transparency from the Financial Accountability Office. But the Premier still hasn't settled an agenda, Speaker. She seems more interested in playing politics and making election threats that even she doesn't take seriously. Now is the Premier going to keep playing games over issues she knows will be supported or will she just get down to work? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, let's just be clear that today, in fact, there will be a vote on the issue of the Financial Accountability Office, Mr. Speaker. So we are moving ahead with those commitments that we made. And, Mr. Speaker, the comments that I made at the beginning of the week about wanting to find those areas where we could work together, all of us in this House, Mr. Speaker, to pass legislation to move ahead on issues where we could find agreement like consumer protection, Mr. Speaker, as an example, like the Financial Accountability Office, that I thought that it was important that we identify those areas. There is lots of room for continued wrangling on other issues. But where there is agreement, it seemed to me, Mr. Speaker, that it would make sense for us to agree that we would move ahead on those issues. That was my point at the beginning of the week. That remains my point, Mr. Speaker. And I am pleased that we are moving ahead with some of those issues. Account supplementary. Thank you. Speaker, Ontarians want to see their politicians focused on results for them, not on their own political interests. And that's why new Democrats are focused on creating jobs, improving healthcare, making life affordable, and making government accountable. There's a lot of work to do, Speaker, but the Premier seems much more interested in picking fights over legislation that we've already agreed to pass instead of focusing on the work that she needs to do here. Now, is the Premier ready to deliver on the commitments that she has made, or can we expect more of the same political game-playing? Mr. Speaker, part of the delivery on those results is making sure that we get legislation through the House. That's part of what I have to do, what we have to do as elected members to make sure that we can deliver on those results. So, you know, there are a number of bills moving forward, three bills moving forward this week, which I'm very pleased about. It's exactly what I was talking about. So, consumer protections, we've got all party support. The Leader of the Opposition voted for it. That's a good thing. We're moving ahead on the tanning-bed legislation, Mr. Speaker, had all party support, and on the Financial Accountability Office, as I said. So, that's the point I was making. So, I feel very, very good that we are able to move that legislation ahead for the very reason that the Leader of the Third Party identifies. We need to get results. We need to make sure that we act on those commitments, and that's what I'm committed to do, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Final supplementary. The Leader of the Spring Budget, we made it pretty clear that we need a fair and balanced approach to balancing the books, and the government's plan to create a new $1.3 billion tax loophole for corporations so they can write off the HST on whining and dying their clients was a cost that we just simply cannot afford here in the province. Now, the Premier and the Minister of Finance said that they'd take action on that file, but nothing has happened. If the Premier is looking for some priorities, that's one that people need her to deliver on. Speaker, why hasn't she made it a priority? Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And, you know, here's an area where there's a disagreement about what has happened or hasn't happened. We have actually before the Leader of the Third Party started to ask these questions in the House, the Finance Minister had been in touch with the federal government and had raised this issue. He's also made the point repeatedly that it's not a loophole. It's nothing new, Mr. Speaker. It's the rollout of the HST. So we did make it a priority. And I'm not saying that the Third Party didn't raise the profile of the issue. They did, and that's as it should be. But we have taken action. We cannot act unilaterally. And so the Finance Minister has taken the appropriate action by being in touch with the federal government. And we will continue to pursue that. Thank you. New question. Thanks very much, Speaker. My next question is also to the Premier. People want to see their government deliver results, but all they see from the Liberals is more games. We worked hard last spring to get some help for drivers paying the highest auto insurance rates in the country, and commitments were made in the budget speaker. But this is what people have seen. Government working overtime to help insurance companies pad their bottom line while they're moving at a glacial pace when it comes to helping drivers get some fairness and some relief. This is a priority speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We've made it a priority. And the Finance Minister made it clear that we are acting on the commitment to reduce auto insurance rates by 15%. Mr. Speaker, it is easy to craft a sound bite about a complex issue. But I think it does a disservice to people to suggest that somehow the leader of the third party could snap her fingers all of a sudden there would be an automatic 15% reduction across the province. That is not how insurance works, Mr. Speaker. The reality is there are costs in the system that need to be removed. We have issues of fraud in the system that need to be removed. We are working with the system to make sure that those costs are removed so that there can be a reduction across the province. And the fact is it's an average reduction, Mr. Speaker, across the province. We will see that we are working on making that happen. And that was our commitment, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Well, the