Good morning. Let us pray.

Prayers.

Mr. Gill moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 91, An Act to enact two Acts, amend various Acts and revoke various regulations / Projet de loi 91, Loi visant à édicter deux lois, à modifier diverses lois et à abroger divers règlements.

Thank you, Mister Speaker, for the opportunity to lead off the debate today on our spring 2023 red tape reduction package, the Less Red Tape, Stronger Economy Act, 2023.

I’ll be sharing my time with my parliamentary assistant, the great member from Niagara West. I want to thank him for all of his assistance and his hard work in helping develop this great piece of legislation and leading some of the consultation work around the province and hearing from Ontarians and businesses. He has done a tremendous job.

Mr. Speaker, it was just two weeks ago when we were right here in this place, debating our fall red tape reduction bill, the Less Red Tape, Stronger Ontario Act, at third reading. Members may recall that I spoke about how red tape causes frustration, expenses and needless delays and complications for everyone: individuals, businesses, not-for-profit organizations and the broader public sector. We talked about how regulatory burdens are a barrier to our productivity, innovation, economic competitiveness and development. We talked about the cost of failing to act, because red tape has huge cost implications. Last year, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business estimated that red tape costs small businesses in Canada approximately $11 billion each year. That’s $11 billion, Mr. Speaker, and that’s just small businesses in our country.

The number one thing I hear from Ontarians when I meet with them, whether they are small-business owners, a volunteer or charitable organization, or even other elected officials outside of our province—you know what they hear, Mr. Speaker? The first thing that they say to me when I speak to them is, “We are so happy that there is a full Ministry of Red Tape Reduction here in the province of Ontario.”

And you know how and why we have this ministry, Mr. Speaker. It’s because, under the leadership of our Premier, Premier Ford, we are taking a critical look at how government impacts both people and business. We know that to build a stronger economy, improve services and save Ontarians time, we need to continue to look for ways to reduce the red tape that people and businesses face in their everyday lives.

Speaker, I am pleased to report that, since 2018, our government has reduced Ontario’s total regulatory burden by 6.5%. The changes that we’ve put in place have saved businesses, not-for-profit organizations and the broader public sector nearly $700 million in annual regulatory compliance costs. This is of course a substantial increase over the $576 million in savings that we last reported in the fall Burden Reduction Report and serves as proof of our government’s ongoing commitment to reduce burden and continue to find savings.

We have achieved these savings by making practical changes that save Ontarians time and money, including the nine high-impact pieces of red tape reduction legislation that this Legislature has passed since 2018 and the more than 450 individual burden-reducing actions we’ve implemented so far, Madam Speaker. These actions, of course, have led to many businesses around the world taking notice of Ontario. They have come to meet with me and some of my colleagues, and they have invested right here in our great province of Ontario, and some of them in a big way.

Let me just say, Speaker, that unlike the 15 years of the Liberal and NDP coalition, it is now far easier to start and expand a business right here in Ontario.

Interjections.

The results of course speak for themselves. Under the previous Liberal-NDP coalition, the automotive manufacturing sector was fleeing our province. Good-paying jobs were obviously drying up and, in some cases, leaving our province, from Oshawa to Windsor and everywhere in between.

Since taking office in 2018, our province has seen these jobs coming back to Ontario in record amounts. By lowering the cost of doing business and removing unnecessary red tape in Ontario, we have seen $17 billion invested in the auto sector alone. That’s $17 billion, Madam Speaker. The changes made are obviously what’s contributing to all of these investments coming in, and obviously the changes being made are obviously to protect and continue to create jobs in the province. The ability for someone in, say, St. Thomas to now work close to home, with a bigger paycheque—and soon we’re going to see a Volkswagen EV manufacturing plant—is only possible because of the work our government has done and continues to do.

That’s why our new bill, the Less Red Tape, Stronger Economy Act, continues to build on the success. It is focused on paving the way for better services, helping Ontario businesses grow and saving people time and money.

But make no mistake, reducing red tape is not just about counting the number of regulations and trying to reduce them; it’s about the impact those changes are having on real people and businesses across our great province. I can say with confidence that this bill we are debating today proposes substantial changes that will have those real impacts for people—changes like accelerating timelines for municipal approvals for broadband projects in support of our goal of bringing high-speed Internet to every community across our great province by 2025. This is essential to live and work in the 21st century.

This package is the product of continued collaboration across government with our ministry partners and extensive consultations with a range of stakeholders and people across the province to develop an unparalleled inventory of red tape reduction ideas.

I’m proud to say the legislation we are debating today, the Less Red Tape, Stronger Economy Act, is our 10th and our largest burden-reduction bill so far. It’s an important part of our larger spring 2023 red tape reduction package, which contains additional regulatory amendments and policy changes that contribute to a common goal of reducing red tape. This bill, if passed, would streamline processes and modernize outdated practices across multiple areas of government and multiple sectors of our province’s economy.

A wide-reaching red tape reduction bill like this one simply isn’t possible without the assistance of our partner ministries across government.

But let me be clear, Speaker: Our government acknowledges the importance of having robust rules and regulations in place. They help protect public health, safety and the environment. They keep our children safe when they’re at school. They protect workers so they can come home to their families each and every day.

With those principles in mind, I would like to talk a little bit about some of the items within the Less Red Tape, Stronger Economy Act and how they will make life better for people right across our great province. As I mentioned earlier, this is a very large red tape reduction package. This bill we are debating today includes 37 different schedules making up more than 200 pages. Our complete spring 2023 red tape reduction package has 42 individual items, including regulatory and policy changes that complement the legislative changes found in the bill.

Speaker, many of us have rural areas as our ridings, and we all know how important farmers are for our province. As we began to put this bill together, the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs was a very important partner. We worked closely to identify some red tape that farmers are facing when going about their day-to-day business. Any minute that a farmer spends dealing with unnecessary government bureaucracy is a minute too long.

