I know there’s not much time left, Speaker, and I’ve got to figure these things out better—where I put myself into the timing and the lineup—but I did want to comment on a couple of things before you shut me down.

I heard the member for Thunder Bay–Superior North talk about—she says supply and demand is a myth. Well, I’m going to put this to you: If it’s a myth—and I want you to sleep on this tonight. If you’ve got 10 shovels and 50 people want to buy a shovel, are those shovels going to cost more than if you have 50 shovels and 10 people want to buy the shovels? The reason I’m asking about shovels is because what they’re trying to spread over there—there aren’t enough shovels in that store to do it.

Speaker, tomorrow I’ll be able to elaborate a little bit more about the fantasy that’s going on over there, when they think that homes can be built by snapping fingers or putting water on a chia home and all of a sudden, they appear. This party over there has really lost it when it comes to reality.

Interjections.

The member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke.

The House will come to order. Order. Order. Thank you.

It is now time for private members’ public business.

Third reading debate deemed adjourned.

I move that, in the opinion of this House, the government should reject the “defund the police” position and continue funding police, seizing illegal guns, suppressing gangs and supporting victims of violence through the Guns, Gangs and Violence Reduction Strategy.

Pursuant to standing order 100, the member has 12 minutes for their presentation.

As I have the tendency to do, I am going to commence my remarks with a very brief story, which will be directly related to the topic of debate for this evening. But, as usual, the full relevance of the story might not be entirely revealed until the very end of this speech.

I live in the town of Amherstburg, as I’ve said many times. Amherstburg is on the west side of the county of Essex. Then, there’s a town called Leamington, and that’s on the east side of the county of Essex. In order to get from Amherstburg to Leamington, you have to drive across the whole county of Essex, end to end. That, at this time of year, is a remarkable drive because of the great canola fields in Essex county. If you’re not familiar with canola, it’s a beautiful plant. It’s golden yellow. When it’s in bloom and you’re standing in a canola field, you feel like you are standing in Elysium.

I drove from Amherstburg to Leamington on a regular basis because, at a certain point in my legal career, I had a part-time contract—it was very part-time; it was only once every two weeks—to prosecute federal offences in the town of Leamington. So I would drive from Amherstburg to Leamington on a biweekly basis. The drive was beautiful. I would pass the canola fields, I would pass the wheat fields, I would pass the cornfields, I would pass the soybean fields—you get the picture. When I got to Leamington, I would go downtown, because that’s where the courthouse was and that’s where I got to work. I met a lot of great people when I was at that courthouse. For example, I met Mark Loop, who was a detective constable at that time. His nickname was Looper. Looper had grown up in the town of Leamington. He knew everybody very well. When he was on the witness stand and we asked him questions, he could tell you practically the entire life story of some of the people who he had arrested.

I also got to work with another awesome police officer. His name is Wayne Parsons. Wayne had a very particular laugh. It made him sound like the cartoon character Muttley, and so his nickname was Muttley.

I also got to work with another excellent officer. His name was Chhieu Seng, and his nickname was Chewy. It was Chewy who pulled me out of a fantastic car wreck one day. You see, I was travelling from Amherstburg to Leamington, it was the wintertime, and I hit a patch of black ice. My car spun out and crashed directly into oncoming traffic. It was a spectacular accident. I was rendered unconscious. When I regained consciousness, it was Chewy pulling me out of my car wreck. The first words that came out of my mouth were, “Chewy, call the courthouse. Tell the judge I’m going to be late for court today.” And Chewy said to me, “Anthony, you are not going to the courthouse today, my friend.”

That was the first day when I started thinking about how the job of a police officer is remarkably different than what we did as lawyers. You see, as a lawyer, our world was the courthouse, and it was the world of rules and procedure and evidence and examination and cross-examination. That was a particular world that had its particular rules. But Chewy’s world, the world of policing—that was a different world. That was a world of car accidents and facial lacerations and confrontation and tension, and these factors made policing more of a life-and-death kind of world to live in, because those are the kinds of decisions they had to make.

