Madam Speaker, I’m pleased to rise and speak on Bill 91, the Less Red Tape, Stronger Economy Act. If passed, this bill will pave the way for better services, help Ontario grow and save people time and money.

First of all, I would like to congratulate our Minister of Red Tape Reduction, the Honourable Parm Gill, and parliamentary assistant Sam Oosterhoff on their great work in compiling this legislation. I would also like to thank the hard-working staff at the Ministry of Red Tape Reduction for their efforts.

Madam Speaker, I’m sure you’ve heard through your consultations with stakeholders, just as I have heard when speaking to people in my riding of Carleton, how important it is to reduce red tape in order to build a stronger economy and improve services for Ontarians.

In 2017, under the previous Liberal government, Ontario had the highest costs of compliance in Canada, totalling $33,000 per business, $4,000 more than any other province. Thankfully, since 2018, our government has taken historic action to reduce red tape, leading to almost $700 million in annual savings for Ontario businesses. We are building stronger supply chains, helping businesses grow and saving people more time and money. When it comes to eliminating unnecessary red tape, only our government will get it done.

Madam Speaker, we’ve had a number of supportive people and industries reach out to tell us how much they appreciate what we are doing in this bill, Bill 91. For example, Michelle Noble, the executive director of the Ontario Environment Industry Association, has said that Ontario’s environment and clean tech industry welcomes the government’s ongoing efforts to reduce red tape and we look forward to continuing to work with the government to identify ways to reduce red tape in our sector.

This is why our government knows that reducing red tape is a key part of building a stronger economy and improving services for Ontarians. As such, we will continue to bring forward burden-reduction packages that will save businesses more than half a billion dollars each year in compliance costs.

To begin my remarks on this important legislation, I would like to briefly summarize what this important bill will do for Ontario.

Bill 91 includes 42 new initiatives that will save businesses, not-for-profits and people more than $120 million in net annual regulatory compliance costs. Among other things, this legislation will accelerate timelines for municipal approvals to build broadband faster for 700,000 homes and businesses. It will also strengthen occupational health and safety in the mining sector by changing regulations to reflect modern technology and better protect workers. This legislation will enable the next phases of carbon storage innovation by piloting technology that has the potential to store 30 years’ worth of carbon emissions.

Madam Speaker, this legislation will also implement the Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support, reducing frustration for more than 8,500 families involved in the province’s child and spousal support order system by enabling enforcement of support orders in 34 additional countries across four continents. Finally, this bill will improve safety on Ontario’s roads by updating the Highway Traffic Act to prohibit drivers from overtaking a working snowplow, unless a full lane is available. As you can see, Madam Speaker, this legislation is comprehensive and robust.

Now, I would like to talk about some of the specific instances of red tape that this legislation will reduce. More specifically, I would like to speak on what this will mean for my riding of Carleton and the great people of Carleton that I have been blessed to represent and serve in the Ontario Legislature since 2018.

Carleton is home to several farms, including Stanley’s Olde Maple Lane Farm, Rideau Pines Farm, Foster Family Farm, Abby Hill Farms, Schouten Dairy Farms, Millers Farm and Market, the Log Cabin Orchard, Mike’s Garden Harvest and Carleton Mushroom, just to name a few, and also home to numerous farm families, some of whom have been here for generations, including the Velthuis, the Acres, the Pattersons, the Shouldices and so many more.

Carleton’s farmers are key producers of fruit, vegetables, honey, lamb, beef, chicken, eggs, dairy, maple syrup, honey cash crop and so much more. That’s why our government is making it easier for Carleton and Ontario farmers through this legislation.

Madam Speaker, we are introducing in schedule 30—and I want to talk about schedule 30. I’ve been reading about it since we introduced this legislation and I want to focus most of my time on schedule 30 of this bill, because it’s actually very, very important for my riding of Carleton. Schedule 30 introduces legislation called Protecting Farmers from Non-Payment Act (Regulating Agricultural Product Dealers and Storage Operators). The purpose of this bill is to provide efficient and effective business risk management tools to farmers to help address the business risks that slow payment and no payment may create, as well as the risks that arise when a storage operator fails to return a designated agricultural product to its owner upon demand. The proposed schedule seeks to protect the financial interests of farmers, like those in my riding of Carleton, so that they can confidently invest and grow their businesses in Ontario. The proposed bill would, if passed, combine the Farm Products Payments Act, the Grains Act and the Livestock and Livestock Products Act into one act, and it would also update the legislative framework governing the financial protection programs for Ontario’s agricultural sector.