In our bill, we have proposed amendments to the legislative framework for financial protection programs. Financial protection programs, or FPPs, help protect farmers from financial risks, like defaulting on payments for farmers’ grain or livestock or an elevator operator who doesn’t return grain to the farmer upon demand. These can threaten their livelihood.

Let me explain a little further, Speaker, the details surrounding FPPs. They were established in the early 1980s and are currently governed under three separate acts: the Grains Act, the Livestock and Livestock Products Act, and the Farm Products Payments Act.

As you may recall, Speaker, this was a time before the Internet, before modern payment methods, and before anybody even knew what cyber security was. And while the FPPs remain critically important for our farmers, the legislative framework of three separate acts has made it burdensome to administer the programs. That’s why our bill proposes a common-sense solution to protect farmers’ livelihoods. By streamlining the existing FPPs under one new governing act, we can ensure those FPPs do what they were always meant to do, to help our farmers do what they do best, which is to farm.

These updates to Ontario’s farm financial protection program will help to reduce the red tape by streamlining and clarifying the process to obtain and renew grain dealer elevator operator and beef cattle dealer licences. But most importantly, consolidating FPPs under one act will allow our government to better support 28,000 grain and 19,000 beef cattle farms more efficiently and effectively. We want to build on this work in the future, Speaker, and we are hopeful, of course, that we can make it easier to expand financial protection to other sectors in the future as well.

On the topic of farmers, I would also like to highlight a proposed regulatory amendment to the Milk Act, one that has come directly from ongoing conversations with the Ontario Dairy Council. This is an industry with over 4,400 dairy farmers in our province, many in the ridings of the members opposite. As with other industries, Ontario’s dairy industry has changed over the last several decades and regulations have not kept pace with new technologies, practices and products.

Yet, some legacy requirements remain in regulation resulting in unnecessary costs for dairy producers and processors. That’s why we have an opportunity to modernize certain regulatory requirements while continuing to maintain the highest food safety and quality requirements in three specific areas: the frequency of cleaning and sanitation in a dairy plant; milk grader certification for on-farm processors; and administrative burden related to expiration of milk grader certificates.

By modernizing the regulations under the Milk Act, we will help reduce burden and costs for dairy processors, while maintaining the high food safety standards that people have come to expect from Ontario’s agri-food sector. Speaker, this vital sector produces over 2.5 billion litres of milk annually and we will always be here to support them.

Speaker, we are also supporting families who are navigating the province’s support orders system. There are over 8,500 families right here in Ontario who have to spend time and money trying to access support orders. If passed, we would streamline the system to provide Ontarians with access to faster, more efficient and easier processes to establish, change and enforce support orders internationally. What that means is that families will see payments flow more quickly and reliably.

Some important context to this, Speaker: This change comes out of the 2007 Hague convention, and if we pass this schedule, Ontario would be one of the first provinces to implement this, proof that, with the Ministry of Red Tape Reduction working across government, our province now moves quickly to implement supports like this.

Next, I’d like to share three modernization measures coming from the Ministry of Colleges and Universities, who are doing exceptional work preparing students for the jobs of the future.

First, this legislation is proposing new measures to collect outstanding debts by bad actors. Under the Private Career Colleges Act, 2005, administrative monetary penalties are levied against career colleges and other institutions that contravene the legislation. These rules help to address bad actors who prey on students, protect compliant institutions and uphold the integrity of the private career colleges sector.

However, the available collection tools have proven to be inadequate, resulting in unpaid monetary penalties by those not adhering to the legislation. This is simply unacceptable. That’s why the Ministry of Colleges and Universities is working with the Ministry of Finance on legislative amendments to strengthen collection of outstanding administrative monetary penalties from non-compliant career colleges by leveraging enhanced collection tools, such as liens on assets or property. By enhancing our tools for collecting outstanding monetary penalties, we can ensure the accountability of training providers, protect students, and promote a healthy and vibrant private training sector.

The Less Red Tape, Stronger Economy Act is also proposing to require legislative reviews of the Private Career Colleges Act every five years. When originally passed back in the day, the act included requirements for a review seven years after coming into force. This requirement was completed, of course, in 2013, and now there is no requirement in the legislation for any further review. By introducing regular reviews of the act, Ontario is supporting career colleges in staying responsive to the needs of the economy and employers in preparing students for great careers. Finally, we’re also proposing to update the name of the Ontario Career Colleges Act. This change signals the importance of career colleges in preparing students for high-demand professions.

Speaker, we have seen over 660,000 manufacturing jobs flood back across the border to Ontario. Not all of these jobs require a university degree. Training, upskilling and retraining is vital in some of these industries. Our government is focused on ensuring that people, young and old, have access to the skills they need to keep Ontario thriving and to keep Ontario the economic engine of our country.

I’d like to focus on a change from the Ministry of Infrastructure which is playing a leading role in our government’s plan to build Ontario, with transit, highways, hospitals, universities, and, yes, broadband. As a government, we have committed to connecting every community across the province to high-speed Internet by the end of 2025, because high-speed Internet is no longer a luxury; it is a necessity. And, Speaker, this is a goal we’re getting closer and closer to meeting day by day.

As an example, just two weeks ago in my great riding of Milton, we announced a joint investment with the federal government to expand broadband to underserved rural areas in parts of my riding. I know many of my colleagues have made similar announcements in their home communities. Yet despite this positive momentum, some Internet providers are still facing unnecessary delays in receiving necessary municipal permits and approvals when they go to build broadband infrastructure. Simply put, it’s taking too long to get Ontarians connected online. That’s why our bill is proposing amendments to the Building Broadband Faster Act, 2021, that would work to prevent delays in the permitting process between municipalities and these Internet service providers. This will ensure that Internet service providers can plan, design and, of course, build high-speed Internet projects as quickly as possible, connecting more communities across Ontario to high-speed Internet faster.