government seems to snap their fingers and get the auto insurance industry some pretty good bonuses to their bottom line, but they can seem to snap their fingers and help out consumers, we're taking a step towards future government accountability with the new democrat plan for the financial accountability office. But people are expecting real answers when it comes to the liberal record of gas plants. Now the premier insisted that the public inquiry wouldn't be needed because the committee would be able to get all questions answered. But this is what Ontarians have seen this week. Every time I've asked the premier if the premier will support expanding the mandate of the gas plants committee so we can ask liberal insiders about their interference with the speaker she dodges that question. It's pretty simple. Will she do her part so Ontarians can get answers or will she keep protecting senior liberal insiders? So Mr. Speaker I thought we were talking about auto insurance so I'm just going to say something else about auto insurance and then I will come to this other question which seems like it's a different question but I just want to make sure that the leader of the third party knows that in a memo that was an internal memo in her party on August 23rd the statement was that about us, about the liberals we cannot truthfully say they've broken a promise. So Mr. Speaker the reality is we're following through on our commitment she knows it Mr. Speaker she knows that we are following through on what we said about auto insurance and we will continue to do that. On the other issue Mr. Speaker I think I've answered the question many times I'm open to having the questions answered that are asked at committee. I tried to give the member a little bit of leeway in the posing of the question in it relationship to the first question and it didn't seem to match so I'm going to ask the member to stay focused on the original question in her final supplementary. The government's promises in getting results on the things that they promised they've been pretty consistent so I'll continue on that vein. I'll say to the Premier through you to the Premier Speaker that making a promise but delivering it delivering it at a glacial glacial place is something that we're quite worried about and that's I think something that Ontarians are worried about because what they're tired of is instead of their priorities taking precedence they're tired of political games taking precedence here Speaker they want their government to actually deliver results and they want their government to actually be accountable. So I'll say to the Premier stop posturing stop playing games and get down to work by keeping the promises that she made in the budget. That was cute. I thank the member for that. I just want to be clear I want to be clear with the people of Ontario that we are acting on every single one of the commitments that we made in the budget Mr. Speaker our work this fall is about making sure that we put those in place Mr. Speaker the Minister of Economic Development Trade and Employment and the Minister of Training Colleges and Universities were working to make sure that the youth employment strategy was put in place Mr. Speaker that those funds were there that that $295 million would be accessible for young people as they look for opportunities in the workforce Mr. Speaker $100 million for roads for materials in place so that municipalities could apply for those funds those are the things that are going to make a difference to people those are the commitments that we're acting on including the auto insurance but Mr. Speaker every single one of the commitments that we made we are taking action on. New question the member from Carlton Mr. Speaker Thank you Mr. Speaker my question is to the Minister of Labor Minister of the Food and Food Act we'll shut the door on Quebec contractors coming into Ontario in spite of countless labor mobility agreements between Ontario and Quebec Ontario contractors are stopped from working in Quebec while Quebec contractors have full access to the Eastern Ontario construction market Ontarians want equal access to the Quebec construction market Minister, numerous workers have expressed their growing frustration with this gross unfairness. We will use support Ontario workers by demanding that Quebec take down their barriers to Ontario construction contractors and workers coming into Quebec. Thank you very much, Speaker. I want to thank the honourable member for the question, but Speaker, our government is focused on creating more jobs for Ontarians and the honourable member's bill would just do the opposite. Speaker, it will create trade barriers that will jeopardize infrastructure and her jobs, not only across the province, but especially in the city of Ottawa. Speaker, what's been approached in terms of the private member's bill is the wrong approach. We saw, and Speaker, we've seen this bill before when the Harris Souda government had the same bill before, and it did not work at that time. It resulted in loss of jobs. It resulted in a court case which city of Ottawa lost as a result of that particular piece of legislation. Speaker. I remind you again that when somebody is answering from the answering side, there should be no noise and no noise on the other side. I'm done. Thank you, Speaker. Minister, the original Fairness is a two-way street act became law in 1999 to solve this worker mobility problem with Quebec. It was repealed in 2006 when the government signed the agreement on labour mobility between Ontario and Quebec. Since 2006, the Quebec provincial government has reverted back to their old ways, creating a regulatory system designed to punish Ontarians by shutting Ontario contractors out of the Quebec construction market. Minister, will you and your eastern Ontario colleagues support the construction workers of eastern Ontario by voting for the Fairness as a two-way