Good morning. Let us pray.

Prières.

Resuming the debate adjourned on August 10, 2022, on the motion for an address in reply to the speech of Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor at the opening of the session.

Good morning. I have about seven and a half minutes to complete my response to the throne speech of about two weeks ago. I just want to start by reflecting back. I won’t repeat what I said in the first part of my response to the throne speech, but I was noting when I was reviewing what I said last time that, in the moment, when this throne speech was first presented, the government was using that opportunity to reassure Ontarians about the state of our hospitals and the crisis in emergency rooms. They were saying things like, “High-urgency patients are finishing their emergency visits within target times,” which is not what we’re hearing, of course, from hospitals, and continue to hear. So we were commenting on the fact that the government was seeing this all through rose-coloured glasses.

In the meantime, since that throne speech was first presented, the government has used this opportunity to actually leverage what I think is a crisis in our emergency rooms and in health care as an opportunity to further privatize health care in this province and to push patients—vulnerable people—out of hospitals and into long-term-care facilities without their consent, which is another bill which we will be continuing to debate, although apparently which won’t be appearing before committee where anybody else in this province will have a chance to comment.

I wanted to start there because I think that’s important context, because what the government has gone from in the last few weeks is to take a situation in this province that is very, very dire, which is frightening for so many people in my community and across this province, and then use that and exploit that opportunity to, at the end of the day, pad the coffers of shareholders and exploit the opportunity to further privatize health care in this province.

One of the things I meant to do the last time I was responding to this is reflect on something that one of my constituents shared with me, because in the first question period of this government, of this session, I asked the Premier and the health minister about whether or not this was the kind of level of care that Ontarians could expect from this government. I had a constituent call me very distraught about the state of our health care system. They brought their son to SickKids after he broke his finger and faced a five-hour wait after being examined in a hallway. When they complained, the staff told them, “Call your MPP. We’re exhausted here.” And I suspect that people are calling. I think they’re calling the members opposite; they’re certainly calling us. The government, again, is using this opportunity to take a path toward privatization instead of doing what really needs to be done, which is addressing the staffing crisis.

The government could, right now—and I called for this yesterday in my comments on Bill 7—stop their low-wage policy, stop this arbitrary cap on health care workers and other public sector worker salaries and repeal Bill 124—easy. Just do it.

I want to talk for a few more minutes though and use the opportunity I have now to talk about another area which I think is very important to many Ontarians. When we talk about this government’s attempt to privatize public health care—and we’ve put this government on notice that we will not stand for that and the people of this province will not stand for that. But I wanted to also talk about another area which people in this province care very deeply about, which this government has opened up the door to privatization, and that is education.

Tacked on to this throne speech was the offer of another direct payment program. The finance minister and the education minister continue to have few-to-no details about what’s going to happen here, but when we do the math, it really works out to a payment directly to parents of about $50 per student or per family to cover private tutoring costs. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that I have received nothing but outrage from families about this as they face another September with classrooms packed to the rafters and kids who are struggling. What they want to see is actually what their taxes pay for, which is an investment in public education. They know that every dollar that you put into that public education system, you’re going to get so much more out of it, and kids are going to benefit so much more from that than from any dollar that’s put into a pocket, which is going to pay for, what—$50? You might get an hour of tutoring, if you’re lucky, and most tutoring programs are going to cost a lot more than that.

The other part of it that I think is really frustrating for families is it puts the onus on parents to go out and supplement their kids’ education because this government has let them down again. I’ve got to tell you, my youngest is now heading into university this year, and so I’m out of that part of the education system to some extent, but the years as a working parent that my partner and I spent trying to support our kids while juggling full-time jobs—this is the reality for so many families, and many more who struggle more and have to juggle multiple jobs. And then to have to think, “Okay, I put my child in this school. I know that their teachers and other education workers care for them and are looking out for them”—but my gosh, the added stress of having to seek out additional support for them, that’s something that only very few people have the privilege to do. It’s not just a money issue, it’s a time issue. It’s really difficult for so many families who are already struggling with that.

I wanted to say, Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, that the government thinks they can throw 70 bucks or 50 bucks at a family and that that’s going to cover up the growing class sizes or the growing mental health and anxiety issues our kids are experiencing. This stripped-down, bare-bones approach to education that denies our children the quality of education they could be getting in so many other countries, frankly, and putting our province and those families at a huge disadvantage is really, very—not just unfortunate; it’s really deeply disappointing.

I want to imagine for a moment a future where kids go to school hungry to learn, not hungry for food—it really shouldn’t be too much to ask—a future where kids go to school and get the supports they need; where teachers and other education workers aren’t exhausted; where you can have one educational assistant maybe per class. Imagine that, instead of one per school or two per school. Imagine a future like that.

But this is where we’re at with this government. They had a chance to lay out a plan with solutions to address the crises we face in education and health care and cost of living, and they chose not to. But it’s not too late to do the right thing. People aren’t looking for business as usual, because that has not been working for them. They want to see all of us here in this place get to work and deliver for them, so I invite the government to work with us, to listen to the voices of front-line workers, to invest in the public services and solutions that will help lift all Ontarians and chart a better, greener future for all of us.