But it’s not just the broadband that our government is building. As I mentioned before, in the last two and a half years, Ontario has attracted more than $17 billion worth of investments by global automakers and suppliers of batteries for electric vehicles, investments from top-tier companies like Volkswagen, Ford, Honda, General Motors, Stellantis, LG Energy Solution, Magna and Umicore.

This is huge news for our economy. Ontario is truly the place to build the electric vehicles of the future.

But these projects are going to require access to many critical minerals, and we have a responsibility to ensure the miners who do the difficult work of supplying those critical minerals and other raw materials our province needs are kept as safe as possible.

That’s why, working with our colleagues at the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development, we are proposing to amend various provisions in the mines and mining plant regulations under the Occupational Health and Safety Act to reflect current practice and technologies, keep the regulations up to date and increase flexibility and reduce regulatory burden while maintaining, and in many cases enhancing, worker health and safety protections. It will see new technologies, like drones, being used to ensure these stronger health and safety requirements are met. It’s a fantastic example of how red tape reduction can enhance safety protections for workers while providing employers with more flexibility to meet these requirements.

Just yesterday, I had an opportunity to meet with one of the foremost leaders in lithium extraction and refinement, and he told me that companies around the world are finally eager to invest in Ontario, not just because we have the raw materials required for the next generation, but because Ontario is truly open for business. As I mentioned before, one of the first things he said when we sat down was, “I wish every jurisdiction had a Ministry of Red Tape Reduction.”

In working with my colleagues at the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, we are building on progress made and proposing amendments to the Oil, Gas and Salt Resources Act to accommodate innovation in new technologies. Businesses in Ontario have been eager to innovate their ways to capture and store carbon. With this new regulatory framework, we now have the ability to establish protective checks and balances for testing and demonstration projects on private lands. We are talking about piloting technology that has the potential to store 30 years’ worth of carbon emissions.

This is something that will develop into a self-sustaining sector in our province. These changes will help evolve our energy system, create good-paying, local jobs and attract investment while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It’s a win-win for Ontario.

Last, but certainly not least, I’d like to touch on some items from the Ministry of Transportation, which is helping move people and goods safely and efficiently across Ontario. I think it’s fair to say that people who clear our roads in stormy Ontario winters don’t quite get the recognition they deserve. But they are the ones who keep our roads safe and our province moving.

Unfortunately, we have seen an increase in motorists making dangerous or unsafe manoeuvres just to get around the plows that are keeping our roads safe and driveable in winter conditions. That’s why the Ministry of Transportation is proposing an amendment to the Highway Traffic Act that would add clauses to prohibit impatient drivers from overtaking snowplows working in a staggered formation across highway lanes. The proposed amendments intend to reduce motor vehicle collisions with snowplows on high-speed, multi-lane highways. This will make the public safer and reduce the burden on emergency responders, health care services, the insurance sector and the legal system, Madam Speaker.

The ministry is also proposing to remove duplicative requirements for the towing and vehicle storage sector. To improve safety for people needing a tow and those working in the towing industry, the province is taking steps to implement a certification program that will require tow operators, tow truck drivers and vehicle storage operators to meet certain requirements to operate in Ontario. But as we roll out this province-wide program, the ministry is also proposing amendments to the Municipal Act and the City of Toronto Act that would ensure operators and drivers in the towing and vehicle storage industry are not required to pay multiple licensing or certificate fees, or adhere to different municipal requirements when the provincial certification program is in effect.

We are also proposing additional measures in our red tape reduction package to encourage and reinforce the need for pre-consultation with the Ministry of Transportation for any Planning Act submissions, such as official plans, development proposals or housing proposals that include work adjacent to provincial highways. Pre-consultation with MTO will help streamline and ensure timely comments, approvals and permits by ensuring proponents and municipalities are aware of MTO requirements before starting a significant project. This could translate into a tangible cost savings of thousands of dollars by avoiding project implementation delays and reduce the potential for frustration or dissatisfaction for proponents and municipalities.

Speaker, it is an honour to speak about some of these items included in the proposed Less Red Tape, Stronger Economy Act, 2023, and how they will benefit people and businesses right across our great province.

I am now going to turn it over to my parliamentary assistant, the great member from Niagara West, to speak to some additional items in this important piece of legislation.

I’m pleased to be able to rise in the chamber today and speak to the Less Red Tape, Stronger Economy Act. I wish to thank the Minister of Red Tape Reduction for his participation this morning and for the words that he shared with regard to this package and to his commitment and the entire commitment of the team at the Ministry of Red Tape Reduction to unleashing opportunity for the people of this province and ensuring that our government is one that follows through on its commitments, including the commitment to make it easier to access services, to cut the amount of time that people have to spend in terms of dealing with onerous regulations or duplicative processes, and to also maintain protections for workers, for health and for the environment. They’re very important measures, as well, that I believe speak to the potential of Ontario and the intentionality that our government has shown in turning around the vast ship of state that I spoke about in the last leadoff to third reading of Bill 46, the Less Red Tape, Stronger Ontario Act.

Speaker, I’m going to speak a little bit about some of the pieces that are contained in this package. I know the minister spoke quite eloquently about a number of the measures that are also in this package, and I know that there are a variety of approaches in both the regulatory and the legislative aspects of our spring red tape reduction package.

I think is important to perhaps just share a little bit of the impetus—why we believe it’s so important to reduce onerous red tape, why we believe it’s important to unleash opportunities for the people of this province and ensure that we are being responsive and nimble in modernizing our systems as we always look to improve, as we always look to make it easier to raise a family, easier to start a business, and easier to live, work and play here in the province of Ontario.

