I wanted to introduce this morning page Liliana Commisso, who comes from Vaughan–Woodbridge and is attending St. Gregory the Great Catholic Academy. Welcome to Queen’s Park, and I hope you enjoy your time here with us.

That’s the exact reason we have to move the patients into long-term care: because of the staffing crisis, because of the backlogged surgeries, because of the long waits in the emergency departments. That’s the exact reason.

Mr. Speaker, there isn’t a CEO of any hospital that has disagreed. As a matter of fact, I got a message from a CEO this morning: “Thank you so much for making this move.” They’re sending me messages non-stop.

This is about taking care of the public, taking care of seniors; making sure that we reduce the wait times when they go into the emergency room; making sure we get rid of the backlog when it comes to surgeries. That’s the reason we’re doing it, Mr. Speaker.

We’re going to continue building on the success that we’ve seen by putting additions and building brand new hospitals in over 50 areas. There’s going to be 50 new hospitals, or with additions on top of that, spending over $40 billion.

There’s no government in the history—not of just Ontario, of Canada—that has put more money into the health care system than this government has.

I hope the member opposite, when she has an opportunity to vote for a billion-dollar investment in community care, will think carefully about what that actually means in our communities. It means 739,000 additional nursing visits. It means 157,000 nursing shift additional hours. It means 117,000 therapy visits, including physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech-language pathology. It means 2,118,000 hours of personal support workers—two million, Speaker. It means 236,000 other types of home care visits.

I absolutely agree that we can do better to make sure that people are safe in their homes, but the member opposite needs to think carefully about that when we vote on today’s budget.

Speaker, the Bradford community’s economic potential is incumbent upon the success of this road project’s expansion. This road project will not only benefit residents and travellers, it’s pretty much the key to their downtown success—and that is so crucial. The people of Bradford deserve to have certainty when it comes to delivering on this project.

We have seen the Liberal track record regarding road expansion like the Bradford Bypass: broken dreams and delayed potential.

Speaker, to the Minister of Transportation, can she tell us how this project will help spur economic growth in York–Simcoe and beyond?

But what did the Liberal government do over the years? They delayed and cancelled. In 1986, the then David Peterson Liberal government cancelled the proposed project. It was brought back once more only to be cancelled by the then Dalton McGuinty-Kathleen Wynne Liberal government.

Our community desperately needs this road expansion project to be completed. Speaker, to the Minister of Transportation: Can she please elaborate on the public support we have seen for getting this project done?

Ma question est pour le premier ministre. The government is attacking seniors’ fundamental right to consent, forcing them into long-term-care facilities far away from their circle of care, from their families, but they continue to ignore the failures of our home care system. Most alternate-level-of-care patients in our hospitals are not waiting for a long-term-care bed; they are waiting for home care. But the wait-lists have tripled under this Ford government.

Why has the government not made any improvements to our home care system that would allow frail, elderly people to stay in their homes safely and respectfully?

Speaker, 90% of elderly people want to age at home, not in a long-term-care home. This government could bring tens of thousands of home care workers back to the job they love by mandating home care providers to offer 70% permanent, full-time jobs—well-paid, with benefits, sick days and a pension plan. But this government is standing by while private, for-profit home care agencies fail more and more frail, elderly people each and every day. Why is that?

The final supplementary?

Minister of Education.

Thank you to the member from Newmarket–Aurora for the great question.

Speaker, I have spoken at length in this House about the urgent need to get this project done, to fill the infrastructure gap that is crippling drivers. But building the Bradford Bypass is so much more than just about relief from gridlock. This new link will provide Ontario with the economic boost that it needs.

We have the heart of agricultural production right here in our backyard. The Holland Marsh grows over 56% of the province’s share of root vegetables and is the second largest grower of carrots in North America. But if our transport trucks are trapped in gridlock, this prevents those goods from getting to market quickly, and it stops us from realizing Ontario’s economic potential.

Speaker, our government is the only government building towards a brighter future for our province and we will get the Bradford Bypass done.

But even as these calls have intensified over the years, successive Liberal governments just refused to listen. Our PC government, under the leadership of our Premier, is finally answering the call and delivering the Bradford Bypass.

Speaker, I am so pleased about the resounding support this project has received, including from York region’s chairman and CEO Wayne Emmerson, who has said, “Projects, like the Bradford Bypass, will make life easier for people by alleviating gridlock that already exists on our roads and highways.” And Bradford West Gwillimbury’s mayor, Rob Keffer, has applauded our government’s plan for this much-needed piece of infrastructure.

Speaker, make no mistake: Building the Bradford Bypass is a priority for our government and we are delivering.

We obviously believe these kids need to get back on track after two years of difficulty. We have a plan to help these kids catch up, and it starts with these kids being in school and staying in school without interruption.

Every three years, families in this province have to deal with their kids staying at home because of strikes imposed by unions, supported by the members opposite.