I was listening to the member continuing her speech. I find it interesting. We all come to this place with good intentions to provide more hope and opportunity for the residents of Ontario, and I was hoping we would start on a new foot in the sense of, let’s invest more in home care, let’s invest more in our seniors, let’s really lift up Ontarians so they can have a better, brighter future. And time after time, I just find the opposition, instead of providing solutions and working with us to progress legislation, they just try to stall, and Ontarians can’t afford the stall. They need solutions now. They need beds now. They need care now. Students need to go to school now. We can’t afford the pause.

If you want to pause the world and get things done in 20 years, great. Maybe that’s why you haven’t formed government in many years.

But I just want to ask you: Here’s your opportunity to really move progress. Will you do it?

Thank you to the member from Barrie–Innisfil. I think maybe the member missed my speech because I would say that in fact what I was doing was proposing solutions, just not the solutions this government wants.

I have to say, on this point about making it happen faster: Well, first of all, the piece of legislation that we’ve seen since then, Bill 7, which takes away consent from seniors and families, that’s a piece of legislation—yes, this government wants it to move fast. They sure do. They don’t even want it to go to committee, where it will have public hearings, where they can hear from the families that will be impacted by this legislation, and that is shameful. And so I would say, no, I don’t want to see bad legislation sped through this place without an opportunity for debate.

Again, this government may have elected more members, but have a little humility and think about the people that you are here to serve. It isn’t just the people—what, the 41% of people or whatever. It is not just those people. You represent everybody in this province. Those families will be impacted and they deserve a say.

It’s a really good question, because I think about it now, and I mentioned it in my comments, that the work I had to do to help my children when they had struggles with learning—and they did, like many kids out there, and they are not even kids who struggle the way that some do. When I think about what advantages I had as somebody who could navigate a really complicated system to get them the supports that they need, so many families do not have the time or the ability, quite frankly, and the time and access to that information to be able to assist their kids.

Right now, our system is starved for support. Educational assistants are exhausted. Teachers are exhausted. ECEs are exhausted because they are overwhelmed. And this government chooses instead to give money that, frankly, most parents will never be able to take advantage of, even figuring out how to access those private tutoring services. It would be so much better spent in classrooms right now.

I want to use this opportunity in particular to thank my sister from the east coast of this country, Lana Payne, for her successful election as the national president of Unifor. We’re proud of you, sister. We know that you’re going to do a great job representing so many of the workers and this sector, and working together with us and with government to make sure that we provide more opportunities for the workers of this province and boost our economy at a time when the government people opposite are unfortunately driving down wages and increasing the cost of living.

I want to also thank the member for mentioning that privatization of health care was not something that this government ran on in the election. We know that. We suspected it; we told people that this was what was coming. But I’ll tell you one of the things that really upsets me right now is that when I talk to people in my community, they will tell you that they never expected—especially grandparents—that they would have a situation in this province—

I would say I would differ with the member on his characterization of the kinds of jobs this government is creating. What we’re not seeing in this province are decent wages, are decent jobs being created. What we’re seeing is a government that is freezing the wages of the hardest-working people in our province—

Good morning to everyone in the House.

I had a question just with respect to the speech from the throne. I know the Lieutenant Governor, when she spoke, spoke a little bit about some of the investments and the opportunities in the automotive sector, with $16 billion in investments in Ontario in manufacturing for electric vehicles as well as the battery plants right here in the province of Ontario, the opportunities that that presents and the challenges that we’ve overcome in the last four years when most of that sector was looking at leaving the province. Obviously, the government has created the right environment for business to flourish here, whether it be $7 billion in savings or red tape reductions.

I just want to get your perspective as the official opposition in terms of how you see the automotive sector growing and what we’ve done so far and what we can do maybe in the future.

Thanks for the presentation by my colleague. The Conservative government never ran on the privatization of health care. Not once was it discussed at the door, not once did the candidate that was in my area even come to debates. Privatization of health care, with their 18% of the vote in the province of Ontario, is an absolute disaster. Bill 124 is a disaster.

The new word that the PCs are using is “innovative.” That’s their new word. It’s not innovative to have seniors taken out of our hospitals without consent. It’s not innovative to have people call 911—they’re supposed to get an ambulance, and they end up getting a cab. So my question is very clear: Is it a myth that seniors moved without consent is not in the bill?

The member from Niagara Falls.

Question? The member from Mississauga–Malton.

Further debate?

Like most of us, we have three kids. I have seven grandkids, six of them old enough to be in school, and I would say that they are—they’re wonderful; they’re mine, but they are just like everybody else. Kids in school, 20% of them will excel no matter what, if they’re online; 20% of them will struggle no matter what. They need that extra support. And the 60% in the middle, well, they do good in math but not in history etc.