The proposed changes to the legislative framework governing the financial protection programs fall within six general themes. It includes flexible administration of the act. The proposed changes would allow for greater flexibility in terms of how the act is administered. This could, for example, include allowing industry to administer all or part of an act via a delegated authority. It would allow for the expansion of financial protection models and greater flexibility for other industries. It would allow easy expansion of protection to other industries. It would allow greater flexibility in financial protection models for other industries. It would update board governance and powers. It would modernize the licensing process. It would enhance compliance tools. And most importantly, it would streamline the appeals process.

Enforcement of this proposed bill would be undertaken by provincial officers. Offences would be processed in accordance with the Provincial Offences Act and prosecuted by provincial prosecutors. If this proposed bill is passed, it would come into force and effect upon proclamation.

Madam Speaker, our government is also proposing amending regulation 761, milk and milk products, under the Milk Act—that’s so many “milks” in one sentence. Sorry, I’m going to repeat that. Our government is also proposing amending regulation 761, milk and milk products, under the Milk Act, which would reduce burden on the dairy processing industry while improving food safety. There is a thriving dairy industry in Carleton, so I’m very pleased that our bill introduces and includes this regulatory change.

Finally, our government is proposing updates to nutrient management tables 1 and 2, which will ensure proper sizing of barns and manure storage to reduce the risk of negative environmental impacts from undersized storages. The updated tables will also provide more accurate estimates of the nutrient content so the land application of manure and other nutrients can occur at optimum rates for both crop growth and to protect the environment. Madam Speaker, this legislation will get it done for farmers in my riding, and I am so excited for these important updates and changes to burdensome red tape.

As I have already alluded to, my riding of Carleton is predominantly rural, and much of the riding lacks reliable access to high-speed Internet. This legislation will make changes in the right direction to ensure that we will have reliable access to high-speed Internet throughout the riding. Ontario is proposing legislative amendments under the Building Broadband Faster Act, 2021, that would ensure Internet service providers can plan, design and build high-speed Internet projects as quickly as possible. This includes enabling more efficient collection of utility infrastructure data to optimize routing for projects, to plan networks and to prevent delays in the permitting process between municipalities and ISPs.

Our government is also updating the Building Broadband Faster Act, 2021 guideline to provide greater clarity and improved guidance to high-speed Internet stakeholders on processes and timelines. A major component of the update is a new process to help resolve disputes between parties and to work with sectors to ensure that they comply with the laws and regulations that are helping to build broadband across the province faster. The updated guideline will also provide more clarity on the Ministry of Transportation’s efforts to speed up their permit process for provincially funded broadband projects and will provide additional guidance on cost-sharing for using electric infrastructure to build these projects. Our government is committed to reliable high-speed Internet access for rural Ontario, and this legislation will help to bring just that.

Moreover, in my riding of Carleton, the predominant means of transportation is by automobile. There simply is no Ottawa public transportation that goes out that far to Carleton. Everyone has to rely on an automobile if they want to get somewhere, and that’s why this important legislation will help improve road safety in my riding of Carleton. Ontario is proposing to amend the Highway Traffic Act by adding clauses that will prohibit drivers from overtaking snowplows working in a staggered formation across highway lanes. The proposed amendments intend to reduce motor vehicle collisions with snowplows on higher-speed, multi-lane highways. This will make the public safer and reduce burden on emergency responders, health care services, the insurance sector and the legal system. Most of all, they will keep our roads safer in my riding of Carleton and across the province of Ontario.

Moreover, to improve safety for people needing a tow and those working in the towing industry, Ontario is taking steps to implement a certification program that will require tow operators, tow truck drivers and vehicle storage operators meet certain requirements to operate in Ontario.

Help is also on the way for commercial drivers in Carleton and across Ontario. Our government is proposing a change to legislation to ensure commercial vehicle operators who purchased equipment between 2020 and 2023 will not to have to undergo a costly retrofit. In emergency driving situations, mainly on icy or wet roads, truck drivers can lift a piece of equipment called a lift axel to make driving safer. Since 2018-19, the law required lift axels to work in a specific way that the Ontario-based company making lift axels for 70% of the market was simply not able to manufacture. The company told the government they were able to provide another solution that meets the needs of trucking companies and the intent of the law. This proposed change would provide more flexibility to companies that manufacture the equipment the steerable lift axel controls, while continuing to support road safety, and saving trucking businesses time and money.