That’s why police have to be properly funded. That’s why this PC government has a strategy; we call that strategy the Guns, Gangs and Violence Reduction Strategy. We’ve already put many millions of dollars into that strategy, and this budget puts another $13.4 million into that strategy. We think that’s good funding and we think that’s good policy—to continue funding police. Because when you properly fund police—let me give you some examples of what they can do.

In March 2023, three handguns and over 300 rounds of ammunition and a kilogram of crystal meth were seized by police of the guns and drugs unit of the city of Windsor. Inspector David DeLuca said, “This is just an example of the results of a really good investigation.” That’s three handguns and over $60,000 worth of drugs that will not be around to harm the citizens of Ontario.

Example number two: In April 2023, a multi-jurisdictional investigation involving police forces from Toronto, York, Durham, the OPP and the Canada Border Services Agency seized a total of 86 firearms, 75 of which were handguns, and these were seized in the GTA. Toronto Police Superintendent Steve Watts said, “A seizure of this size is definitely going to save lives on the streets of the GTA and elsewhere.”

Another example: In May 2023, a police drug raid netted a suspect who had escaped while he was on bail awaiting sentencing. He managed to remove his ankle monitor and disappeared. The drugs and guns unit of Windsor picked him up.

As you can see, properly funding the police renders results. Our policy is getting guns off the streets. Our policy is getting drugs off the streets. Our policy is saving lives. And I’m happy to say that Mark Baxter, the president of the Ontario police association, has written a communication of support for this motion and has signed the petition.

That’s our policy in the PC caucus, and that stands in contrast to the policy put forward by the NDP, which I have dubbed the “defund the police” policy. I call it that because “defund the police” is what they say on page number one of their policy. You don’t have to read too far into that policy to find out where the NDP stand. On the cover of that policy, they call it a “call to action”; I say that it is a call to inaction.

My seatmate, the member from Mississauga–Erin Mills, also read the NDP policy. He calls it the “support your local gang” policy. Michael Gendron, the spokesperson for the Ontario police association, said this with regard to the “defund the police” policy of the NDP: “It was never a conceivable idea. It never had widespread support (outside of op ed pages), was rejected by the public in virtually every election where policing was an issue, and set back real opportunities for reform that could have had buy-in from all stakeholders.”

So this is the challenge. We put forward a budget; that budget had a certain amount of money in it, $13.4 million, to continue funding the Guns, Gangs and Violence Reduction Strategy. The NDP have the same response to many of the things that we talk about in this House. They say, “Well, that specific number or thing in this bill, we don’t like it, so we’re going to vote against the whole bill.” We’ve heard the NDP say that so many times. They might agree with 99.9% of what’s in a bill, but if they find 0.1% something they don’t agree with, they vote against it. Well, now I’m giving them an opportunity, because I’ve isolated just one thing—which is in contrast to the PC policy—which is continue funding the police through the Guns, Gangs and Violence Reduction Strategy or, alternatively, the NDP policy, which is the “defund the police” policy. I’m asking this House to vote on that one thing. I have liberated the NDP from having to decide on 99.9% of all the other things. They only have to decide one thing. They can choose to continue promoting their policy—the “defund the police” policy—or they can choose the PC policy, which is the “fund the police” policy.

That brings me back to Highway 3 and the car crash. Chewy pulled me out of the car crash. I was taken to Leamington hospital. I was treated and released, and eventually I took a taxi back to my law office. I completed my workday and then got a ride back to my home. And I walked in the door and my wife Jackie saw me, and she saw the lacerations on my face and said, “What happened to you?” I told her what had happened, and then she said, “Why didn’t you come home? Why did you go to work after that car accident?” And I never really thought about it until today, but I guess it was probably because I had an obligation, a sense of duty, to make sure that my clients were well-served. I didn’t want to skip that day and let down my clients, and I call that a sense of duty. Even though I worked in a different world than the police worked, I think that’s what I have in common with the police: a sense of duty. That’s why I’m promoting this motion and asking all members of this House to vote for it.