When you look at this and you look at the government’s plan to give every parent $50, how will the 20% of kids who need this extra support, who need the tutoring to be able to achieve their full potential—we know how to support them. We know how to make them thrive and succeed, but they need that extra help. How is the 50 bucks going to help the 20% of kids who need support in order to be able to achieve their full potential?

Thank you, Madam Speaker. It’s always great to see you in that chair. As you know, I’m proud that our government, through the speech from the throne, is making investments. We are investing in rebuilding Ontario’s economy by creating new jobs with bigger paycheques, supporting workers by raising the minimum wage and investing in skilled training and skilled workers. I actually had an opportunity to visit one with the Hammer Heads.

Through you, Madam Speaker, I want to ask the member opposite, do you support these kinds of investments that we are doing into the skilled trades strategy and into the youth as our leaders of the future?

Questions?

Good morning, members. It is my pleasure to offer my inaugural speech in this chamber. As I was preparing my remarks for this morning’s presentation, I realized that I don’t think I’ve ever spoken for 20 minutes straight, so this will be an adventure. At the same time, it’s something I clearly will have to get used to. Who knows? Sometime soon, I may think that 20 minutes is only a healthy introduction.

To be one of only 1,968 members to have stood in this chamber in all of the history of our great province of Ontario is still something I’m getting used to. I understand from the Clerk that I’m member number 1,937. I like that number. Seeing those names in the corridors of this beautiful building and knowing that we are continuing the important work that they undertook is a little overwhelming. As I hope to outline in this speech, though, I want to focus on the outcomes of government, as I know they did over the past 155 years.

I want to begin my remarks by thanking the people who were so supportive in helping me with my journey to this chamber, beginning with my dear wife, Margot Byers. Margot is here with us this morning. Margot and I will have been married for 36 years as of next month. She has been a caring and loving partner and fantastic mother of our three sons. She has also been tremendously supportive and patient as I’ve pursued elected office many times, as you will hear shortly. Thank you for everything, Margot.

Margot and I have been blessed with three fantastic sons: Adrian, Peter and Cameron, who are actively pursing careers in health care, finance and engineering. Thank you for being who you are. You make us proud every day.

I’m delighted that our fantastic and multi-talented daughter-in-law Teresa Silva-Byers is here as well. She and Adrian will have been married three years as of next month. Thank you, Teresa, and welcome.

My mother, Mary Byers, is here as well. In addition to being a great mother and a very accomplished author, she is a big reason why I am standing in this chamber today. You see, she and my father, David Byers, were very active in the PC association and campaigns for Len Reilly, who was the member for Eglinton–Lawrence, which is where we lived when I was young. In fact, when Mr. Reilly announced that he was not running and Roy McMurtry was thinking of running, Roy first asked my dad if he wanted to run. Roy would have supported my dad if he had wanted to run. But Dad was not interested, and Roy McMurtry not only became a member here, but of course had a distinguished career as Ontario’s Attorney General and Solicitor General. So thank you, Mom, for who you are and for lighting the spark that led me here today. Dad passed away 26 years ago, but I know he would have been pleased to see today happen, and I know he’s looking down from a gallery above.

Of course, I also want to thank the constituents of the great riding of Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound. I am very grateful for the confidence you showed in me as a new candidate in this past election. The voters sent me to Queen’s Park with a solid margin, and I will be forever grateful. I will work hard to earn your trust every day.

I want to recognize, as well, the incredible work of our dedicated campaign team. We are fortunate to have a history of campaign success in Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound, but we take nothing for granted and always work like we’re 500 votes behind. This time was no different. We all worked our tails off putting up signs, getting to the doors, raising funds and running the office. And in the end, we got it done. So I want to thank our core team, also known as the A Team, for all their dedication, support and friendship: Karen, Carol, Dave, Bill, Jo, Sharon, Don, Bob, Paul, Tyler, Ted and John—from the bottom of my heart, thank you.

And finally, there were so many friends who supported my campaign efforts, from former work colleagues, friends who used to live in the riding, and friends and supporters from past campaigns. Clay, Jim, Larry, Bill, Andrew, Michael and many more—thank you for your guidance and friendship.

I now want to acknowledge the person who represented Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound from 2011 to 2022, Mr. Bill Walker.

Interjection: Hear, hear.

Hear, hear.

Bill could not be here today, as he is active with his new job. We know he will be here again soon.

Bill grew up in the riding, in the booming metropolis of Hepworth. He was very active in sports, and I understand he developed his speaking ability while playing third base for various baseball teams in the riding.

Bill was successfully elected in 2011, 2014 and 2018. I was Bill’s campaign manager in 2018. He worked actively for our community during his two terms in opposition, including as critic for long-term care. But it was during his last mandate, when in government, where Bill was able to really deliver so fully for our Grey-Bruce community: three new schools, three daycare facilities, broadband investments throughout the riding, 958 new and upgraded long-term-care beds and, of course, the new hospital being built in Markdale. What a track record. That is getting it done.