I think what is most regrettable is that when we have a positive plan for these kids to get back on track—on the eve of back-to-school, when all of us should be coming together to support children and their return—we have a doom-and-gloom scenario again by the New Democrats, undermining the confidence of families at a time when we should be united to keep kids in class.

Mr. Speaker, we have a plan in place, with over $600 million more for this September, $175 million for tutoring—there are 49,000 kids last week alone who benefited from that support—and a mental health lift and a jobs-in-focus priority that’s going to help these kids stay in school and get back on track.

The government House leader.

The next question.

The supplementary question.

Meegwetch. Good morning. Remarks in Oji-Cree.

My question is for the Premier. Twenty-seven First Nations in the Far North are air access only. These northern airports are lifelines to essential services: policing, groceries, mail, education, health care etc. They use gravel runways 3,500 feet in length, which may have been okay in the 1960s, but is definitely not okay today. What is the government doing to plan to extend and improve these gravel runways?

Speaker, imagine landing a six-ton aircraft at 160 kilometres per hour on a gravel runway that is less than a kilometre. Stop and think about that. We would never say it is safe to drive a car or a bus or a truck on a gravel road at 160 kilometres per hour, yet every day, planes are landing under these conditions. In Kingfisher Lake, my home community, the airport runway, which is gravel, was built in 1987. We are still using the same gravel runway.

What is this government’s plan to update these airports, to make them as safe as airports in the rest of Ontario?

Speaker, we all know that housing availability is at an all-time low across Ontario, with more than a million new residences required to address the shortage. The previous Liberal government didn’t have the initiative when it came to addressing supply constraints. It didn’t matter if it was high-rise, mid-rise, single-family, residential or missing middle, the entire process of building housing got mired in delay and wrapped in red tape.

This shortage can’t go on. There are young people in my riding—young hard-working people, people who are out building our economy—who are desperate to strike out on their own and start laying down their own roots, but they are stuck still living with their parents because the shortage has left them with limited options on where else to go.

What is the Associate Minister of Housing doing to keep us on track to building homes faster?

We’re so lucky to have all these new residents. They keep our economy buzzing, and they keep our province vibrant. But if we don’t buckle down and build now, we’re going to see more and more Ontarians under-housed.

Can the associate minister explain how our government is working to keep pace with the growth happening here in Ontario?

It’s actually a very important question because, as the member will know, the Premier and this government have put an emphasis on developing the north, because we understand how important the north is to the economic success of the entire province. That has not, of course, always been the case in the province of Ontario. For many, many years, the north was ignored.

He will also know, Mr. Speaker, how important it is when you consider all of the work that the Minister of Mines and the Minister of Northern Development are doing with respect to the Ring of Fire.

The member is correct. It’s not only about economic development in the north, but it is also about the communities that will follow the enormous development that is happening there. We are building hospitals in the north, long-term care in the north. We’re building roads in the north. This is all part of what happens when the Ring of Fire comes to the north, and the infrastructure in the north will have to be improved. It is all part of the emphasis that this Premier has put in place since he was elected back in 2018, and we will continue that work.

For far too long, people have thought of the north as a drag on the province of Ontario, but it was this Premier and this government who said that it’s absolutely the opposite, that there is a tremendous amount of wealth and resources in the north. There are skills in the north; we have seen it. The Minister of Mines has been a passionate advocate for the north and has brought jobs and opportunity to the north.

But the member is right. Infrastructure needs to be improved as we make these important investments which will bring hundreds of billions of dollars to the province of Ontario, thousands of jobs, enormous opportunities for all of the people in the north. The member is right, and that’s why we’re making investments not only in roads and bridges but, of course, airports will need to be part of this, because that’s what happens when you—

Having said that, we do contemplate working with hospitals to make space that is available in long-term-care homes available to our hospitals so that patients who need more complex care can have that care. That is something that has been working very well in communities across the province of Ontario. It works well in Markham–Stouffville. It has been working quite well in Ottawa. That is part of our changes to the health care system—our modernizing of the health care system.

We’ve said it a million times: We’re not just going to simply go with the status quo. It is not a good level of care when a person who wants to be in long-term care is sitting in a hospital. This has been the case in this province for years. I read you yesterday a report from the Auditor General, dating back to 2011, that highlighted how dangerous it was to have seniors waiting in hospitals when they should be in a long-term-care home. We’re acting on it, Mr. Speaker, and that is one of the ways we’re doing it.

I would like to thank the member for the question, and the member is absolutely right. Ontario is in a housing crisis due to lack of supply, because of inaction by the previous Liberal government.

That’s why the people of Ontario put their trust in this Premier and in this government, because they know that we are here to act, to build, and because they know that we will work with all levels of government to get shovels in the ground.

As part of our More Homes for Everyone plan, we’re cutting through red tape and getting homes built faster. Through the community infrastructure and housing accelerator, we’re providing municipalities with the tools they need to speed up the approval process. This will remove barriers, creating new housing projects all across the province.