In summary, our government is getting it done for road users across this province.

Now, as Premier Ford and our team have shown time and time again, our government is committed to the success of small business owners, because we know that they are the lifeblood of Ontario’s economy. Small businesses are all across my riding of Carleton, and they are opening up every day. Every day, I am seeing more and more businesses.

In fact, just the other day there was—I’m going to pull this up, because it’s on my Facebook. One thing my office does is we like to keep track of all the businesses and all the companies that are opening up across my riding of Carleton. My riding is very big, there are a lot of communities. My team and I work really hard to keep track of all of this. One thing that we do is, when we see a new business open up, we like to present them with a certificate just to let them know, “Welcome to the neighbourhood, welcome to the community.” Oftentimes when the businesses receive one of these certificates from me and my office, they will usually post about it on social media, and literally five hours ago a company called Bright Hearing and Tinnitus Centre, which just opened up in Richmond and serves folks in Richmond, Stittsville, Kanata and Ottawa West, posted a certificate that I had provided them on their social media account thanking me for welcoming them to the community. Bright Hearing and Tinnitus Centre is just one example of the numerous businesses and small businesses across the riding of Carleton that are opening up, and it’s our responsibility to support them, because they are the lifeblood of Ontario’s economy.

That’s why I’m pleased that our legislation will implement the Building Ontario Businesses Initiative. This is expected to reduce barriers and provide companies in Ontario with greater access to public procurement opportunities, helping them to sell more goods and services and create jobs in their local communities. The implementation of the initiative will help Ontario’s economic growth and build businesses and communities across the province while ensuring greater security of the province’s supply chain.

I also want to speak about the important changes that this legislation is going to be making to child support legislation in this province. Children deserve to be supported in the best way that their families can, and that is why our government is taking action to implement the 2007 Hague Convention. The 2007 Hague Convention is an international treaty that applies to obtaining, changing and enforcing spousal and child support orders when parents or spouses live in different countries.

As a former international trade lawyer, Madam Speaker, I can appreciate and understand how important this legislation really is, because one of the most frustrating things for parents or families is when they have a court order for something here in Ontario, but they’re not able to enforce it in another jurisdiction. This change will provide families relief. So I’m very, very pleased about this.

If this legislation is passed to implement the convention in the province of Ontario and the government of Canada ratifies the convention, then current procedures would be streamlined and more cost efficient. That’s important because, again as an international trade lawyer, one of the things that I worked on was international law, and while we are happy to implement the convention in this province, the convention will not be actual law until the government of Canada ratifies the convention and makes it law. So one thing that I think we need to do, not just as a government but as a province—and I’m asking all MPPs on all sides of the House here—is to put pressure on our federal government to make sure that they ratify this convention, that they ratify this and bring it into Canadian law so that Ontario families can rely on this convention to get the support they need.

Speaking of young people, we are also making important strides for the post-secondary education sector. These partners are crucial in ensuring that young people are trained for the jobs of the future. Career colleges play an important role in Ontario’s post-secondary landscape, providing learners with the knowledge and skills they need to get a job in today’s workplace. Moreover, our government is enhancing collection tools for training institutions under the Private Career Colleges Act.

Madam Speaker, I see that my time is running short. There really is so much that I want to speak about. Every single initiative in this piece of legislation—and here’s the bill. I don’t know if I’m allowed to use props or not, but I’m holding the bill in my hand.

I do want a cough drop. I mean, what does a girl have to do around here to get a cough drop?

So the answer we got back from the finance minister is that we should reach out to the Ontario Securities Commission. Of course, we are going to do that, but I do think it’s worth noting that the council—this is not something that should be driven by the sector, Madam Speaker. Cryptocurrency is here. There are concerns about it. There’s no consumer protection plan around it. Why is this government not doing something around regulating this sector with consumers and citizens in mind?

Going back to my theme of where the energy is going around red tape, it should be also noted that some changes have happened around ODSP and the reporting around ODSP. If I have to say—and I did write the former minister about this as well: “As of February 4, 2023, recipients of ODSP are now required to log into their MyBenefits app to declare that they have not been out of Ontario for 30 consecutive days.”

When this issue first came to my attention, as many issues do come through our constituency—there was a lady who said, “Listen, why do I have to prove that I haven’t left Ontario? Why do I have to do this on a monthly basis? I can’t even get down to the grocery store.” So there is a disconnect here around the overregulation in certain sectors and then the under-regulation in emerging issues like crypto.