These accomplishments would not have happened without Bill’s energy and dedication. You’ve heard of the Energizer bunny; we called him Energizer Billy to acknowledge how hard he worked every day. As members here know, Bill’s friendship and team approach defined how he operated all the time. Oh, and of course, saying over 127,000 words in this chamber in one year and having a drink—the Billy Walker—named after him were also an important part of his legacy.

Bill, thank you for all you’ve done for Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound and who you’ve been throughout your terms of service. You’ve served your community and your province with distinction.

I want to also take a moment to acknowledge Bill Murdoch, who represented Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound from 1990 to 2011. As members know, Bill passed away last week. He was an extraordinary and incredibly active member of the Grey-Bruce community and of this chamber. His name is carved on the walls five times. Bill’s legacy will long be remembered and cherished. Many current members served with Bill and have related fond memories of his work here at Queen’s Park. I know we will have an opportunity to formally remember Bill Murdoch in this House sometime soon, and I know we all look forward to that presentation. Thank you, Bill, for your great work and for being the great person you were.

Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound is a big and beautiful riding. From the southern communities of Hanover and Dundalk up to Tobermory, it is 175 kilometres from end to end. Our biggest centre is Owen Sound, at 21,600 people. It’s where my constituency office is located, which is run by Ontario’s best constituency team: Julie, Lisa and Karen. Thank you so much for your excellent support.

The economic base of the riding is heavily agricultural, with large beef, dairy and cash crop producers throughout. In addition, there’s a solid economic base, with a variety of excellent businesses, including Chapman’s ice cream, in Markdale, and Bruce Power, in our colleague Lisa Thompson’s riding, but with substantial operations in Owen Sound and in my riding. Both of these companies were excellent community stewards during COVID.

Of course, I could not discuss Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound without referring to the significance of the landscape, which we are so fortunate to enjoy. Whether it’s the harbour and islands around Tobermory, the beautiful grotto on Georgian Bay or the rugged beauty of the Beaver Valley, our home is a beautiful and scenic place to live. Please come and visit.

And, of course, we’d love to see you up in Wiarton on Groundhog Day, where you can see and hear Wiarton Willie make the bold prediction about when spring will come. The Premier has been to see Willie, and we sure hope he will be back. Trust me, watching fireworks at 7 a.m. on a cold winter morning is something you will not soon forget.

So why am I here now and what was the journey that got me here? Well, my journey started in grade 3. I was attending John Ross Robertson public school. I enjoyed math, playing the recorder and recess. Then our teacher, Miss Redmond, told us one day that there would be an election for mayor of the grade. So I ran for mayor of grade 3. Who does that? But it was fun. I had a neat slogan: “Want a New Pair of Plyers? Vote Byers for Mayor.” It rhymed very well. There were three candidates: me, another boy and a girl named Janet Cameron. Of course, I didn’t win, as the boys either voted for me or the other fellow, and all the girls voted for Janet. It was my first taste of vote-splitting. But I’d caught the political bug.

Next was four years later and my chance to be a page here in the Ontario Legislature. It was 1972—that’s right, 50 years ago. Now, I know some of you are saying, “Rick, you look so young. Are you sure it wasn’t 30 years ago?” Others are probably saying, “It’s probably more like 70 years.” Anyway, regardless of the time, my interest in being a page came from my parents’ active involvement in our local riding.

So in the spring of 1972, in the 29th Parliament, I was here. Bill Davis was Premier, Bob Nixon was Leader of the Opposition, and the cabinet included Bette Stephenson, Darcy McKeough and Frank Miller. It was a thrill. I loved it every day. I even got the seating plan signed by almost all the members. I still have it. The bug was getting more active.

The next step was a chance to work for Michael Wilson in Ottawa, when he was Minister of Finance. I worked on his staff in a tax policy role. It was a tough environment back then, with rising interest rates and challenging inflation—sound familiar? I was involved in four budgets and with many policy areas, including helping structure everybody’s favourite sales tax, the GST. But the lesson that stuck with me from that work was the willingness of a government to make the tough but right decisions, even if the politics were difficult. I saw that first-hand. It had a big impact.

My work with Mike Wilson triggered a career in finance with BMO Capital Markets and then the OMERS pension plan. I worked with governments on financial and infrastructure matters, and I enjoyed and appreciated seeing public policy’s perspective from the viewpoint of a commercial partner and the financial markets.

During this time, we were living in Oakville and raising our family there. And during this time, I ran in three elections: federally in 2000 and 2004, and provincially in 2007. I lost each time. Who does that? I must hold some record for most electoral losses in Oakville. Oh, well. I mention these political losses not to relive the memory of having gone through them, but because they have instilled two lessons which I hope to use to my benefit in my current role as a member.

The first lesson: While losing hurts, it makes finally winning even more cherished. More importantly, though, it motivates you to focus even more on serving your community. As I noted earlier, I will never take for granted the voters of Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound, who gave me this amazing opportunity to serve the community and the province—never.