It’s always an honour to speak in the House, and I would like to thank the member from Essex for bringing this issue forward. Actually, I listened intently to his remarks, and I would like to thank him for the life experiences he shared. I always love that about private members’ motions and bills—sometimes they’re partisan, but he spoke from the heart, and I respect that.

I would like to start by respectfully paying the respects of the official opposition to the family of Detective Constable Steven Tourangeau, who recently lost his life in East Zorra township. I lived there for a little while. Police officers not only risk their own lives, but their families also share that risk. On behalf of, I believe, all members of the House, we would like to express our condolences.

I come from an area where, in my riding—and the member from Essex talked about his riding. I appreciated that—I like it when people bring things personally. I’ve just lost, in Timiskaming–Cochrane, in Matheson, the OPP detachment—closed. French River OPP detachment—people in that area are signing petitions, which I have signed as well, to try to keep it open. We know—I don’t pretend to know a lot about cities, but I know what canola looks like; I know what canola smells like. We’re fighting to keep OPP officers. In northern Ontario, we wonder who’s trying to defund the police. I’m not trying to be facetious. We’re doing everything we can to keep our police officers.

Do we believe that to try to solve societal problems we have, we need to look beyond the police? Yes. This is a nuanced debate; it should be.

I’ve spent a long time talking to—and I’ve mentioned him in the House before—Martin Thibault, an officer in the Temiskaming detachment. One of the things that frustrates Martin is when he deals with people with mental health issues. He’s their first point of contact, and he has to deal with them over and over and over again because there’s no one else in our part of the world to help. Just in that instance, two Martins isn’t going to make that any better. He needs to be part of a team, a circle of care. We have to look at that, as well.

Do we recognize that police officers play a vital role in our society? Absolutely. Do we believe that everyone in our society should feel safe, including police officers? Absolutely.

I appreciate the member’s tone. This is a nuanced debate, and it should be. We need well-funded, well-trained police.

I think everyone in this House knows that—I believe the number is 35% of our police officers are off on PTSD. We need to look at that too. We need to support them.

Do we need to recruit more police officers? Absolutely. But if you want to keep a well-trained police force, you also have to support the people who are already trained, who are already working and who face incredible challenges, as your police officer friend did when he pulled you out of that car wreck. There are so many things that police face. They need to be supported. Do we want that support to be there? Absolutely, we want that support for them. We want that support for the people they have to deal with on a daily basis. They deal with more trauma than the rest of us. And when they are overworked, when they lack support—they’re human. Sometimes they make mistakes. We all make mistakes. Let the first perfect person throw the first stone.

Do we need to properly fund police? Yes, 100%. Do we need to look further to see what else is breaking down in society that is causing the increased risks that we all face, that we all feel and that police feel times 10? At the end of the day, when something goes wrong, we call 911—well, I’m going to divert. In some areas, we call 911—because the whole province doesn’t have 911 either. But we call the police. The police are trained, and they can suffer incredible trauma.

I’ve talked to Mark Baxter a fair bit. I have a pretty good relationship with Mark, I think. I helped him out on a bill a little while ago. I like talking to Mark Baxter. I actually learn a lot talking to police. But actually, the defund-the-police concept—which I’ve never used and which isn’t a party position—they never bring that up. They bring up the supports that they need, the supports that the community needs. That’s what they bring up, and that’s what they should bring up, because when people become—what’s the word I’m looking for?—marginalized, destitute, sometimes they do things that they shouldn’t, and the police end up dealing with them. But there’s no place for them to go, so we need to look at that.

There are a lot of things we need to look at, but let’s get over the issue that any of us here want to have less trained police or don’t believe that we need policing in a civil society; you need policing in a civil society. But you need to give the police, also, the support that everyone else should have in a civil society.

When Martin Thibault—and I’m going to tell you exactly: There was a Crime Stoppers barbecue in front of the OPP, and Martin came up to me and talked to me. We talked about how he was an officer for 21 years. He knew exactly when he could retire, because it wasn’t the same; the last five years, it’s not the same. We talked about how he didn’t feel safe—and police officer is a risky job; it is. There’s an inherent risk in taking the risk for others. There’s an inherent risk. But Martin pointed to the highway, and there was a homeless person sitting on the side of the highway in front of the OPP detachment in Temiskaming Shores. And he said, “He’s part of our issue. Not himself, but we’ll likely have to deal with him three times today. There’s nowhere for him to go.”

