Last week, on the 31st Independence Day of Ukraine, I was honoured to join the Premier, the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport, and the Ukrainian ambassador, Yuliya Kovaliv, at the Lighthouse Artspace in Toronto for a special preview of the incredible new exhibit titled Ukraine: Land of the Brave, which will soon open as part of the Bloor West Village Ukrainian Festival, from September 15 to 18. I want to encourage all members to visit. Proceeds will support the purchase of medical and evacuation vehicles in Ukraine.

I want to thank the Mississauga companies, like Musket Transport and Cyclone Manufacturing, that have worked together to send humanitarian aid to Ukraine.

I also want to thank Ontarians, including many in my own community, who have welcomed Ukrainian refugees into their homes and into their communities—over 25,000 in the last six months. While I can’t name all of them here, I do want to thank the Sheridan Park Family Church for helping to collect donations of food, clothing and other supplies for refugee families now staying in local hotels. They will join a vibrant Ukrainian Canadian community in Mississauga that has an incredible, positive impact on Ontario—from athletes, like the Toronto Maple Leafs legend Johnny Bower to entrepreneurs like Igor Antonoff, a long-time resident of Port Credit. Ontarians will always welcome refugees, and our government will always ensure they have access to the resources and services they need.

Once again, happy independence day. Slava Ukraini.

This is to the Premier. The Centre for Social Justice estimates that almost half of the 16,000 Ontarians experiencing homelessness have a disability or mental illness. When this government was elected in 2018, 94 people experiencing homelessness died on the streets of Toronto. Last year, in 2021, the number was 216 Ontarians who died on the streets of Toronto experiencing homelessness. People cannot afford housing, and the government’s promise to raise the ODSP housing allowance to $522 a month does not provide rent for a room anywhere in this province.

So my question is, will this government double ODSP rates so that Ontarians with disabilities have a place to live, or will the number of people dying on the streets of Toronto and across this province experiencing homelessness continue to rise under this government’s watch?

Today, we’re joined by some Ontarians with disabilities. One of them, Leslie, requires a special diet. She says, “The broccoli that used to cost 99 cents is now $5.99.” She says, “It’s obvious that this government doesn’t care.” She says, “I might as well eat garbage and die because no one seems to care.”

My question is to the government. Stop the spin. Stop the rhetoric. People with disabilities in Ontario are dying under your watch. Will you double the ODSP rates so Ontarians with disabilities can live a decent life?

Speaker, through you to the honourable member: The minister was correct in the first answer. The social services relief fund has helped Ontarians during the pandemic in a very meaningful way. We made a decision when we first announced the program that we wanted to make it flexible. So, many service managers targeted the issues that Minister Fullerton spoke about: food insecurity and ensuring that those who were less fortunate had that opportunity.

Some of the tranches of this funding—I think we’re now up to five times that we’ve distributed these dollars—was not cost-shared by the federal government. We have a situation where, based on our core housing need, based on our need in the province of Ontario—that is far, far greater than any other province or territory in Canada—the federal government has shortchanged us some $490 million. We need that member and his party to support our call to the federal government for our fair share.

I just want to start off by stating that I’ll be sharing my time with the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Long-Term Care, the member for Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston.

I’m going to be very quick, Madam Speaker. What I want to do is thank the Minister of Long-Term Care and the hard-working parliamentary assistant for all of their hard work on behalf of the residents of Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill for looking at ways to constantly improve the quality of lives of Ontarians. That is a huge undertaking when you look at the state of our health care system that was left behind by the previous government. From day one, you have seen the Minister of Health and the Minister of Long-Term Care, under the leadership of Premier Ford, look at ways of improving our health care system and our long-term-care homes.

On behalf of the residents of Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill, thank you to the Minister of Long-Term Care and thank you to the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Long-Term Care, and I’ll turn the floor over to him, please.

