Because it is the law in the province of Ontario, and became the law through the Fixing Long-Term Care Act. Nobody can be moved into a home that does not have the resources to handle the person that is being transferred in. That is the whole point of this bill. I’m not sure how the member could actually get up in her place and ask this question, and then say that she’s not in support of the bill that we are bringing forward.

But I’ll go even further: I challenge the member to lay on the table what the Liberals did with respect to long-term care. Did they get us to four hours? No. Did they build new homes? No. Did they increase the food budget? No. When it comes to health care, they failed not only seniors in this province, they failed so many people in the province of Ontario. We’re reversing that. We are making historic investments because we know how important health care is to ensuring a strong, stable government that can meet the needs of Ontarians for decades to come, for the economy and education. We’re getting it done because we know how—

I’d like to thank the member for the question.

This bill is about long-term care. Twenty-five years ago, we started an experiment in long-term care here in this province, bringing in for-profit long-term care, and successive governments, of which I was a part, continued it. I have to say, during the pandemic we all saw the results of that experiment—not good results. It’s not a path we should have gone down. It doesn’t work. You can’t serve two masters. You can’t pay dividends and care for people.

The homes that generally aren’t on people’s list of choices are the for-profit homes. The lists for non-profit homes are very long.

What this bill is going to do right now is, it’s going to send people where they don’t want to go. It’s not right. This is kind of a continuation of that legacy.

I think we all care about seniors here—people in our families, people in other people’s families. But I kind of feel like I’m in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. There’s a bill that says you can move people without their consent, and the government continually says, “You can’t do that”—but it’s in the bill.

Then, nobody says how far people are going to move—“Well, just leave that for regulations. We’ll find out later.” No one says anything about how it’s going to cost you more money if you decide not to go.

I think it would be easier to have a reasonable, positive debate if we could actually debate, if we could actually put it to committee, if we could actually let people come and tell us what was going to happen. That’s why we have committees—because we don’t all work in that sector; we don’t all know that sector. But I’ve been doing this for 20 years in a community office. I know what happens when couples get separated.

What I’m saying is, this bill is going to create more problems. It’s going to hurt more than it helps.

I think we answered the question about how long—this is being put out as a temporary measure, but it’s permanent. There’s no sunset clause in here.

Interjections.

I’m sorry I missed the member’s press conference, but I think Ontarians deserve these answers. That’s why we should be debating it and putting it to committee. The government should be forthright about it. It’s obviously something that they’re proud of.

I think that your question is spot-on.

What I would say, respectfully, is, Bill 124 has done more damage to our health care human resources—

Interjections.

Interjections.

Respectfully, if you don’t have a nurse, it’s pretty hard to get someone off a gurney into a bed. But I would also say to the person who’s in that bed, who’s 80 or 90, who has a spouse—the farther you move that person away, the harder it is for that spouse. It’s about their quality of life. Just because they’re old doesn’t mean they don’t have rights. Just because they’re old doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a quality of life. So that shouldn’t happen.

I would, respectfully, submit that actually repealing Bill 124 about 18 months ago would have made a difference in this province, and actually respecting nurses and front-line health care workers, and not saying wonderful things and then not following it up with action.

Do you know what? When they engrave this Ford government in granite, it is going to say, “Here lies the Ford government—I need a plan in two weeks.”

I want to thank the member for his great remarks. I almost heard an endorsement of both managing the economy and the environment, something this government has done, steadfast, all along, whether it’s investing in our critical minerals strategy, whether it’s building electric vehicles.

But also, about affordability, we have the Minister of Energy here, who helped stabilize our electricity rates here in Ontario. As we know, when the previous government was here, they signed a terrible deal for electricity rates for all Ontarians. This member must be quite aware of it, because he must hear it from his constituents.

I want him to speak to how we can really manage our great, clean electricity grid; it’s the cleanest in North America. But in addition to that, it’s about affordability, which is exactly what our throne speech outlined. If we can produce more electric vehicles here, we can create high-paying jobs. And do you know what high-paying jobs give to people? An affordable living.

I’m asking the member opposite if he does support our great strategy that’s going to create high-paying jobs and really lift people up in this province.

I think the member from Guelph would agree with the following analogy. This government has been in power for the last four years, and prior to them, we’ve seen the boondoggle of what the Liberals had done to our energy system. We’ve seen when the Conservative government was actually sitting here fighting with the Liberal government in regard to, “No, you should privatize hydro this way.” And they’re saying, “No, no, you should privatize it this way.” They disagreed on how to privatize it, but they agreed on the privatization.

The result of that was the deregulation and the high cost of hydro. I’ve got a couple of bills, and I’ll be talking to it hopefully today, over my opportunity to bring in the statements. But here’s a bill from someone where their consumption—their actual usage was $1,600. Their actual bill, after delivery charges are added to this, was $3,800. Is that saving dollars for Ontarians? Is that bringing the hydro cost across this province in line with the actualities of what people are facing when they’re opening up their hydro bills? Everybody is opening up their hydro bills and they’re, “No, no, no.” But those are the facts that are happening.

Has this government, in your knowledge—have they actually brought down the price of hydro?

Thank you very much for your remarks. I couldn’t help but really feel that as you were talking about your constituents, they really could have been my constituents. Food bank usage in Toronto Centre for new users has gone up by 60%. We’re seeing students now living in youth shelters because there’s no adequate housing.

With respect to what’s happening within the throne speech and what’s contained in the throne speech: Clearly, there isn’t enough to meet the needs of Ontarians today, but what is actually missing in there? You’ve identified some things. But what are the solutions, and how can we get there with the support of this government? Do you think they would be able to allow us to make those amendments and work collaboratively so we can end the lineups at the food banks, so we can put an end to poverty, so we can put an end to homelessness once and for all?