You have a police officer with 21 years’ experience, very well trained. Everyone in Timiskaming—or at least our part of Timiskaming—knows Martin Thibault. Martin Thibault used to sell John Deere equipment, and then he became a police officer—highly regarded, well trained, the kind of police officer that we all know and respect. Martin wanted to find services to help the homeless guy. That’s what Martin wanted.

So I thank the member from Essex for bringing this issue forward, because I think he brought it from his heart.

Further debate?

I rise today to voice my support for this motion and for our province’s outstanding police officers. While some seek to vilify our police, this government is committed to investing in police to tackle violent crime and to create safer communities across Ontario.

Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to participate in a ride along with the Hamilton Police Service and saw first-hand the compassion that their officers have for all members of our community, including marginalized people. Every day, thousands of brave men and women across the province put on the uniform to serve and protect their communities. They have an incredibly difficult job that requires strength and sacrifice. Over the last year, our province has witnessed the tragic deaths of far too many officers in the line of duty. Now more than ever, police deserve our support, our respect and our gratitude.

Our government’s Guns, Gangs and Violence Reduction Strategy outlines the actions that we are taking to help our police stop crime and to get dangerous offenders of our streets. This strategy includes investments in a provincial gun and gang support unit to aid investigations and prosecutions of gun and gang crimes. It also includes funding to support major investigations into organized crime and drug and human trafficking. This strategy directs more resources towards community policing programs to help address concerns around mental health, addictions and hate-motivated crimes at the local level. Our government is also eliminating tuition fees for the basic constable training program at the Ontario Police College and increasing the number of police recruits per cohort from 480 to 550. These measures will deter criminals by increasing the number of police officers in our communities.

Some of the most heinous crimes that we have seen in our province recently were committed by offenders who were on bail. Our government is doing its part to prevent more of this senseless violence from occurring by investing $112 million to reinforce the bail system by supporting local police services in creating bail compliance teams and creating a province-wide bail compliance unit within the OPP to arrest high-risk offenders in violation of their bail conditions.

While our government takes concrete action to support our officers, radical activists and, unfortunately, some politicians have denigrated the sacrifice and bravery of police with calls to defund them. This kind of rhetoric is insulting. It is insulting to our police officers and it is insulting to victims of crime and Ontarians, who rely on police each and every day for their safety. Instead of condemning this rhetoric and supporting our government’s plan to reduce crime and invest in policing, the NDP has proposed taking away some of the tools that police rely on to do their jobs. Our government has unequivocally rejected defund-the-police rhetoric and has instead embraced policies that are serious and effective.

Sadly, the NDP has not just refused to join us in rejecting this rhetoric, they have endorsed it. Their policy commitment on policing said that calls to defund the police should not be dismissed, and that a conversation about defunding police is long overdue. I hope the member from Hamilton Centre takes the opportunity tonight to speak to this motion to explain why she tweeted, “Police in Ontario have a record of arbitrarily killing babies, Black, Indigenous, racialized, disabled civilians ... & those who are in crisis.” Shame.

I will be supporting this motion because we all must stand steadfast in our rejection of this kind of anti-police rhetoric, and we must continue to fund policing to support our officers and protect our communities.

I don’t know.

I do. The way he started his remarks, I really appreciate it—

So I’m glad you brought this issue forward. Of course we want to adequately fund police; of course we do. I look forward to the rest of the debate.

The member from Flamborough–Glanbrook.

The member from Etobicoke–Lakeshore.

Mr. Leardi has moved private members’ notice of motion number 54. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? The motion carries.

Motion agreed to.

The House adjourned at 1839.

I rise in support of a motion tabled by my colleague the member of Essex. I, too, want to thank our men and women in uniform for the work they do every day by keeping our communities safe.