Secondly, I believe it has made me focus more on the outcomes of government, rather than on the process. When I was asked by the party to be a candidate for this election, the previous losses made me think very hard about whether I should try again. Margot, of course, had the best perspective. She said, “If you don’t run, I won’t listen to you for one second on how good you might have been as a member”—sound advice. My decision to run ultimately focused on my desire to get things done for the community and for the province; in other words, the outcomes of government. That is certainly what I hope will guide my actions in this chamber.

That’s why I was so pleased to hear the major elements of the throne speech, as delivered by the Lieutenant Governor: building our health care system, building an economy with better jobs and bigger paycheques, building Ontario’s roads and transit infrastructure to keep Ontarians moving, building the workforce we need for the jobs of tomorrow, and building more homes that people can afford. These will all be important outcomes and results from our work together here in this chamber. They will deliver important results in our communities and for the province. For me, these goals reinforce why I’m so happy to have made this long journey to the Legislature of Ontario.

As I look at the clock, I see that miracles do happen and that I’m approaching my 20-minute limit. Further, as Jim Flaherty used to say, I’ve gone on for almost as long as it seems. So let me finish with a story that will put in further context how I plan to think about the challenge we will face in this 43rd Parliament. The story is set in Antarctica. You see, when I was leaving OMERS in mid-2015, I was approached by a great organization called the True Patriot Love Foundation about an upcoming expedition. True Patriot Love is a fantastic foundation that raises money to fund programs for injured Canadian veterans and their families. They had organized and run expeditions to various exciting places since their start-up in 2009. In fact, our colleague Peter Bethlenfalvy went on an expedition to the North Pole in 2014. He told me it was an incredible adventure.

True Patriot Love said there was a group of 10 veterans and 20 civilians going to Antarctica to climb Mount Vinson—at 16,050 feet, the highest peak on the continent—and would I like to come? Well, of course, anyone who gets asked that question says yes, right? Well, I did end up saying yes and went on this extraordinary adventure to Antarctica in January 2016.

We flew to Punta Arenas at the southern tip of South America, then took a military transport to Antarctica that landed safely on a glistening ice runway. We camped in the intense white of an Antarctica summer, which is a balmy minus 25 degrees most days, with sunlight 24 hours a day. We moved progressively day by day towards the summit opportunity.

To make it to the actual summit, though, we had to traverse a long, narrow ridge at the top of the mountain. It was about 60 metres long and about two metres wide. We were roped together in teams of five. About halfway along the ridge, our group paused. I had a chance to look around. To my left was 45-degree slope and a beautiful white mountainous scene. I remember thinking to myself, “This is fine. If I were to trip, my team could easily secure me.” All was good.

Then I looked down to my right. About 18 inches from my right boot, it was 1,000 feet pretty well straight down. “Yikes,” I said. “Byers, quit being a tourist and take your next step and make sure it’s the best step you can take.” So I did.

Happily, everyone in our group made it to the summit and safely back to camp. A few days later, we took the transport off the ice. What an adventure.

After our celebrations and storytelling though, and coming back safely, I had a chance to reflect on that moment many times: the goal of taking the best next step. I realized that those words can well apply beyond being on a mountain. In fact, it doesn’t matter whether you’re near the summit, at work, with your family or managing your next challenge, the goal should be to make sure you take the best next step.

I believe this thinking can also apply to our role in government. We all know we are facing significant challenges in so many areas. Whether it’s health care, housing, education, the economy or other issues, I believe it’s critical for us to think in terms of taking the next step and making sure it’s the best one we can take. That’s the thinking I hope to bring to my work here in the Legislature, and I know you will hold me to account for that approach.

So, colleagues, thank you for this opportunity to share some thoughts about my journey to this important place and the approach I hope to take. I look forward to working with you all and, together, taking the best next step.

Questions and answers?

I thank the member from Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound for your comments. I will agree with you on one thing: It is a beautiful area that you represent. I’ve got a friend in Oliphant and I drive through that area many, many times. It’s an absolutely gorgeous area.

Look, I’m going to use my question as an opportunity to make a personal plea to you. One of the issues that I’m most concerned about in my riding and across this province is homelessness. Homelessness is not just in downtown Toronto; it is across this province. I was just reading a report from Grey Bruce public health. They interviewed 77 residents who are experiencing homelessness: 38% of those have a physical disability, 67% have a mental illness.

One of the issues that we are facing is that ODSP rates do not provide enough funding for housing, so half of the people, the 16,000 people in this province who are experiencing homelessness, have either a physical or an intellectual disability or mental illness. And so the government’s proposing to increase ODSP rates by 5%, which would increase the housing allowance from $497 to $520. That’s not going to provide housing. People are going to be—

Response?

Welcome to the House. We are arriving at the same time to this place, and I’m sure you’re finding it as interesting as I am.

The most important action this government could take to address the health care crisis would be to repeal Bill 124 and remove the wage repression experienced by our existing health care workers. I have noticed that it seems that there are certain words that the members of the government are not allowed to utter.

