Ma question est pour le premier ministre.

At hearings held by the NDP this week, front-line health care workers sounded the alarm about the Ford government’s Bill 7. The bill does nothing to address the human resources crisis in our health care system, but it will force frail seniors into private long-term-care homes miles away from their circle of care and their family.

This raises the question: Is the goal of the bill to help patients, or is it to force frail, elderly seniors into private, for-profit long-term-care homes that no one wants to live in?

Again to the Premier: Let’s be clear, 70 people died in this facility, over 100 staff got sick—soiled diapers, dehydration, cockroaches and flies everywhere.

Time and time again, the government has bent over backwards to support for-profit long-term care. They exempted them from legal liability, ignored their own commission’s call to eliminate profit in long-term care, and granted facilities like Orchard Villa licence renewals of 30 years, worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Now they are literally threatening seniors with massive fees if they refuse to move to these homes. Does this government truly believe that this is fair to seniors and their families—as 5,000 people died under your watch in the last four years?

I know the member opposite will vote against improvements in long-term care, because the member voted against the increases in long-term-care capacity in her own riding. Additional beds? The member voted against that.

What this legislation does specifically is ensure that, for somebody who is a patient in a hospital and about to be discharged, we’re able to match up an appropriate home. So exactly what the member is talking about is what the whole point of this bill is. Looking at the services a person needs if they’re going to be discharged from a hospital—does the long-term-care home have the services that patient needs to care for them properly, to care for them better? It also includes $5 million of support this year, right now, for behavioural services of Ontario. It includes $2.6 million of support for a partnership with Baycrest to have leading-edge behavioural services, and a $20-million local priorities fund to ensure that every home, frankly, has what the senior needs before they get there.

I assure this minister that I will vote against his bad bills each and every time—as I will Bill 7.

Not repealing Bill 124 and the push to move residents from ALC to long-term care are not going to solve the issue. PSWs are nervous and they’re fearful that they’re not able to provide the care necessary.

Judy goes on to tell me that she’s worried for her neighbours, other seniors, and their caregivers who visit daily to fill in the gaps. Her request was clear.

Premier, when will you admit the reality of long-term care and support and protect health care workers whom residents like Judy depend on?

Interjections.

Thank you very much, Speaker. This is my first opportunity to see you in that chair, so I want to offer you my congratulations. It’s great to see you there.

I’m pleased to rise to offer a few minutes of comments on this bill, this budget that is before us today, on behalf of the people I represent in London West.

This week and last week I have been raising stories of people from my riding who are experiencing first-hand what the crumbling of our health care system means for them. Our home care system is broken.

I raised the story of Robin Floyd; her son was discharged from surgery with a drainage tube. He had to wait nine days before he had a home care appointment.

I raised the story of Kim Fowler, who is exhausted trying to care for her mother, who is at home with dementia and COPD—cannot get admitted into long-term care, PSWs regularly don’t show up. Kim is frantic with worry about what will happen if she herself gets sick and cannot get the care that she needs and her mother deserves.

Today I raised the story of Jane Berges; her husband Don was discharged from hospital and admitted to a private sector long-term-care home that did not have the capacity to care for him properly. He fell out of the bed in the long-term-care home, was readmitted to hospital and tragically died.

I hear regularly from constituents who do not have access to a family physician, whose only recourse if they or a family member are sick is to use our overcrowded and stretched-thin emergency services.

And yet this budget that is before us today does nothing to address these pressing problems in our health care system. It does nothing to repeal Bill 124 and make sure that our front-line health care workers are compensated fairly, they get the wages that they deserve and the benefits that they surely have earned. It does nothing to deal with violence in health care workplace settings. It does nothing to fast-track internationally educated health professionals at the rate that they need to be fast-tracked.

I hear the government talk about their plan to stay open, as if that plan is to ensure that the health care system is going to be there when people need it. But one of the most important things that this government could do if they want to stay open, if they want our health care system to be there for Ontarians, is to legislate paid sick days. We heard today from Dr. Moore that Ontarians are supposed to stay home until their fever clears, until their symptoms have improved—60% of Ontarians don’t have access to paid sick days. They can’t stay home if it means losing a paycheque, if it means not being able to pay the rent or put groceries on the table. And we know that for racialized workers, for Indigenous workers—they are highly more likely not to have access to paid sick days.

The other issue that is of grave concern to people in London West with this budget is the absence of any appropriate measures to lift people out of poverty. The minister talks about the LIFT tax credit, but more than 200 advocacy organizations have told this government that what we need is to double social assistance rates. Instead, we see a paltry 5% increase for ODSP and nothing for Ontario Works. That ODSP increase will mean $58 more a month, which locks people into legislated poverty.

There’s no mention of rent control for the many London West constituents who don’t know that when they move into an apartment that was built after November 2018, there’s no rent control whatsoever. They are being hit with double-digit rent increases, unable to know how they’re going to afford to continue to live there.

There’s no mention of the climate crisis and the need for strong climate action. There are many, many gaps in this budget that make it impossible for me to support it if I am doing my job on behalf of the people of London West.