street act? Will you demand that Quebec open up their borders to Ontario construction workers? Thank you. Mr. Flabor. Thank you very much, Speaker. Don't take my word on the impact of Fairness as a two-way street act. This is what the mayor of Ottawa had to say today. The previous legislation did not correct concerns about worker mobility and the exact same legislation is unlikely to do so in 2013. Therefore, I could not support your private members bill, and that is to the honourable member. But, Speaker, this is what John DeVries, the president of the Ottawa Construction Association, said. This is the construction association Ottawa representing the industry. Bringing back the Fairness as a two-way street act is not a solution. In essence, Ontario was penalizing our workforce not exiling the desired outcome. And lastly, Speaker, this is what Richard Hader from the Building Trades in Ottawa said about this bill. This act certainly won't make things better. My question is to the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure. Last week, the Minister blindsided everyone and announced an on-costed and technically challenged subway proposal. By acting unilaterally, this minister and this government have created unprecedented division and chaos in Scarborough Transit Planning. This action is setting back new transit in Scarborough, which is already a decade behind schedule. Why didn't the Minister work with City Council and the TTC to get them on board so we can finally get some shovels in the ground in Scarborough? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Councillor Thompson, who is the City Council in the area and the Chair of the Economic Development Committee, will be shortly convening a meeting with my colleague, Minister Dewgood, to address the planning and connectivity issues. We looked very carefully at this line, and it was not me. We have two ministries, the Ministry of Transportation, through ICOR or looks at Rhinership, which we estimate. I don't mean me. I mean the experts, about 10,000 riders on this portion of the line. There is not that level of ridership after the Scarborough Town Centre, and there isn't the evidence yet to justify a subway beyond that point. As a matter of fact, the original plan in the negotiations with the City seems to suggest that BRT and LRT and the other projects in that connectivity on the evidence on the engineering makes more sense. The person sowing chaos here is the member opposite and the party opposite who can't produce an option in marble, nor can they support any funding, any revenue, and constantly undermine efforts to fund the subways that Scarborough folks want. Thank you. Supplementary? Well, here is the support that the Minister has for his scheme thus far. The CEO of the TTC says the plan is technically challenged. The Chair of the TTC says the plan doesn't meet the City's transit objectives. Experts like Steve Monro say the plan simply cannot be built for $1.4 billion. This Minister has no partners. The Minister has insulted the people he needs to get this done. When will the Liberal government drop the hubris, get back to the conversation, and build the relationships needed to move forward with transit? Thank you. Mr. Speaker, I didn't develop my corridor. I'm not the Executive Vice President Jack Collins and his engineering team who said this was feasible. I don't think Ms. Stintz or the member opposite is an engineer and I'm not. That was the ruling from Metrolings. That was quite clear. This government would not proceed on something that wasn't engineeringly feasible and took great care to make sure that it was. A matter of fact, I released the other day, Mr. Speaker, I Corridor and G.R. Porol, which is the most advanced planning tools that looks at ridership and land use, and we have a highly, with those of us who want to work with us. Mr. Speaker, when Ms. Stintz declared that the $1.4 billion was going to result on a plan that has no business plan, Mr. Flaherty and I are both waiting for the business plan on this alternate route that has never been seen anyone. We're actually sticking to the original route that has been researched, of which millions of dollars have been spent. Mr. Speaker, you're proposing a plan that's been pulled over the air. Please, the new question to the members from Sporvelation Court. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. This summer, the government implemented changes in the way physiotherapy services are offered in Ontario. I understand that these changes were necessary to crack down on fraud and to improve access to physiotherapy for Ontarians in all parts of Ontario. Still, some of the seniors in my riding of Scarborough Agent Court are worried that these changes can make physiotherapy services less accessible to them from forward. Mr. Speaker, through you to the Minister, can she tell my constituents why these changes are necessary and also to reassure the seniors in my riding that they will continue to receive physiotherapy they need? Thank you, Speaker, and I'm very grateful to the member from Scarborough Agent Court for this question because I do welcome the opportunity to clarify some of the issues around our changes to physiotherapy. I want to be very clear, Speaker. Eligibility for physiotherapy has not changed. The people who are eligible before are still eligible. What has changed is our delivery model. These changes will allow us to deliver physiotherapy to far more people and to expand exercise programs and false prevention programs. 