So I have a two-part question. Are you allowed to say the words “Bill 124,” and if so, could you please address why this government will not repeal the bill or even mention it?

It’s rather interesting, because I was also going to ask you about the South East Grey Community Health Centre, a community health centre—like all of them—where care is based on needs, not on ability to pay; where people who have complex needs can be taken care of by an interdisciplinary team. Not only do they have nurse practitioners, they also have social workers and they have nutritionists, and they all work together so that they can make people as healthy as they can and support them if they have complex needs.

I was happy to just hear you say that you support the model. There are about 20 communities in Ontario that have been waiting for a long time for a community health centre or a satellite of a community health centre. Would you help advocate so that your government funds those communities who have been waiting such a long time for a community health centre?

I have no problem building better care for patients, but we have to look at the link that was made right at the beginning of the throne speech, that our health care system should be there to support people based on their needs, not on their ability to pay. It does not exist to keep our province open.

So why does this link bother me? Do I want our province to be open? Absolutely. Some 20% of the small businesses in Nickel Belt closed or went bankrupt during the pandemic. Those businesses did nothing wrong. Those businesses did what the government told them to do. They closed down when the government told them do so, but yet there was no support for them to stay open. There was no support for them to make it to the other side of the pandemic. And 20% of the small businesses in Nickel Belt do not exist anymore through no fault of their own—that is, people that don’t have jobs anymore; that is, families that need to find other ways to support themselves; that is, businesses that have been there for three generations that are not there anymore. That means, whether you go to Place Bonaventure Mall in Chelmsford, or to the Hanmer mall, there are more empty places in the malls than there are businesses still open. Do I want our province to stay open? Yes, absolutely. I don’t want to lose any more businesses in Nickel Belt.

But I also want our health care system to be true to Canadian values. When Tommy Douglas brought us medicare, he made it clear that care will be based on need, not on ability to pay. This is a value that defines us as Canadians. This is a value that really distinguishes us from our friends to the south. In Canada, you get the care you need based on your health needs, not on your ability to pay. Whether you are a two-year-old, newborn or a 102-year-old person, you will get the care you need. But all of this is under threat right now, Speaker.

When we look at Bill 7 that the government introduced, where you will take away the right to consent from frail, elderly people needing long-term care, so that you could free up beds so that our hospitals allow our businesses to stay open? This is to put the burden of all of this on the shoulders of frail, elderly people. How, as a society, could we even contemplate doing things like this?

Do I want our hospitals to be there? Yes, absolutely. Do I want them to have enough beds for the care that we need? Yes, absolutely. Have I had it up to here with hallway health care? Yes. My hospital, Health Sciences North, has been full at over 120% every single month for the last three years, except for that little wee part there during COVID where they were allowed to stop everything. They’re still full. I didn’t look at the stats this morning, but yesterday they were at 124%. What does that mean? That means that every single bed is full. That means that the hallways on four north and four east have at least four beds in all of them. That mean that there is no more shower room—we have patients in there. That means that this big, ugly room beside the morgue in the basement of the hospital has at least eight patients in there, in beds with no bathroom, no call bell. This is what hallway health care looks like in northern Ontario, and I don’t want any of this.

But there is so much that we could do. First, invest in home care. Our home care system was privatized by the last Conservative government that was there. Remember, it was called the Common Sense Revolution. The private sector was going to deliver home care faster, better, cheaper than the public system. Fast-forward to 2022: Would anybody say that our home care system does a good job? Absolutely not. It fails more people than it helps, every single day.

I will give you some examples. I don’t have the right to share her name, but we’ll call her by her initials. D.R. has concerns regarding home care services for her husband, Mr. R. She has been trying to reach her care coordinator for two weeks. She leaves voicemails, but does not receive a call back. She had heard from a PSW from Bayshore that the hours of care for her husband will be cut from four hours a day to two and a half hours a day, because there is a lack of staffing.

Mr. R. just returned home from the hospital two weeks ago. He is quadriplegic and spends most of his days in bed. She wants her husband to have proper care at home; so does he. But with two and a half hours—when you’re quadriplegic, it requires quite a bit of care and requires the skill to be able to provide that care. There are very good PSWs that have been working with that family for a long time, but now her hours of care are being cut, because there are not enough PSWs to do the job.

We all know how to fix this. We have been told over and over again. How do you fix the shortage of PSWs in our home care system? Let me repeat it, Speaker: The government can, today, pass the law that we would all agree to this morning, to make 70% of jobs in the home care system permanent, full-time, well-paid, with benefits, sick days, a pension plan and a workload that people can handle—problem solved.

There are tens of thousands of PSWs that are good at what they do, that care for the people, that have the knowledge and the skill to care for a quadriplegic patient in his home who wants to stay with his family in his community. But if they work for home care, if they work for Bayshore, none of them have a permanent job, none of them have a full-time job, none of them get paid enough to be able to pay the rent and feed their kids. So rather than taking a shift with Bayshore, they will take a shift with Home Depot, with Giant Tiger, because Giant Tiger will pay them more than what they get when they work hard as a PSW.