Perhaps to go back to someone I’ve quoted and back to, I believe, this quote I’ve brought forward here in the chamber before—it’s something that speaks to our impetus and my passion for this area. It’s a quote from Alexis de Tocqueville. Of course, I am sure we all know Alexis de Tocqueville and his treatise Democracy in America, where he visited the then fledgling United States of America and was amazed by their commitment to democracy, was amazed by the political processes that they had in place, and was amazed at the awareness of the citizens about what their governments were doing and the determination to ensure that a free, prosperous and democratic society succeeded. I believe that here in Ontario and in Canada we share a similar enthusiasm. We share, obviously, many similar, albeit more loyalist, historic appreciations for these values.

I think his quote is very relevant because it speaks to the potential danger in letting red tape grow unfettered. It speaks to the need for all of us to realize that a little change here and a little change there might not seem like that big of a deal in and of itself, but rules upon rules upon rules can stifle out ingenuity, stifle out creativity, stifle out innovation and, in fact, create a static economy, one that isn’t nimble and growing.

He spoke about what he believed to be a despotism that could come to America. He didn’t feel that this despotism would be perhaps the grand or the more dictatorial despotism that had been experienced in some of the European nations, but he felt it would be relatively mild, retaining some of the external forms of liberty, but that the people would behave like timid animals and the government would act like their shepherd.

This is how Alexis de Tocqueville in his analysis of this spoke about what this could look like. He said:

“After having thus taken each individual one by one into its powerful hands, and having molded him as it pleases, the sovereign power”—the state—“extends its arms over the entire society; it covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated, minute, and uniform rules, which the most original minds and the most vigorous souls cannot break through to go beyond the crowd; it does not break wills, but it softens them, bends them and directs them; it rarely forces action, but it constantly opposes your acting; it does not destroy, it prevents birth; it does not tyrannize, it hinders, it represses, it enervates, it extinguishes, it stupefies, and finally it reduces each nation to being nothing more than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.”

Again, still quoting Alexis de Tocqueville, he said, “I have always believed that this sort of servitude, regulated, mild and peaceful, of which I have just done the portrait, could be combined better than we imagine with some of the external forms of liberty, and that it would not be impossible for it to be established in the very shadow of the sovereignty of the people.”

We see in his analysis of the small, minute, complicated and uniform rules, which do not break wills, but soften them, bend them and direct them, the danger of onerous red tape. We saw under the former Liberal government for many years an inexorable, continual growth in the small, minute wills that enervate and hinder the wills of the people, those rules that were, frankly, onerous and burdensome and often had little to no practical rationale for their existence.

Our government took that vast state of regulations here in the province of Ontario, where we had seen regulation growth year after year after year, constant growth in the number of regulations and the amount of time, energy and money that was spent in trying to deal with these regulations, and we actually were able to turn that ship around. Perhaps not all at once, but we were able to turn that ship of state around, and now we have seen a 6.7% reduction in overall regulations and in red tape here in the province of Ontario—

Interjections.

I think it’s one thing to say, “That’s a reduction,” but to stop that momentum—momentum is a very powerful thing. I’m sure we’ve all heard about momentum, especially in campaigns. You can feel it, right? When the momentum stalls, it’s a very tangible feeling where you’re not sure where you’re going, you’re not sure what you’re doing. But when you have the momentum and you’re heading in the right direction, that momentum can carry you through and just accelerate.

But also negative momentum, where things are on a downward spiral, you can feel that as well. When you’re spiralling down and when we’re seeing things get worse and worse, it almost can accelerate. I think that that’s what we saw under the Liberal government: acceleration in the number of new regulations. At a certain point it was almost like they threw their hands up in the air and they said, “You know what? Forget it. We already have hundreds and hundreds of thousands of regulations. At this point, why would we even bother trying to reduce red tape? We might as well embrace our role.” So the Liberals, supported by the NDP, continued their campaign to ensure that it was next to impossible to be a successful small business owner here in the province of Ontario just because of the sheer amount of red tape that they created.

For us to be able to not just stop that continual increase of red tape but to begin that reduction—I believe we have momentum, and that’s a momentum we’re going to continue to work through. Today’s bill is an important piece of that story. This story hasn’t been written in the past—eight red tape bills alone—and it’s not going to be written in this one. It’s a continual story, one that we’re all participating in, one that we’re all adding to by our contributions, by your citizens’ contributions to the red tape reduction portal, by the consultations that the minister spoke about that he participated in, reaching out to people in our community, by the active team that we have at the Ministry of Red Tape Reduction, and by each and every one of you, as caucus colleagues, bringing forward ideas and saying, “How can we make it easier for people to be able to thrive and succeed? How can we unleash their potential and ensure the entrepreneurial spirit is strong here in the province of Ontario, as it has been for so long prior to the dark days of the Liberal government?”

I want to pick up where the minister left off, having laid out that context as to why we believe it’s so important to take the actions that we’re taking here in this red tape reduction package. I want to speak a little bit about a few more items in this red tape reduction bill and how they’re going to make a real impact on the lives of people across government.

When we formed government in 2018, we saw that under the leadership of the previous Liberal government, supported by the NDP, Ontario was the most heavily regulated province in the country. We knew that that had to change, so when we came to office, we set out on our mission to remove the unnecessary and outdated regulations holding this province back, and we did.

Our government has made a commitment to increase jobs and investment in Ontario by making it less expensive, faster and easier to do business and to set out one of the best regulatory service standards in North America. We’re following through on that commitment today. Our government has taken more than 450 actions to reduce burdens while continuing to look for ways to improve.

We pledged to introduce two high-impact red tape reduction bills each year, one in the spring and one in the fall, and we’ve followed through with that commitment.

The government has also passed nine high-impact pieces of red tape reduction legislation in the past five years and today we’re here debating the 10th. We made a commitment to save Ontario businesses, including not-for-profit organizations and the broader public sector, at least $400 million in annual compliance costs by March 2022. I’m pleased to state, for the record, that not only have we met this goal, but we have far exceeded it.