I appreciate the opportunity to rise and talk a little bit about this debate about this bill today. There’s been a lot that has been said and a lot that leads me to believe that members have either chosen not to read the bill or have chosen to ignore what’s in the bill and make something out of the bill that is not actually in the bill.

Let’s just hit it head-on, Speaker. We’ve heard many of the members of the opposition talk about—I think the member for Windsor just said we were going to move somebody from Windsor to Timmins. Of course, that’s not in the bill. It’s nowhere in the bill.

And when you ask the members of the opposition, “Show me where in the bill it says that,” they say, “Well, you know, it’s in there. It’s just what’s going to happen. It’s what you’re going to do. You’re just going to do it.” Right?

So that’s what they say: “We’re going to move people 300 kilometres away. This bill says we’re going to move people 300 kilometres away.” The bill not only does not say 300 kilometres away; the bill does not even say a kilometre away. The bill says nothing with respect to where people will be asked to move or how that will happen, but the opposition gets up in the House—and you see the member for Niagara Falls; he’s laughing because he knows. He thinks that he’s got us on it. Look at the way the member for Niagara Falls is laughing, because he thinks, “Oh, look. I know what I said. I said it as though it was real.” He thinks he’s got us on that, right? That’s what the member for Niagara Falls does. He goes to the lowest. He goes to the personal. This is what happens. And he’s agreeing. The member for Niagara Falls is agreeing right now.

Interjection.

I’d ask a page to bring me a copy of the bill. One of the pages, if they could bring me a copy of the bill, I would appreciate that.

Interjection.

I’d ask one of the pages, if you could come here for me. I would like you to bring that to any member of the opposition—pick any one of them; in fact, why don’t we give it to the opposition House leader? If she wants to get up on a point of order, Madam Speaker, I’d gladly allow that member to get up on a point of order to tell me where in the bill it says that we will be sending people 300 kilometres away, because it won’t be in there. It won’t be in there, Madam Speaker. That’s part of the problem about this debate, isn’t it?

Then you get, “Well, they’re going to be charged $1,500 a day.” I would ask the page, if you would do me a favour—I should have gotten more than one copy—get me another copy of the bill.

Now, we had the new member for Don Valley East, who said, “Let’s not talk about something that’s been on the books since 1979.” Okay, let’s not talk about it, then. All right. Because it’s not in here either, right? It’s been on the books since 1979, but if I could have one of the pages come to me or if one of my colleagues would bring one of these bills over to any member of the opposition—in fact, the deputy leader of the opposition—and if they could find for me in the bill where it suggests that we’re going to be charging people $1,500 a day, I will again cede the floor and listen to the point of order where it says that.

Colleagues, you’ll agree with me that if it’s not in here, then that is not what we are talking about with this, right? So what would be the advantage of somebody to get up here and talk about things that are not in the bill? What would be the advantage? One thing and one thing only: to frighten people. And that, colleagues, is the essence of what the opposition is doing on this.

Now, the Liberals themselves—I’m going to spend a little time on the Liberals. They were in power from 2003 to 2018, 15 very long, difficult, challenging years for the people of the province of Ontario—very, very long. There were a number of Auditor General reports in that time that asked for the then Liberal government to do something about home care, to do something about palliative care, to do something about long-term care, to do something about hospital capacity, but in a subsequent report before they left, the Auditor General highlighted all of the things that they didn’t accomplish. Palliative care, long-term care, home care—not done.

So the new member for Don Valley East, who is a physician, who is a good member—I like him. He’s got a lot to bring to the table here, I think, in this House. He talks about the things—he says there ares a lot of things—I wrote it down. I’ve got to find it, Madam Speaker.

Oh, yes. He talked about things that he thinks aren’t being done. He says it sounds like a trend. He talked about home care, palliative care—it sounds like a trend. Well, we know what the trend was, right? It was 15 years of Liberals doing nothing. And what did we do? The day that we were elected, we began to invest in health care—and not silos in health care, but a health care system that is completely integrated.