200,000 more Ontarians will be able to access services as a result of these changes. We're doubling the number of physiotherapy clinics, so people across the province, no matter where they live in this great province, will have access to clinic-based physiotherapy. We're also bringing physiotherapy into family health care, so our family health teams, nurse practitioners, and clinics and so on. I'm sure the many seniors in my riding will be delighted to hear the physiotherapy services have been expanded. I understand that there are many major changes to the way physiotherapy is being delivered and built in over 40 years, and I know my constituents will be happy to hear that the government is modernizing the physiotherapy in Ontario. But there are many seniors and other people who require physiotherapy in Scarborough Agent Corner across Ontario who are aware that they will see interruption in their services as these changes have been implemented. Mr. Speaker, through you to the minister, can she tell the House what's been done to ensure those who are needing physiotherapy service will continue to receive them? My highest priority is to ensure that seniors get the services they need to stay healthy, mobile, and independent. We are working with Lins, with the Community Care Access Centers, with the community clinics and other partners to ensure a smooth transition to the model. I'm happy to provide an update to this House. Assessments are taking place across the province. People are receiving physiotherapy under the new model. This is very good news. 12 of the 14 Lins have now eliminated the waitlist for in-home physiotherapy. This is a great new insight. Across this province have exercise programs and falls prevention programs in place. St. Hilda's Tower in Toronto, for example, has falls prevention classes. They started last Friday. Resident assessments are ongoing. Seniors are already benefiting. As we expand this, more seniors will benefit from these changes. My question is to the Premier and Minister of Agriculture and Food. The 2012 Liberal Budget, aided and abetted by the NDP, kicked the legs from under the horse racing industry. They did so with no consultation and no concern for the thousands of jobs that would be lost, mainly in rural Ontario. But the government did create three new part-time jobs for former cabinet ministers and had also created work for consulting and communication firms. My question to the Premier, can she tell us what her government's horse racing industry transition panel has cost taxpayers so far? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Thank you for the question. I know that the member opposite, because he represents a riding that is quite rural. I know that he understands the importance of having a sustainable horse racing industry. I also know, Mr. Speaker, that he understands how much people like John Snowblain know about the horse racing industry, Mr. Speaker, and Elmer Buchanan and John Wilkinson. He knows how important it is that we have people wherever it is giving us advice. Order. Attorney General. That's when I'm going to nail them. You do something. Nail them, but consider yourself nailed. Premier. I thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I know that the member opposite wants the horse racing industry to be sustainable. I've written a letter to the panel and I've asked for a five-year plan, Mr. Speaker. They are working on that five-year plan, working on the recommendations, Mr. Speaker, and I look forward to acting on those recommendations. Complementary. Thank you, Speaker. Premier, it took a freedom of information request to learn the truth. The panel built taxpayers for compensation, expenses and outside consultants. The grand total so far is $526,649. The Premier's new instructions to the panel will push the bill even higher. Panelists are building taxpayers $750 a day for attending meetings and often for just making conference calls. Even a laundry bill wasn't approved. We need to know how this Premier justifies putting thousands out of work and then spending over a half a million dollars cleaning up the government's mess. Does the Premier really think that this is the way to support the horse racing industry and win back rural Ontario? If so, Speaker, the Premier is sadly mistaken. Thank you, Premier. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Yes, we are paying John Snowblain and Elmer Buchanan and John Wilkinson to do this work. And yes, they have billed expenses. There was of the billing of a dry cleaning. I'd like to hear it. That's not helpful. Finish, please. There was an error made. The members from Lambton come to order right as soon as I sit down. It doesn't start back up again. The intent is to get it quiet. That bill that was approved in error has been paid back, Mr. Speaker. All of the expenses now fall into line with the guidelines of the OPS. The point is, though, Mr. Speaker, I get to see the horse racing industry on a solid footing, Mr. Speaker. The members from Toronto stand for. Thank you, Speaker. My question to the Minister of Education. This morning, parents and children at a coal Napoleon in my riding were told that, effectively, their childcare centre was being shut down on Monday. Twelve children and their families are being thrown into crisis over childcare. Parents who have to go to work on Monday are scrambling to find a place for their children. Children are asking why they're going to be separated from their friends. This school and its unlicensed daycare have been inspected by your ministry for the past three years, and no one noticed that an unlicensed childcare operation was going on. Why did it take three years to notice and speak to the school? Thank you for your question, and you obviously have raised some issues around inspection in childcare, and I will absolutely look into that. It's not an issue that I've been advised of, so this is the first time that I've heard about it, but I do commit to look into the issue and see if we can figure out what went on there. Thank you. Minister, you have a lot of looking to do. Now, chaos could have been avoided at a coal Napoleon if a few inspections ago, a few years ago, the operator had been told you need to have a license for doing this kind of childcare work. Now parents are facing this upheaval, they're facing chaos, they're trying to figure out how to pull their lives together, they're trying to deal with their children who are upset. If the operator is willing to move quickly and comply, is your ministry willing to move quickly to license them? I appreciate the applause, but I have a second part, and will you consider giving them a provisional license if they meet the criteria so that the children don't have to be moved out of the school? Thank you again for the follow-up. As I said, I have not been advised of this particular situation, so obviously, Speaker, I cannot make a commitment to take any particular next step, but I will absolutely look into this, and the member has made a couple of suggestions that may prove useful, and I will ask my staff to look into those particular suggestions as well. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My question today is for the Minister of Labour. Minister, Ontario's construction industry is an important part, a crucial part in fact of our economy. At a time when we need more apprenticeships, more jobs, and a stronger economy, construction companies continue to positively invest in our province. In my community of Vaughan, construction workers play a particularly important role building our neighbourhoods from the ground up. Unfortunately, Speaker, this summer we saw multiple fall-related injuries and fatalities in the construction industry, and I also recall, of course, a very serious scaffolding tragedy that occurred on Christmas Eve just a few years ago. Speaker, through you to the Minister, with construction workers playing such a crucial role, both in my riding and across Ontario, what is our government doing to ensure the safety of our construction workers so the tragedies of this kind can be avoided? Thank you very much, Speaker, and I thank the member for the question and his commitment to safety and prevention of all workers. As Speaker, when Ontarians go to work, we all want to make sure that they go home safely as well. Workplace safety is Ministry of Labor's number one priority, something that we work towards every single day, Speaker. We are working hard to ensure that both employees and employers know their rights and are fulfilling their responsibilities. And therefore, Speaker, we make sure that we are enforcing the law to its fullest extent. For instance, the member mentioned the Christmas Eve tragedy that took about four workers' lives. I'm proud to report, Speaker, that our government appealed the decision of the lower court, which had made a fairly low fine. And we were able, successful, to increase the fine to the company to $750,000, the largest in Canadian history. Thank you, Speaker. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And I want to thank the Minister for his answer and also for his continuing energy on this particular file. It's very, very important for my community, for the industry and for our entire province. And I am glad to hear that the Ministry of Labor and the Minister is focused on ensuring the safety of workers on construction sites, particularly in relation to falls. Speaker, it is important that we continue to take these kinds of proactive steps to prevent avoidable accidents. Both my constituents and all people across our province should know what kind of measures they themselves can take to keep our construction workers safe on the job. So, Speaker, to the Minister, could you please speak to the two blitzes that you've mentioned and explain how these types of initiatives will benefit workers in our construction industry. Thank you, Minister. Thank you very much, Speaker. The Ministry of Labor, as the member alluded, will be conducting a blitz on roofing awareness and fall hazards in the construction industry. These blitzes will focus on workers' safety at heights and take enforcement action against those who fail to adequately train and protect our workers. There are many ways to keep workers safe at heights and prevent them from falls through floor-open covers, travel-restained systems and fall arrest systems. Enforcement during the fall hazard safety blitz will primarily focus on the implementation and effectiveness of these varied solutions. We will also be checking that workers using fall protection equipment have adequate training, as well as ensuring that guardrails and covers are adequately maintained to ensure that they are protecting workers properly. Speaker, with these safety mechanisms in place in construction sites across Ontario, we believe we can make a difference in reducing injuries in our construction sector and ultimately save lives. Thank you. Thank you. Despite telling us last spring that the reopen teachers' negotiations from the legislative contracts wouldn't cost us anything, yesterday you actually admitted that after fiddling with those contracts that there would be a new cost, but you had no idea what it actually was. You said my quote, and I quote, I want to get the accurate numbers, so you quote, struck an implementation cost estimate working group. Minister, that's why I asked the auditor to intervene. Yesterday and the day before, a senior education source told the Toronto Sun twice that the estimated cost could be as high as $500 million. I've publicly estimated anywhere between $300 to $500 million once the union demands for me to clauses are implemented. So minister, my questions are this. Why did you tell this House last spring that the enhancements were savings when yesterday that you admitted what we knew all along that was going to cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars? And what kind of minister, during deficit time as it goes out, gives massive payouts to unions without knowing the true cost six months ago and then a nod is still knowing what the true cost is today? Yes, thank you. And could we just clarify what the situation here is here? When in January we announced the savings that were related to the 2012-2014 collective agreements, we announced that