Our red tape reduction measures so far have saved businesses, not-for-profit organizations, municipalities, school boards, colleges, universities and hospitals, not to mention many individuals in this province, nearly $700 million in annual compliance costs. That’s $700 million each year that Ontario businesses and organizations and public serving-groups can put to better use as a result of our changes. It is part of our newest red tape reduction act, the Less Red Tape, Stronger Economy Act, that will save Ontario businesses even more, once fully implemented.

Speaker, we’ve come a long way. We’re proud of the work that we’ve been able to accomplish and we’re grateful for the ideas that we have received from so many stakeholders, from so many hard-working entrepreneurs, from so many honest and hard-working workers, from so many seniors and from so many citizens in our ridings who have provided their ideas of on-the-ground solutions. These people from across the province haven’t just fed that to us in the Ministry of Red Tape Reduction; we’ve had fantastic partnerships with our partner ministries. The legislation that is in front of us today had 17 different ministries that have been involved. I want to acknowledge those ministries for their work as well, for their participation in this process, for continually feeding back their ideas.

I’m going off on a little tangent here, but one of the things that people don’t always, I think, realize about the legislative calendar is that there’s actually only a limited amount of time to be able to pass bills. There are often areas in different ministries—I know this having worked in different ministries—that might have particular solutions to issues that are coming up in their bailiwick, if you will, in their ministry, and yet they might not have a legislative option to bring forward a bill on that particular item. So what often we’re able to do if they are relevant to the Ministry of Red Tape Reduction in terms of reducing unnecessary regulations or onerous processes is take those great ideas from the ministries, whether that’s the Ministry of Colleges and Universities or the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, the Ministry of Health, or any of these other organizations, these incredibly hard-working ministries who have great ideas about what should be done to streamline processes while maintaining health, safety and the environment. We can sit down with them, go through those ideas and see if they work within our packages. It’s a way also of ensuring that we’re able to move rapidly on those issues.

Otherwise, what can happen, with the greatest respect to the government House leader’s team and the incredible work that they do, is there might not always be the opportunity for a legislative package for people to move those items through. Sometimes it can just be because there are only a few items that they want to move through, and it might not be able to justify a stand-alone piece of legislation in terms of just the constraints that we have on the hours of debate that are available in the Legislature.

We’re able to work with those ministries and those partners, and the minister is always ensuring that at that cabinet table—I’m sure he’s speaking about the ability that we have to work with them to bring forward good ideas and to be a conduit of sorts, as well as through our own outreach and our continual conversations with people in every corner of the province. I think it’s an important thing to remember, because it’s not just our ministry; there’s obviously—

Interjections.

The member from Niagara West.

You make red tape exciting.

Thank you for the support of the tangent. I won’t do it too often, I promise.

Speaker, we’ve come a long way, and we’re proud of the work we’ve accomplished so far. We’re also grateful for the ideas that we’ve received from so many across this province which have allowed us to continue delivering on our commitment to support economic competitiveness and create high-quality jobs and an attractive investment climate.

I want to tell you a little bit more about the work that we do. People always ask, “Okay, so, what does it actually mean to reduce red tape? Walk me through what that process looks like.” I’m going to walk through a little bit of this partly by talking about the Modernizing Ontario for People and Businesses Act. This is an important piece of legislation, something that we follow in the Ministry of Red Tape Reduction to ensure that every new regulation that comes forward isn’t onerous or burdensome for the people of Ontario. Every time we consider a new idea that crosses our path, we draw on the seven guiding principles contained in this act.

The first principle is that we should recognize national and international standards whenever possible. What this means is—this is a little bit of a challenging one, because everyone likes to think they’re “made in.” Everyone wants to have a made-in-Ontario solution, and I understand that. We need flexibility. We need to have a responsibility to interact with the local needs here in Ontario, and I respect that. I have lots of family in Alberta, and they’re always very like, “Made in Alberta: We’re going to do a made-in-Alberta strategy,” and I’m like, “Well, we have a really great idea here. You could pick it up and use it.” They’re like, “No, it needs it be made in Alberta,” so they remake the wheel every time. We’ve seen that with some other provinces as well. I won’t name any names—Quebec.

But I also think that it’s important to recognize best international standards and national standards. If there are ways that we can work with those existing standards and they protect the people of Ontario, they’re able to provide flexibility within that standard to allow our local organizations here in Ontario to be responsive to our needs but yet not create a whole new list of standards that then have to be duplicated and done again at the national or international level—the very first principle we have in the Ministry of Red Tape Reduction is to recognize national and international standards which should be adopted when possible. That’s our first principle: to make sure that we have accessibility for the broadest possible part of the economy and that people in our province or others who come to our province to invest are able to also recognize those standards and have options across this province. So we recognize that harmonizing requirements across jurisdictions reduces costs and makes it easier to do business across borders.

Our second pillar is that small businesses should have less onerous compliance requirements compared to larger businesses. I think this instinctively makes sense to people, recognizing that small businesses don’t have some of the same resources or expertise as their larger counterparts to focus on compliance.

I think there’s a recognition that if you’re in a small mom-and-pop shop, you probably shouldn’t be having to deal with some of the same regulatory requirements as if you’re a massive industrial setting. I would imagine that if you’re a small machine shop in my riding, in Beamsville, you shouldn’t have some of the same requirements that Dofasco does down the road, obviously, where they’re literally boiling enormous vats of liquid steel. They need to have slightly different requirements than a machinist working out of a small shop in Beamsville. There’s an understanding that we have to be flexible within our regulatory system and recognize that larger organizations have some of the resources and the expertise to deal with particular issues that perhaps a smaller organization doesn’t, so our second principle is that they should have less onerous compliance compared to larger businesses.

Our third principle is that any entity subject to regulations should be provided accessible digital services whenever possible, because in 2023, we shouldn’t be asking people or businesses to fill out long paper forms anymore. If any of you don’t have the YouTube Premium subscription—I don’t—

Interjection.

No, no. I can’t afford it.

Oh, wow. This guy over here has YouTube Premium.