Now, this is what they don’t like to talk about. They don’t like to talk about this. We said, “Look, the health care system isn’t working as it is. Once you’re in the system, people have good things to say about it, but getting into the system is a very difficult challenge.” So we brought in Ontario health teams to make it easier for people: a ribbon of care, a blanket of care so that you could have all of your needs met by one person. Whether you needed home care, long-term care, whether you need to be in the hospital or a specialist, you went to one place and you had all of that done for you. You didn’t have to worry about calling this person, that person and all the stress that goes along with it.

So we started the transition to Ontario health teams, and then we said, “What’s next?” Of course, what is next? Long-term care is next, Madam Speaker. Long-term care is next. That’s why we said we’re going to build 30,000 new long-term-care spaces. So the member says it’s a trend, and he’s right. The member for Don Valley East is actually right. It is a trend. Improving health care? Yes, it’s a trend for us to get it done. Improving long-term care? Yes, it’s a trend for us to get it done.

There’s a billion dollars for home care that is on the table, and we will have an opportunity to vote on a billion dollars for added home care very, very soon, but we know how they’re going to vote, right? They’ll vote against it because they voted against the throne speech earlier today which highlighted the investments that we’re making in health care. They already voted against it. This is what the NDP and the Liberals do.

I’m going to take it a bit further. The member for Don Valley East then again said, “Well, it’s $1,500. It’s coercion.” I’m sure his colleagues in the hospitals that he just worked at would be shocked to hear that they are somehow coercing patients to get a better quality of care. I don’t believe that’s the case, Madam Speaker. I don’t believe that the long-term-care discharge officers in the hospitals are going around rubbing their hands together and saying, “Oh, I could get 1,500 bucks from that person.” I don’t think that’s happening. And I don’t think doctors who are looking at patients and saying, “You no longer need to be in a hospital. It is not the best place for you”—I don’t think they’re saying “Oh, well, we’re going to get 1,500 bucks from this person.” I’ve never met a health care official who would say that. And I know that the member for Don Valley East would never, ever do that.

Let’s talk about it. Are there instances when people have been charged for being in a hospital? Absolutely. Of course there are. Are there instances when people should be charged for being in a hospital if they are alternate-level-of-care? Yes, there should be. If the coordinator has offered somebody their preferred home of choice and the person refuses to go to their number one choice, should there be a charge for that? I believe there should be, and I’ve never said anything differently than that. I believe that. And I think most Ontarians would agree with that.

By the same token, they talk about ALC being a current problem. ALC numbers in this province have gone up every single year. Every single year, the amount of people waiting in a hospital to be transferred or cared for in a different environment, in a better environment, has gone up. It has not been dependent on whether there’s a Bill 124. The numbers have gone up and up and up. The difference is that the opposition, the Liberals, when they were in government, did less and less and less.

The NDP dine off of the fact that the people of the province of Ontario have never given them the honour of serving in government but one time. They somehow absolve themselves of the responsibility, from 2011 and 2014—I believe it was 2011 to 2014—when they held the balance of power. For those watching at home who don’t understand what that means, it means that not enough Liberals at that time were elected to govern without the support of another party. We’re seeing the same thing in Ottawa. In 2011—friends, at that time, there were already Auditor General reports with respect to long-term care. There were already thousands of people sitting in hospital beds—alternative-level-of-care—who needed to be treated better somewhere else. Was it a priority for the NDP then? It was not a priority. Did they talk about building long-term-care homes then? They did not. Did they talk about paying PSWs more then? No. Did they talk about bringing them in? Did they talk about the things that the Minister of Colleges and Universities is doing—by adding new medical schools? No. Did they talk about adding beds to our health care system so that we could—they talk about, “Oh, we’ve got the lowest bed-to-person ratio and blah blah blah.” Did they do anything about it? Nothing. It wasn’t a priority for them during that time period. And I’m glad that the member for Niagara Falls agrees with me that they had the opportunity and it wasn’t done.

Interjection.