the savings were $1.8 billion. That continues to be the case, which is what I have consistently told you. We have found since January some additional savings related to the collective agreement and that is the money that has been directed towards the enhancements. She just told you. I just told you when we found additional savings they were when we found additional savings they were directed. The important thing here is we have classroom peace because we agreed to have discussions with our public. Thank you. Supplementary and before you move on, I would like to remind everybody the questions are put through the chair and the answers are put through the chair, which avoids some of the heckling responses. I can't really appreciate that clarification. I feel as though I may have been misled as is the public given the responses that we have received. Withdraw, please. Clarification is passing strange. I don't know how you can have $1.8 billion in savings and then increase people's fortuities at retirement at maternity leave and at sick leave. But once again the minister admitted to us yesterday in this house that she actually has no idea of what the costs were this spring when she had a union giveaway to who I quote as for her friends. She has refused to provide me and this house with details after numerous questions, letters to her, order paper questions where I asked specifically for her to outline the $1.8 billion in savings and to outline exactly what those added costs were. From cameras come to the education sector yet we know that boards are still able to sign agreements with the union. So back to her minister why have your friends in the unions continued to obstruct local processes even though you have given them exactly what they want at a cost we have no idea. Thank you. I'm pleased to tell you that as we had discussions with our partners we absolutely had cost estimates at every point. The school boards challenged the cost estimates we put together a committee to look at it and in fact our cost estimates were entirely reasonable and in fact we often found when we got the information from the school boards that the estimated that the actual costs were less than the estimated cost. So it is to the advantage of the taxpayer I would say that we have worked through the implementation committee process because in identifying the true cost we have actually found further savings. Thank you speaker. Thank you. Question. The member from the member from to miscommunicate my question is to the minister and after resources liberal budget cuts them and our resulted in the cancellation of the live trapping a relocation nuisance bears and left people with 1 800 tip line instead. Over the summer there have been several near fatal human bear encounters across the north northerners feel abandoned by the ministry and don't even bother reporting problem bears anymore since the ministry doesn't offer any physical assistance anyway. In a recent news release the minister stated that I quote the ministry is currently in the process of reviewing more effective options and a quote for new for dealing with nuisance bears. Could the minister tell northerners what those options are? Thank you speaker and certainly appreciate the question from the member and the members well aware as a northerner as am I of the ongoing challenges and from year to year depending on the specific circumstances in northern Ontario whether there's food availability with respect to the number of bears that are harvested each year. We have different circumstances in different communities and in some communities we have more problems than others and we've worked with those communities to ensure that we are giving them the assistance they need when it comes to supporting them and identifying their problems. In fact we have spent more money than any other jurisdiction in North America on our bear wise program about 34 million dollars to date helping and assisting communities right across northern Ontario but I certainly do acknowledge with respect to the members comments that there are communities in northern Ontario that are facing significant challenges around nuisance bears and we're committed to working with them to find more effective solutions. Once again to the minister and after resources northerners have been forced to protect themselves against nuisance rogue bears and for those who aren't equipped to do so their option is phone a friend or in a life threatening situation or in a life threatening situation call the police and then the municipalities pay the bill. Because of this government's inaction or action bears are increasingly seen as pests and marauders instead of the majestic animals that they really are. Speaker does the minister believe that ignoring rogue bears is good wildlife management and is he willing to continue to put northerners safety at risk. Thank you speaker and absolutely we are not interested in seeing anyone at risk public safety is paramount in these circumstances. What I think the member should be aware is that at the time the conservative party cancelled the spring bear hunt 1999 we introduced the bear wise program and we also extended the fall bear hunt so that relatively the same number of bears would be harvested each year in fact just the other day received an email with respect to a mere politeness in Cochrane and the members are riding with regard to a nuisance bear and the information that I have is that our bear technician they've set up a trap with with respect to this nuisance bear who the OPPA have identified as being a significant problem. Our folks are out there responding where appropriate and when they're being called to do so but I'm certainly interested in working with the member opposite and other northern members thank you find ways to work. New question the member from Wolfridge's Markham. And my question is for the minister of economic development trade and employment our