But either way, if you don’t have it, you get this ad. It says, “There’s no place like Chrome.” You’ve seen this ad where it talks about how your tabs go where you go, and it’s a very nice little ad that’s on a lot of these YouTube videos. The whole premise, of course, is that if you use Google—which not everyone does; I get that. But I do. I happen to love my Google Docs and my Google Sheets. They make life much easier. Wherever I go, I can open it up, and—boom—everything is filled in, so you don’t have to fill in your shipping address every single time. You don’t have to fill in your information every single time. I know some people aren’t comfortable with that, and then they don’t use that service. That’s fine. I respect that. For me, I love it that I can sign on to any computer, log into my Google Chrome, and when I log into my Google Chrome, it’s instantly available. I don’t have to spend all my time filling out all the information for whatever form I’m going through—a table to be filled out very rapidly.

And so, it’s the same thing in terms of government services. We have to recognize that we’re living in a digital age. There might be some people who don’t want to do everything online, and I respect that. I understand making the option—having a physical option available is important. But to the vast majority of us, we do so many things online already, and if we’re able to have a digital process that is simpler than having to physically bring over papers and physically fill out papers, and perhaps miswrite something or have a letter that’s backwards or whatever it might be—when we have this in so many other aspects of our lives, governments have to respond to that as well, and so we are recognizing that. Our third principle is that any entities should be able to have accessible digital services wherever possible.

The fourth principle is that regulated entities like businesses, services and broader public sector organizations which demonstrate excellent compliance should be recognized. We recognize that we shouldn’t be punishing those who have done excellent jobs, have a healthy track record and have a very strong history of maintaining a regulatory environment and maintaining a compliance level that demonstrates their commitment to good corporate citizenship. They shouldn’t be under the exact same pressures as someone who perhaps hasn’t demonstrated such good faith and has not met the requirements that are in place to protect health, safety and the environment. We should be making sure that regulations which are in place are recognizing the different backgrounds and the different histories of individual organizations.

The fifth principle, one that I know my father would agree with, is that unnecessary reporting should be reduced and steps should be taken to avoid requiring regulated entities to provide the same information to government repeatedly. This is one of those ones that I’ve had so many conversations with people about. Actually, this is one of the questions I and my team also regularly ask. When we’re dealing with, let’s say, a renewal requirement, there are all sorts of requirements for different organizations, for different licensing and for different pieces where people have to provide a renewal every year, a renewal every six months or a renewal every two years. Often the question we’ll ask is, “Why is that the time frame? Why do we have to renew that every year? Can it be done every three years? Can it be done every five years? Is there a way to make sure that we don’t have to have people repeatedly submitting information again and again and again when it’s the exact same information year after year?”

Now, again, there are caveats to that. We recognize, of course, that there are changes in life. Look at, for example, your driver’s licence. Once you have your G, you don’t have to go back every year and redo it all over again and submit all your information. We understand that you have your G licence, but we also recognize that when you turn 80, there is potential for some challenges, health challenges, and that there needs to also be some conversation and a testing period. But generally speaking, we don’t force people to renew everything all the time, and we shouldn’t be taking that approach with regulations as well. We want to prevent people from having to unnecessarily resubmit information to the government again and again and again.

The sixth pillar is that instruments should prioritize the user by using clear communication, setting reasonable response times and establishing a centralized point of contact. It’s very straightforward, this pillar: People and businesses should be able to understand the requirements imposed upon them by the government. Yet I actually think this pillar is one of the most difficult to implement, and it’s also one of the most important pillars. Saying that we should have clear communication, a reasonable response time and a centralized point of contact I believe is, unfortunately, aspirational. It should be very basic, but the reality is, if you’ve spoken with anyone who’s had to interact with governments and had to interact with different bureaucracies, they probably don’t have one centralized point of contact that they can call with all their questions. They probably don’t necessarily even have a clear expectation of what a reasonable response time is. In some ministries or in some organizations, it can be within 24 hours. In some, it’s 90 days. In some, it’s 30 days. In some, it’s 10 business days. So we want to make sure that that changes, that there’s a reasonable response time expectation and a centralized point of contact for anyone who has to deal with regulations to make sure that they’re able to have a one-stop shop that they go to, to be able to know “This is who we have to deal with in order to get things done.”

The seventh principle is that an instrument should specify the desired result that regulated entities must meet, rather than the specific methods used to attain the result. Good outcomes are what we’re concerned about, and we recognize that there are many different ways to get to the same outcome. If the outcome is intended to protect health or the outcome is intended to protect workers or the outcome is intended to protect the environment, we need to recognize when people are acting in good faith towards those outcomes and not simply checking boxes. You could have people who check the boxes who do a process that’s technically accurate, but that doesn’t mean that the result is where we’re trying to go. So we have to be results-oriented, we have to be responsive and we have to recognize some flexibility around people’s ability to attain those results and not just focus on the process to get there.

The minister mentioned in his remarks earlier this morning that this year’s spring red tape reduction package focuses on three key themes, and in the time left I’m going to walk through a few of those themes: paving the way for better services, helping Ontario businesses grow and saving Ontarians time. I know he already walked through many of the measures in this legislation, but I’m going to spend a few minutes speaking to some of the other initiatives in the package which will help us realize these commitments.

I’d like to highlight an initiative that’s coming from the Ministry of Transportation when it comes to paving the way for better services. This Ministry of Transportation is looking to modernize agency governance at the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission. This is an agency which has an important role to play in our government’s plan to build a stronger Ontario. We’ve committed to restoring passenger rail service from Toronto to northern Ontario, a service that was cancelled by the former Liberal government in 2012, and we’re well on our way to delivering on that promise with planning under way and three new state-of-the-art trainsets on order from Siemens Mobility.