In the letter, I said, “We are hearing from constituents who feel they are being over-monitored by the government when they are already exhausted by having to prove they are disabled enough to receive support.” This is a direct quote from a constituent: “Enough of our lives are controlled by reporting into the program.” Our offices have reached out to the MPP liaison to clarify the full impact of this change. To date, we did not receive any response.

Now, considering that ODSP payments are barely enough to survive on—okay? So you’re leaving, like, the Wild West of crypto and Bitcoin just to figure things out and not protecting consumers, but for folks who are on ODSP, they have to prove that they are disabled year after year after year. Now they have to also go into the MyBenefits app and prove that they haven’t gone anywhere. How could they go anywhere, Madam Speaker? And why is this government implementing further administrative and financial hoops for recipients to jump through? We’re concerned about the cost of this added oversight with the addition of red tape that that creates.

It is ironic that the government can bring forward a very hefty red tape bill but then, on the other hand, create more red tape for the most vulnerable people who don’t have that support system in their lives. ODSP is already punitive even without this change. We ask you, are the benefits of this change worth further demoralizing and marginalizing ODSP recipients?

I raise that issue again because Bill 91, which is a huge bill, delves into some of these areas where you’ve decided—you’re picking and choosing certain areas and prioritizing them. There honestly doesn’t seem to be any rhyme or reason as to why you’ve decided that.

There are some red flags for us, though, with this bill. I just had this really great meeting with the University of Guelph, an amazing institution, and I really learned a lot about how expansive their program is, how they’ve modernized as a university. But they are going to be running a $33-million deficit this year, like many of our public institutions that have gone through a hard time, and these things ebb and flow. One of the areas, though, that they struggle with is around international students, and the fact that private colleges are making promises to those students and providing—I have to be careful about my language, but some of those international students are fast-tracked over to those private colleges.

And then, of course, we see in Bill 91 who you actually are listening to. Schedule 29 of the bill changes the name of the act to the Ontario Career Colleges Act; it removes “private,” which is ironic because they are still businesses, and one could say that calling something a career college has a different connotation, I think, quite honestly. And then, also, the fact that this change in the definition and the request to change the name has actually come from the sector because “operators have raised concerns that the word ‘private’ has a negative connotation and unfairly stigmatizes them and their students”—this was reported in the Trillium. So here you have a piece of legislation and a government that clearly has the ear of some people, and then you have a whole segment, like workers, where safety in the province of Ontario—we’ve never seen so many injuries and accidents on our sites. This is a huge concern for me, especially around the use of accredited tradespeople, because my son is a tradesperson. He’s an electrician. If you have one unqualified person on that work site, that then becomes, in my opinion—not just as a mother, but as someone who follows workplace health and safety regulations—a very unsafe workplace.

So we have some concerns about schedule 29, and I think that the former comments by our critic on schedule 29 warrant some consideration by the minister.

Finally, I want to say that we did hear some really good examples—and I do want to thank the minister who is responsible for red tape for appearing before budget committee when we were up in Kenora. The story goes like this: We heard from some forestry leaders, not surprisingly, up north. They commented that they are really struggling with finding drivers, and perhaps you’ll remember this. Erik Holmstrom and Tom Ratz were really trying to hire a Ukrainian driver. A driver and his family came to the north, came to the Kenora area. This Ukrainian driver had 20 years of experience. He did apply at Resolute, but it took nine months for a licence, so instead, he got a job in Manitoba.

So when you can streamline some red tape and fast-track some licensing requirements for qualified people, you can actually have a competitive edge as an economy. I think that warrants some attention. As I said at the beginning of my comments, which have been cough-ridden, this is something that we should consider doing, especially if we want to capitalize as a province on the talent that is coming into the province.

While we’re at it, let’s reduce the regulatory burden on municipalities so that when those new immigrants come in, when those skilled workers come into the province of Ontario, they actually have a place to live—because I just want to be really clear with this government: They’re not going to be living in the greenbelt. That’s not the destination for new immigrants who are coming to Ontario. And the great irony that I want to point out is that we are actually making the case for intensification of housing within urban boundaries, where the infrastructure is—where the parks are, the hospitals, the educational resources. That’s what we want. We want people to come into our communities, be welcomed in those communities—and then not further add burden to the current tax base by having to increase the taxes to facilitate sprawl. So that’s what the people of Waterloo region want me to really try to get through to this government—that we are arguing for intensification, not sprawl, especially when your own affordable housing task force recommended that you have enough land within the urban boundary to accommodate those immigrants.