government has put together a strong plan to help people across this province a plan that will create jobs and give all Ontarians the chance to succeed one of the key elements in our plan is to work with businesses and renew support across a variety of industries. Your ministry recently announced its renewed support by extending the Ontario micro brewery strategy for two more years to help create jobs and expand the industry. Mr. Speaker through you to the minister of economic development trade and employment could the minister please inform this house what this government is doing through the Ontario micro brewery strategy to help small brewers explore new marketing training and tourism development opportunities across the province. Thank you minister. Thank you Mr. Speaker and I thank the member from Oak Ridge's Markham for her great question I'm pleased to inform the house of a recent funding announcement of $1.2 million in annual funding our government has made to renew the Ontario micro brewery strategy from 2014 to 2016 this will help Ontario craft brewers better market and raise awareness of locally made loggers, ails, pilsners, porters and the all important stouts. Mr. Speaker these are brewers like Steam Whistle, Mill Street, Muskoka Brewery and Flying Monkeys Craft Brewery a little known fact about these brewers is that they are the largest purchaser of Ontario grown hops and this investment will help the craft beer industry right down the supply chain by extending funding for the micro brewery strategy our government will help to support the success of this important industry and this funding will not only support brewers themselves but will lead to many spin-off jobs these brewers create through their success in local agriculture and the hospitality industry. Thank you Mr. Speaker and thank you minister for your response this is really exciting news for craft brewers across the province and especially in my riding of Oak Ridge's Markham as we are host to a thriving brewery the King Brewery in Novelton which I'm sure this house will be excited to hear recently won a gold medal in the Keller beer category and a bronze medal in the box traditional German style category at the 2013 Canadian Brewing Awards ensuring that flagship sectors in Ontario like these continue to see support from our government will only keep our economy diverse while creating jobs for the future Mr. Speaker on the day before Toronto beer week kicks off when many of these craft brewers will have a chance to showcase their fine brews through you could the minister update the house on just how big the craft beer industry is in Ontario question thank you minister well that's a great question and I thank my colleague for the opportunity to speak to it over the last eight years the pace of growth in the craft brewing industry has accelerated with nearly 45 growth in sales in fact leading sales of all products in our LCBO stores nearly a thousand people across the province are directly employed by craft brewers that's 20 percent of all the people in that sector at over 47 micro breweries around the province this industry is gaining such momentum that in 2012 Niagara College offered Canada's first brewmaster and brewery operations management program and everyone in the first graduating class found industry jobs Mr. Speaker this doesn't even begin to tell the story of the spinoff jobs created across a variety of sectors including agriculture Ontario craft brewers highlight a real made in Ontario success story answer we can all be proud of as we continue on the government's path to creating a fair and prosperous Ontario thank you new question speaker my question is to the minister of natural resources ministers of families that live in rondo park a chartered cottage provincial park since 1894 in my writing of Chatham Ken Essex I've been told that they'll have to find a new home in 2017 and tear their cottages down at their own expense minister these are hardworking Ontarians that expect to keep their homes and continue supporting their community while doing so instead they're being threatened with the loss of their unique heritage community because the government has decided the park needs to be returned to nature with little evidence to back up their claims minister we need to work together will you listen to the families of rondo who have spent generations as stewards of this beautiful park and allow them to either purchase their property or at least to extend their lease agreements thank you speaker and certainly pleased to have the question today and member from Chatham Ken Essex has given me another letter today which we will be taking a close look at and the member opposite knows full well we've had a number of discussions on the matter and our ministry is very actively engaged on this issue we want a positive resolution to this the the member also knows that in 2010 we released a policy to propose extending the leases to 2038 there was some strong polarized views that that came into play and there's been a number of reviews around the ecological integrity and the natural habitat of this park to ensure that that's maintained but i want to assure the member opposite that we're committed to finding a positive resolution here we certainly respect the cultural and historic significance that these individuals and organizations in the area have with respect to rondo in this case supplementary thank you speaker minister i believe that there is an everyone wins solution here rondo park Ontario parks chatham ken lease holders the environment and the economy minister they all win families will be able to reinvest in their homes with confidence of tenure behind them you and i have had past have had many discussions as well as your predecessor minister gravel we've discussed options with regards to this and i've also asked the ministry of tourism culture and sport to grant the heritage designation that this park and the