With this work, our government is going to be proceeding with developing a new and clearly defined transportation-focused mandate for Ontario Northland, which will be brought forward in this House in the future as part of modernized legislation. Speaker, this is necessary because the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission Act is a legacy piece of legislation from 1902 which has seen limited changes and does not align with modern agency legislation. To put that in context, Speaker, 1902 is six years before the Ford Motor Company invented the Model T.

Clarifying the agency’s mandate with regard to transportation, when a lot has changed in the last 120 years, will help result in increased agency alignment with our strategic vision for being responsive to the needs of the people in the province and will empower the agency to deliver on key priority projects such as the Northlander.

Another way that we are paving the road to better services is by proposing amendments to the Ontario Energy Board to protect ratepayers. Speaker, you might be surprised to learn that, currently, utilities can pass on costs they’ve incurred because of failing to comply with their statutory obligations to ratepayers through increases to rates. What that means is, they break the rules, and you pay the price. At the end of the day, when they fail to meet their legislative obligations or their regulatory obligations, which results in greater costs, they don’t take those costs and eat them. They actually pass those costs along to the ratepayers and say, “Sorry. We made this mistake, whatever it costs—millions of dollars. It sucks to be us. But guess what? It’s okay, because we don’t have to pay for it; the ratepayers do.” No longer. We’re making changes under this legislation to make sure that when they break the rules, the ratepayers aren’t the ones who are paying for it. We’re putting an end to that practice. It would protect energy ratepayers from paying for costs incurred because of non-compliance and help keep rates predictable.

Speaking of the Ministry of Energy, there’s another way that this red tape reduction package is helping businesses grow. We know that Ontario’s clean energy grid can be a real competitive advantage when we’re looking at attracting businesses and investments to the province. But we can do much more. That’s why we’re proposing amendments to the Ontario Energy Board Act which will allow the Ontario Energy Board to remove certain regulatory barriers to innovative pilot and demonstration projects. There are a lot of projects in the province that, unfortunately, we’re not able to proceed with, under the restrictive regulations of the Ontario Energy Board. This will expand the Ontario Energy Board’s authority to facilitate pilot and demonstration projects, such as exploring the idea of peer-to-peer energy trading. There’s vast potential for energy innovation that could revolutionize the way we produce, distribute and consume energy. Eliminating the red tape associated with these pilot projects will have the potential to reveal real value for the sector and for customers. Innovative projects that could come forward through these changes will benefit electricity ratepayers through lower rates and a more reliable and resilient system—as well as having a positive impact on Ontarians.

Speaker, I know that we’re running close to time, but I do want to focus on an initiative from the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development that is intended to save time for the people of this province. We’re seeking to clarify the concept of “survivor” in the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act in relation to terms such as “surviving spouse” and “cohabiting,” as well as other related issues. Modernizing the approach that the WSIB takes in relation to survivors will improve operational consistency in decision-making, reduce administrative burden, and also provide the WSIB with the ability to process claims faster and save Ontarians time.

There are other ways that we’re working to save Ontarians time. We are proposing amendments to electronic forms delivery under the Pension Benefits Act, which will eliminate the need to send retiring plan members unneeded reminder notices, reducing costs and duplication.

We will have permanent changes made to several business law statutes in the Condominium Act to allow for corporations, including not-for-profits, to hold virtual meetings. Some businesses aren’t able to hold virtual meetings. We’re making changes to allow them to continue to hold those virtual meetings to save everyone time and money. This has been a very popular and successful measure.

Speaker, I wish I had more time to speak about all the other actions that are in this legislation. Unfortunately, due to my tangents, we are not able to continue, but I appreciate the—

I want to thank my colleague for that important question. I can assure him that one of the things we do at the Ministry of Red Tape Reduction is work across government. So we have an opportunity to work with every single one of our colleagues and every single one of our cabinet ministers to look at ways—and I know the Attorney General has been doing a tremendous job over the last number of years modernizing our justice system—and it’s across government, and we all help one another. We all work closely with one another, and all of us, I would say, do a really good job listening to our constituents and listening to our stakeholders. A lot of these ideas—where do they come from—that we’re able to put in our piece of legislation? They come from Ontarians through the consultation process, through the relaunch of our online portal where we get amazing feedback from just regular Ontarians, businesses that are impacted, that are frustrated, that are spending countless hours filling out unnecessary papers.

We recognize we have a lot more work to do and we’ll continue to do the hard work.

With all due respect to the minister, I have a question for the parliamentary assistant, due to his age—and this is a good thing, Madam Speaker—because as the parliamentary assistant mentioned in his speech, one of the things that we are doing with this red tape reduction package is modernizing the way we deliver government services electronically. This is really, really important for younger generations who are so connected with the online world and the Internet. So, by doing this, we are actually empowering younger generations to become more connected with government and with services and all of that. So I wanted to know if the parliamentary assistant could speak a little bit more about what he has heard from other people in his generation or younger about how this bill is actually helping younger generations.

A question for my friend from Niagara West: Schedule 30, Protecting Farmers from Non-Payment Act—I’m curious as to if and how that will benefit any of the farmers in our region of Niagara.

Questions?

My thanks to the member opposite. I appreciate her bringing this forward. I’m happy to hear her ideas around potential future pieces of legislation and obviously more than willing to hear about what particular changes she recommends.

I lived in a condo for some time when my wife and I were first married. We were in a condo in Smithville in my riding and so I understand of course that there are always different things. One of the pieces that I understand is so important in this legislation is to allow for that option for virtual meetings. I know for myself, as someone who spends a lot of time on the road doing consultations, community outreach and stakeholder outreach, and for my wife as well who’s very business with our son and with a lot of different community events, to virtually be able to call into these meetings, to ensure that we save time and be flexible—sometimes you just can’t be there in person. I think we’ve all had that experience where there’s just an unavoidable conflict. So to be able to call in quietly on a Zoom and still listen to what’s going on and not hear about it second-hand, I think is a great way of saving people time and money.

Thank you to the member from Niagara West for your presentation.