In my riding, I serve 33 small, local communities in northeastern Ontario. The communities are far apart. They come to me and they show me—every two weeks they submit their mileage. They could have 800 kilometres of mileage. They could have 600 kilometres of mileage for what they do in a two-week period of time. Do they get paid? How long do you figure it takes to travel 800 kilometres on the not-so-good roads we have in northern Ontario? It takes hours and hours. They don’t get paid for that travel time. They get 34 cents per kilometre. You can go to Foleyet. There is one gas station, and gas is at $2.29. How far do you figure that 34 cents brings you? Not very far.

It is better to go do a shift at Giant Tiger at minimum wage than it is to care for Mr. R., who is quadriplegic and who needs home care. This is wrong. Why can we not respect PSWs? Why can we not respect the fact that 90% of people want to stay home, that we have tens of thousands of PSWs who are good at what they do, who want to care for people, who went to school to do this, but who cannot pay their rent and feed their kids if they work as a PSW in home care? Why can we not change this today? It would make such a huge difference.

Mr. R. will end up in the hospital, he will end up being labelled ALC, and he will end up in a long-term-care home an hour’s drive away from his family.

I can give you the example of—again, I don’t have permission to share her name, but we’ll call her G.B. Mr. B.’s wife is the primary caregiver at home. She called for assistance. Her husband receives home care, and she receives respite. Her husband has dementia. He’s diagnosed with Alzheimer’s and is on dialysis three days a week for his kidneys. She takes care of him most of the time, but she was receiving respite hours on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays—three hours three days a week. She decided to take her husband on a little holiday. It was summer, COVID was finally lifted; let’s go for a little holiday. When she returned, she realized that her home care had been cancelled. She has not received any respite care since then. She spoke to her care coordinator at the Home and Community Care Support Services and she is saying that there are not enough PSWs to reinstate her respite care.

She spoke to a PSW at Canadian Shield and she told her that there are a lot of PSWs available, but, again, they need to pay the rent and feed their kids and they will make more money working at Giant Tiger, Home Depot or Tim Hortons than they will—she is very disappointed. Nobody told her that if she was to take her husband on a little holiday, they were going to lose their respite care.

I have Mrs. C.K.: Mrs. K. reached out to our office with her concerns. She says that her care coordinator from Home and Community Care Support Services North East told her that she had too many home care hours and they were going to make some cuts because the guidelines had been changed. Mr. K. had been receiving home care since 2019.

She says that she received one hour in the morning and half an hour at night, which equalled 10 and a half hours per week. It’s for her, not for her husband. They help her dress, make her bed, bathe her, change her commode, wash her hair in the sink during the hours that they are there in the morning, and the half an hour at night is to change her commode and get her ready for bed. Now, she has one hour per day. The half hour has been cut off at night. All of this, she is told, is because of budget cuts and her care will be down to a minimum.

We all know what will happen, Speaker. This woman won’t be able to stay at home. Everybody needs to be washed. Everybody needs to sleep in their bed. You cannot sleep in a wheelchair; you will end up with a pressure ulcer on your butt, or anywhere else, and then you end up in the hospital. And then the doctor will say it’s not safe for you to go back home, and then you are labelled ALC. Then, apparently, you take up a bed in our hospital and you are not keeping our province open, because this is how this government looks at that.

I have another failure of home care here: Mrs. D. lives in Hanmer. Her husband broke his neck several years ago and he has slowly deteriorated. She sold their home and moved to something that would be more accessible to him, but he has been in the hospital following a fall. She wants to bring him back home. She moved to a place that will be easier for him. But there is no home care. He needs a lift to get out of bed and into his wheelchair to get around. He was sent to rehab for three months. Everybody feels that he would be ready to go back home, and there is no home care.

She has made an inquiry of her own. She found home care. She went and bought the equipment. She moved their home into a place that will be wheelchair-accessible so that her husband could come back home. But there is no PSW to provide the home care that her husband needs.

The hospital and the rehab says that with one hour a day, she would probably be able to manage having him at home. Think about this. For the sake of one hour with a PSW—most of them are paid $18 an hour—for the sake of the government investing $18 a day into this family—he is in the hospital. He has been labeled ALC in the hospital. It costs the taxpayers $500, $600 a day to keep him there. He will be transferred to a long-term-care home where the government will be investing about $187 a day—for the sake of $18 for one hour with a PSW to bring this man back home.

I can talk about Mrs. M.R. Mrs. M.R. lives in Whitefish in my riding. She is on home and community care support services and has a plan of care for a PSW to go to her house every day for an hour to help her dress, put her braces on etc. When she was discharged from the hospital, the care went pretty good for many years. Now, the PSWs, day after day, don’t show up. If there’s nobody to help her, then she is at very high risk of a fall because she needs help to put her leg braces on. When she talked to the scheduler at Bayshore, the scheduler at Bayshore told her that it will get worse before it gets better. This patient is getting worse. She has cancer. She is partially blind. She needs home care. Again, for the sake of one hour a day of a PSW coming to help, Mrs. M.R., who lives in Whitefish in my riding, is going to end up in the hospital, and she’s going to end up being labelled an ALC patient. She’s going to end up in a nursing home for the sake of one hour of a PSW a day.