Speaker, as we’ve heard tonight, Ontarians from all walks of life and all across this province, from Etobicoke–Lakeshore and Essex to Flamborough–Glanbrook and Whitby and everywhere in between, have earned and deserve the right to safe streets and safe communities. But it seems that everywhere you turn now, especially through social media, you come across pockets of people who say law enforcement isn’t part of the solution but part of the problem. They want to spend less on policing in the face of rising crime, random violence, gang shootouts and other forms of mayhem now gripping many of our cities and towns.

In fact, as mentioned earlier, a policy paper issued not long ago by the official opposition puts it plainly, right there on page 1: “We cannot and should not ... dismiss the call to defund police.” Well, Speaker, I can say with some confidence that the response to this statement from this side of the House is: Oh, yes, we can, and yes, we will.

So I rise to declare my view on this matter as reflected in tonight’s motion put forward by the member of Essex: “In the opinion of this House, the government should reject the ‘defund the police’ position and continue funding police, seizing illegal guns, suppressing gangs and supporting victims of violence through the Guns, Gangs and Violence Reduction Strategy”—hear, hear, Speaker—because the reality is that the city of Toronto, for example, currently has fewer police on our streets than we did 10 years ago. That’s despite significant population growth and the fact that many forms of violent crimes have skyrocketed in the decade since. Would the members opposite not concede that there might just be a cause-and-effect relationship at work here, do you think?

Speaker, I say it again: The people of Ontario deserve safe communities. That is why, since 2018, our government has allocated approximately $203 million to combatting gun and gang violence. Through the government’s Guns, Gangs and Violence Reduction Strategy launched in 2020, we are taking action to support measures that dismantle crime activity. We are enhancing investigative supports, increasing collaboration throughout the justice sector and stopping the flow of illegal guns across the border, and it’s working.

Just last April 11, the Windsor Star reported the seizure by police of 173 guns and the arrest of 42 people resulting from a cross-border trafficking investigation. Congratulations to the Windsor police. The story quotes Toronto Police Service Superintendent Steve Watts as saying, “A seizure of this size is definitely going to save lives on the streets of the GTA and elsewhere.” But then I suppose the official opposition might not dismiss the call to defund that program, too.

I just want to say a couple more words. I want to thank the member from Essex for this motion. Once again, I want to thank our servicemen and women. I want to thank them for what they do every day. A special shout-out to 22 Division in my riding of Etobicoke–Lakeshore and of course our OPP officers. They’ve gone through some hardship over the last couple of months and our hearts go out to them and their families.

First, I want to thank the gentleman member from Timiskaming–Cochrane for his comments. He expressed the concerns he had about policing in his riding, and I draw from his comments that he would like to see more policing commitment in his riding, and based on those comments, I would invite him to vote in favour of this motion because if we continue to fund police, then we might be able to provide more policing for his riding, which is clearly what he would like.

I would like to thank the member from Flamborough–Glanbrook for her comments on this motion. She spoke about the sad reality that there are pockets of our community here in Ontario where people are calling to defund the police, and they’re denigrating our police forces. I’ve said this often in this House, and I’ll say it again, because it’s true in almost every situation: Regardless of how many good people you have, there are always a few bad apples in the barrel, and those bad apples have to be rooted out and dealt with, but that should not cause you to paint everybody with the same brush. We’re very proud of our police forces, and we should continue to speak well of them, promote them and thank them.

I thank the member from Whitby for his comments. He spoke about all of the excellent programs that are available for police officers in the province of Ontario and how this government is making extra investments to promote mental health for police officers and to assist police officers in what sometimes is a very difficult job. As I described in my comments, the world of police officers is a world of confrontation and tragic events, because that’s what police officers have to deal with.

Finally, the member from Etobicoke–Lakeshore: I thank that member for her comments. She spoke very strongly in favour of her police forces and police forces across the province of Ontario. She indicated quite well the importance of continuing with the funding of these programs. In particular, we should note that she’s the parliamentary assistant for the Solicitor General, and she’s doing a great job in that role.

So I thank you, Madam Speaker, for this debate tonight and encourage all members to vote in favour of the motion.