And, Mr. Speaker, we’re just getting started. We’re putting together Ontario’s first-ever housing supply action plan implementation team to engage with municipalities, the federal government and the ministry. As the Associate Minister of Housing, I’m here to ensure that we will fulfill our commitment to the people of this province. And, Mr. Speaker, we will—

That’s precisely what this government is doing. In 2021, our government broke ground on a record number of homes being built, with more than 100,000 new homes in only 12 months. That was the highest level since 1987.

And we can’t stop now. To keep up with the pace of population growth, we’ve introduced A Place to Grow, our plan for the greater Golden Horseshoe, designed to increase housing supply, create jobs and build stronger communities. We brought forward the Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act, which will ensure Ontario’s fastest growing cities have the tools they need to get projects approved quicker and build more homes faster.

Under the previous Liberal government, too many Ontarians gave up on the dream of home ownership. This government will never give up on them. I will never give up on them.

Last week, Deana, a resident of Extendicare’s West End Villa, was forced into a move she didn’t want to make, thanks to the government’s Bill 7. Deana had temporarily ended up on a floor run by the Ottawa Hospital after they took over management of two floors at West End Villa. Warned that she was facing the possibility of being moved far from family, and hospital charges of up to $1,800 a day, Dina was forced to accept a room in this for-profit facility that she does not want to live in.

Why is the Premier insisting that no one will be coerced against their will when it is already happening to patients like Deana?

Speaker, Deana may be bedbound, but she has the same right to choose where to live that we all have. People don’t become disposable just because they’re elderly or they have a disability, but instead of being able to choose a new room or a new facility herself, she was told, “Take this one now or, next week, we can put you wherever we want or charge you whatever we want.” It’s this government’s bill that was used to coerce her decision. Will the Premier finally acknowledge the danger and stop Bill 7 from coming into force?

I think the member opposite is losing track of the fact that we have patients who are sitting in hospital beds who need to be better served in community. That can, in some cases, be in a long-term-care home, and I want to reinforce that Bill 7 ensures that the individual, even if they are moved into a long-term-care facility, will still have their priority list of five there, so that when a bed is available in the long-term-care facility of their choice, they will have that opportunity.

I have to remind people that hospitals are not homes. We need to ensure that people have the ability to live out their lives in community, in long-term-care homes, where there is social programming and where there are opportunities for enhancement, which is, of course, not what is available in hospitals.

Speaker, the member suggests that this is something new. But look, we have a report dating back to 2011 that was commissioned by the former Liberal government where their own commissioner begged them to do something about ALC and to work with long-term care in order to make that happen. This is dating back to 2011.

We then have a further report from the Auditor General in 2012 which highlighted the dangers of having our seniors in hospital who should be transitioned into long-term care. In addition to the potential for C. difficile, they talked about older patients’ decline in physical and mental abilities due to lack of activity as being one of the dangers.

That’s what this bill fixes. It allows us to work with long-term-care homes, it allows us to work with the patient who wants to become a resident, see what services are available in the homes around their choice, and if their choice is not available, they stay at the top of the priority list for their home of choice, but at the same time get better care in the home while they wait for that.

What we’re able to do is, we’re opening up 500 spaces for respite care. I’ve talked about how important that is, and I hope all members would agree that that’s important. We’re able to bring on 1,000 beds that have been set aside for isolation purposes—1,000 of the 2,000—and put them back into service, so that people can have access to those beds.

We’re able to work with long-term-care homes and the patients: “What is your preferred choice? Is it available? If it’s not, what homes in and around your preferred choice are available? Will that home work for you? If it doesn’t, what do we need to do to make it work for you? Do we need to put in kidney dialysis? Do we need behavioural supports for you, or specialized nursing for you?” This bill allows us to do that.

The regulations that I introduced a couple of days ago eliminate ward rooms. It reiterates the fact that there are no more ward rooms. We talked about the $60 million going forward. It’s better for patients, and we won’t stop—

The government is rushing the passing of Bill 7—not allowing the government to hear the concerns of Ontarians because there will be no public hearings. We understand that hospitals are under enormous pressure and that we need to find measures of support and relief, but moving patients out of ALC into inappropriate long-term-care facilities is displacing the issue, not solving it. The Premier himself said yesterday that patients deserve proper care, so why not invest in more home care?

The bill does not contain details regarding the implementation, and not knowing how far this government will go to free beds in hospitals really worries families.

My question is, how will the government ensure that patients’ rights to consent to proper care will be guaranteed?

Les gens sont inquiets, car le projet de loi ne donne aucune assurance que le consentement, la volonté et les besoins des patients et des familles seront respectés. Selon la loi, le patient doit être libre de consentir au traitement ou de le refuser. Le consentement doit être obtenu sans contrainte, ni coercition.

Est-ce que le ministre peut garantir aux Ontariens que la réglementation de mise en oeuvre du projet de loi 7 va respecter leur droit de consentir librement aux soins?

Supplementary question.

Next question.