I could keep going on and on, but I see that I have very little time left.

To keep our hospitals open, certainly, fix our home care system. It is very economical to keep people in their own home. This is what people want. The best quality of life is to be in your own home, with the people you love, in the neighbourhood you know, with the people who support you, with your circle of care. And yet, we have a privatized home care system that does not respect their PSWs, that cannot recruit and retain a stable workforce, which means that for the one hour a day of a PSW—I’ve given you three or four examples. I have pages and pages of examples all from my riding, but in every single one of our ridings it is the same story. We could keep all of those people safely at home if we fix our home care system rather than taking away their right to consent.

We could also do a whole lot to help our hospitals if we were to invest in community mental health. When we see where the investments are being made, in more in-patient mental health rehab—unfortunately, 90% of them who go to those beds will relapse because they don’t have the support in their community. We have billions of dollars coming from the federal government. Invest them into supporting people with mental health issues and addictions in their own homes so that they will not end up in the ER, in our hospitals.

There is lots that could be done to help make sure that our hospital system, our safety net in our health care system, is there when we need it. But taking away the right of elderly people to consent to their assessment for long-term care and taking away the right of frail, elderly people to consent to sharing their personal information and having people access their personal health information is not something in line with the values of Ontarians. We should run away from this and fix the part of our health care system that would keep our hospitals free.

I thank the member for the question, and I share your views and concerns about homelessness. We do see it in our riding, whether it’s Owen Sound, Hanover, there are pockets of homelessness. I know it’s being worked on well—in fact, two responses that have been very significant. One, there was a huge investment through Grey Bruce Health Services of about $6 million recently for increased mental health support and facilities at the Owen Sound hospital, so we sure look towards using those resources to help.

And on ODSP, I understand the views. I would say, the increase of 5% is significant and linking it to inflation, but also, so many other programs apply that support those in need. But we share the concern with you about homelessness.

Look, on housing, we share the view that more needs to be done. We see that. Listen, I know it personally. I’ve got three sons who are looking for spots for sale. We know it directly. That’s why I’m so pleased about the work that our government is doing and the commitment to build 150,000 new homes a year. And 100,000, the highest in 30 years, have been built already this past year.

I want to work to get it done. This is one of the important outcomes of government I talked about. I look forward to working with members in the House and our members in our local community in Grey county and getting it done. Thank you for your question. I agree with your approach.

What you’ve got from our side is a very tangible plan for huge investment in health care facilities over the next decade, long-term care and on and on. I understand the significant support that has been delivered through the health care system in the last several years: over 10,000 new health care workers hired since March 2020 and other supports that have been given.

I know I’m aware of the questions in the community. I have heard them. We’ll work to make sure there are proper resources to support our patients and health care systems in the province and in my riding.

I will mention the South East Grey Community Health Centre, because it’s a great point that you’ve mentioned. Here is a community health centre that is staffed significantly by nurse practitioners and some visiting doctors, which provides fantastic care in the community. I love that model. One of the things that I want to get done is that they’re looking to build a new facility in Dundalk—of course, the source of the famous bee-swallowing incident recently. We want to get a new facility for the South East Grey Community Health Centre down there and get it done to continue to expand health care services in our community.

I think it’s very practical, and as you said, it’s not just health care, all sorts of community programs apply. It’s an important part of our primary care model, and I think that’s the other element that we’ve been talking a lot about: hospitals, but our primary care infrastructure. It’s also important that we build out and coordinate and support other elements of health care, so I look forward to supporting the community health centre model.

First of all, I want to congratulate PA Byers and Margot for the election. It’s always a family affair. By the way, my family’s favourite place is Tobermory, so I’m looking forward to seeing you there.

I was looking at your past, and I saw that you’ve been actively giving back to the community as vice-chair of the South East Grey Community Health Centre, the Royal Canadian Legion, Christ Church Markdale. It’s incredible when you see the members coming and giving back to the community. This is what we are here doing.

My question to the member from Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound would be, what is some of the legacy work that you want to do for your riding going forward as a member of provincial Parliament?

Thank you, Madam Speaker. You are looking great in the chair.

And thank you to my colleague from Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound. It is a beautiful riding. You talk about your landscape and the water and the green—always, I miss your riding. Thank you for your election. Thank you for bringing your wonderful family to the chamber, and congratulations on your election.

My colleague comes from the municipal world. He understands the housing crisis is not only facing Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound, but Ontario as a whole. Tell me about the throne speech—elaborate on that—bringing hope and dreams to the next generation of Canadians of having a home, having a roof over their heads. Please elaborate on that.