I noticed in this bill, Bill 91, that the government has opened up the condo act, which I find quite interesting, because there are a lot of improvements that we can make to strengthen protections for the 1.3 million people who live in a condo in Ontario.

To the member from Niagara West: What measures would you like to see to strengthen board governance and consumer protections for condo residents in Ontario? Since you’re opening up the act, this is a real opportunity to move forward with that kind of stuff.

I appreciated very much the conversation from both the minister and the parliamentary assistant on this new red tape bill. It amazes me how we have no problems coming up with these large omnibus bills twice a year on the incredible work that we’re doing, and this is just another one of these. I think one of the biggest ones—and we just heard about that at the Standing Committee on Public Accounts—was the incredible changes to the court system through electronic filing and everything else.

I was looking through the bill and I see even more on that again now through updating the Creditors’ Relief Act to include electronic formats. I was wondering if either the minister or the member from Niagara West could speak of the changes we’re making to make court systems work more efficiently and use a whole lot less paper.

This morning, I would like to show much-deserved recognition to a member from my riding. I was introduced to Carolyn Karle during my campaign, and I am proud to now call her a friend. Carolyn founded the DEK Foundation, named after her daughter, Dayna Elizabeth Karle, who she unfortunately lost to a devastating drug overdose. Dayna was only 31 years old when she succumbed to her disease. Dayna is described by friends and loved ones as an energetic, vibrant and beautiful soul. When Dayna started to face mental health challenges, it became unmanageable, and she was unable to get access to the resources she needed to fight it.

Carolyn and I both agree that drug addiction can happen to anyone. There is no discrimination when it comes to issues with mental health and addiction, and it truly affects all walks of life. Carolyn was able to turn this devastating loss into strength, and she works tirelessly in the foundation she started to help those struggling with addiction. Carolyn was recently recognized by her community and received Thunder Bay’s 2023 respect. Award.

The DEK foundation provides necessities to those struggling from mental health and addictions, giving them the needed love and support they deserve. I’d like to thank Carolyn for her relentless work, and I look forward to working closely with her to end the stigma and to build a secure foundation of support systems for the constituents of Thunder Bay and region. Thank you, Carolyn.

I stand before you today to urge this government to access and evaluate funding for women’s health across the board. That is research, it is education and it is services.

I stand today inspired by the dedication of local friends and health advocates April Hamm and Jessica Plenzick, who collaborated to arrange a significant event at the FirstOntario Performing Arts Centre in St. Catharines. To a packed house, on the last day of endometriosis month—legislation that actually was passed by my colleague here in this chamber, the member from Davenport—they showcased a film, Below the Belt, and proceeded to have a powerful panel discussion by the inspiring health professionals. There was a question asked, and it was a simple one: Why? Why are we not talking about endometriosis anymore—a common condition that impacts one in 10 women, a condition that suffers from bias and prejudice?

Women’s health has been underfunded and under-researched for many years. Women’s health is put into reproductive categories. It is a systemic issue. We need to change it. This needs to be changed.

I want to recognize the passion of these advocates. However, I cannot do this without recognizing how much more still needs to be done.

I urge this government to prioritize women’s health by increasing funding for research, education and services that address the unique health needs of women. Let us work together to ensure that every woman in Ontario receives the care and support she deserves.

Today, Jewish residents and communities in my riding of Eglinton–Lawrence and around the world will mark the start of Passover, usually an eight-day festival. Also known as Pesach, this holiday commemorates the miracle in which God passed over the houses of the Israelites during the 10th plague—also 400 years of slavery endured by the Jewish people in ancient Egypt and their 40-year journey to the promised land. Throughout the entire period, Jewish law forbids eating any hametz—or foods with leaven.

Centred on family and communal celebrations, Passover is one of the most beloved of all Jewish holidays. The main ritual is the Passover Seder, a festive meal during which families and friends will gather to read and discuss the story of Passover, recite prayers and consume symbolic foods like matzah or unleavened bread. To everyone marking Passover, Chag Pesach Sameach.

Later this week, Western Christian denominations will also celebrate Easter. Following the 40-day period of fasting and prayer known as Lent, Christians will gather to celebrate the holiest time in the Christian calendar.

This week is Holy Week. The Easter Triduum includes Maundy Thursday, which commemorates the washing of the feet and the Last Supper of Christ with the apostles; Good Friday, marking the crucifixion and death of Jesus; and of course Easter Sunday, marking the resurrection of Christ.

Religion, which literally derives from the Latin word “religare,” which means “to tie one to their community,” and the common participation in ritual it includes, helps to give meaning and purpose to life and comfort in times of hardship—all things that I believe we could use more of in modern times.

To all my constituents, a joyous and meaningful Easter and Chag Pesach Sameach.

I have a letter that I would like to share from a very concerned and upset mother. She wants me to know, “My son ... is struggling in school. He is ADHD and has autism. He is seven years old ... and desperately needs an EA or some kind of support. Our teacher is absolutely wonderful, for the first time in many years. She specializes in special education but the thing is like a lot she is running out of resources. He is very high needs and desperately needs 1:1 support in class. Unfortunately all requests come back as ‘no budget’ or no more staff available.

“I’m so upset as my son gets very hands” on “sometimes and can’t self-regulate. Last week he had an incident and now is told he has to sit in the office with admin staff to realize his actions (he has no idea what is going on). So this morning I pulled him to get some testing done. I was told because he missed part of the day he would be making up the hours tomorrow ... he would spend the full day again in the office with no outside recess, which he barely gets to experience.

“I’m so upset for my son. He is so bright and is being held back because of apparent resources not available and then making him spend all this time in the office. I’m ready to pull him.... He is being secluded from his peers” and “he is very liked in school.

“Can you help me in any way? I have no idea.”

My question to this government is: Why won’t they fund schools so that students like this child can participate and learn with the resources that they so desperately need?

Further questions?

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.