cottage is so rightly deserved and instead of destroying the local ecosystem with an extensive tear down the park gets to keep its proud stewards will giving up less than one percent of its area minister i ask you will you endorse this crucial project for rondo families thank you speaker and again i say to the member opposite we're committed to finding a positive resolution to this with respect to the designation of the area as the member also knows that is a function of the municipalities but we do have guidelines and standards when it comes to provincial property and provincial parks again i want to say to the member opposite speaker we're committed to finding a positive resolution that helps to protect the cultural historic significance that these residents have enjoyed for many decades and generations in fact as well as protect the natural biodiversity of of this park thanks thank you new question the leader of the third party my special questions minister of long-term care and health in the budget the liberal government claimed that mental health is a top priority yet it's cutting mental health beds at providence care in kinkston and firing 70 nurses housekeepers of food service workers who care for vulnerable patients in their time of need can the minister please explain to mental health patients and their families in kinkston how cutting beds and services will improve the care they receive thank you minister well thank you speaker and i assure the member opposite and i think she knows this that our government is very strongly committed to providing improved services front areas with mental health challenges speaker part of our commitment to mental health is building up supports in the community that is where the greatest need is speaker and when we do that right when we support people to live independently we can close beds in institutions where they previously have been residing speaker we have almost doubled spending for community-based mental health services and we're serving more than 500 000 ontarians in community mental health and addictions programs every year that's our speaker we we must provide 24-hour care for those who need it but when people can be supported in the community that is where we will be supporting them well the speaker i find it odd that the uh i find it odd that the minister is uh relying on 20 more than 20 year old study done by the heiress government when it comes to hospital restructuring uh i think the people in kinkston deserve much better than uh than information based on studies that are done over two decades ago the premier's commitment however was to expanding access to mental health services and that commitment is bringing very very hollow for the people of kinkston because this government's actions don't back up its words when it comes to the looming cuts at providence care in kinkston now is cutting mental health care beds and laying off nurses this government's idea of transforming health care in ontario our commitment to transforming health care is to provide people the care they need where they need it speaker as close to home as possible and because of changes in our understanding of mental illness speaker we are able to care for more people in the community i do not think people should be in institutions when they can be cared for safely and productively in the community i do believe the members members opposite believe in community based mental health programming speaker and that's exactly what we're doing and when we have successes in the community speaker it does reduce demand for institutional based care thank you we have a deferred vote on a motion by mr maloy on second reading of bill 95 an act to establish a financial financial accountability officer calling the members this will be a five-minute bell the members take their seats please all members take their seats please all members take their seats please i see a lot of friendliness going on in here on september the eleventh mr maloy gave a second reading of bill 95 all those in favor please rise one at a time and be recognized by the clerk mr maloy mr maloy mr bradley mr bradley mr garrett mr garrett mr jeffrey mr jeffrey this went his matthews denn mai Mitchale his sandals his sandals mr housekins mr twinter mr barlow chess with Bill laks is kuniversuse his cashfield mr dylan sir dylan mr dologger mr do good mr grovella sir grovella mr membnee mr chin mr chihad's mating brutes mr invert myr бок danger surelly mr shurelli mr de lai knows if i'm Mrs. Elliott, Mr. Hudak, Mr. Yakobusky, Ms. McLeod, Mr. Holliday, Ms. Jones, Mrs. Monroe, Mr. Chudley, Mr. Clark, Mr. Willat, Mr. Bailey, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Smith, Mr. Harris, Ms. Thompson, Mr. Eurek, Ms. McKenna, Mr. McNaught, Mr. Leone, Mr. McDonnell, Mr. Pettipes, Mr. Milligan, Mr. Walker, Mr. McLaren, Mr. Nichols, Ms. Fife, Ms. Bisson, Ms. Horvath, Ms. DeNovo, Mr. Marquesi, Ms. Angelina, Ms. Taylor, Mr. Natascha, Mr. Tabas, Mr. Singh, Mr. Miller Hamilton, East Stony Creek, Ms. Forster, Ms. Campbell, Mr. Vantok, Mr. Shine, Ms. Armstrong, Mr. Manfowl, Ms. Sattler, Mr. Hatfield, Mr. Hatfield. All those opposed, please rise one at a time to recognize by the court. We don't need MPP's anymore. The ayes are 91, the nays are zero. The ayes be 91, and the nays be zero. I declare the motion carried. Pursuant to order. Does the electorate push it a lot? Keep forgetting that further. Pursuant to the order of house dated June 5, 2013. The bill is referred to the standing committee on legislative assembly. There are no deferred votes this afternoon. I will recognize a point of order. A point of order from the member for Manfowl. Thank you for the support of the campaign for bullying, standing up against bullying today. I want to thank all the members that took the initiative of doing so. It's not a point of order, but since there are no further deferred votes, this house stands recess until 1 p.m. this afternoon.