Great segue, because my next line is, “And this is why I will be coming back to the bill,” which ties it all in—amazing; it’s incredible.

If anyone, just out of curiosity, was wondering how the story of Mr. Rinaldi ended, he finished a distant third in the 2018 election, losing his seat to the current Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. To my knowledge, that minister hasn’t asked anybody to take it outside yet here in the Legislature, but hey, anything can happen.

Let’s track it back a little bit to why we’re here today. The proposed package of legislative amendments that have been posted on the Environmental Registry is open to the public until April 16, 2023, so I encourage everybody to go ahead and check that out. Realistically, Ontario has a responsibility to support the development of the critical minerals supply chain. This is a simple fact as industries continue to change as we move forward into the 21st century. Whether it’s building EV batteries or components for semiconductors, the world will need more critical minerals. Ontario has such an important role to play in mining, and I’m glad our government is supporting the sector through this bill.

This is a stark contrast, as I had mentioned earlier, in comparison to the former Liberal government. The Ring of Fire was mentioned in every speech from the throne from 2010 to 2017, and in most budgets. They didn’t even bother to mention it in their 2018 speech from the throne, which was, quite frankly, their speech on the way out the door.

I will quote from a few of these:

“Your government is fully committed to working with northerners, Aboriginal communities and mining partners to fully realize the Ring of Fire’s potential.” That quote was from the throne speech on March 8, 2010.

I’ll read another one: “Your government remains fully committed to turning the vast, untapped potential of the Ring of Fire into good, leading-edge northern jobs.” That was from November 22, 2011.

Another one: “A commitment of $1 billion to develop strategic transportation infrastructure in the Ring of Fire and unlock the north’s economic growth and jobs potential”—that was from the budget of the summer of 2014.

As I looked over the years of quotes, I noticed that the promises got bigger but the actions did not. To put it another way, they failed when concerning the Ring of Fire—and I’ve got a little bit of Johnny Cash that we might work in here, but I think maybe just for the sake of time, we’ll skip the singing today.

Realistically, when you go and look through these quotes, by 2016, they had really stopped pretending to care. This comes from a 2016 TVO article on the budget:

“No movement on the Ring of Fire.

“The government made no new commitments on the Ring of Fire, despite reports of a mining sector that’s anxious about the slow pace of work.” That doesn’t sound fully committed to me.

The business world took notice of their fear, of the former Liberal government’s lack of commitment.

When we look at what the Ontario Chamber of Commerce has said in relation to these, we’ll say, lacklustre benchmarks that the previous government had hit, the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport was welcoming the Ontario chamber—they were just here yesterday, I believe, colleagues. Was it yesterday? It was really great to hear them talk a lot about what this government has done right.

We’ve got a very, very positive relationship moving forward with the Ontario chamber, but this was not the case with the Liberals back in 2015. That year, the chamber released its report, Where Are We Now? A Report Card on the Ring of Fire. I just want to highlight a few pieces that came from that. The truly sad thing about these failing grades was that the chamber wanted to work with the government. So why did they give the government of the time a failing report card? According to a CBC article from the time—and I’ll just read through it a little bit—the Ontario Chamber of Commerce executives said that they wanted to talk about projects like the Ring of Fire, but government officials just weren’t returning phone calls. Quite frankly, colleagues, that’s shameful.

Members of this House will know I have five children and I get to see a lot of report cards. So let’s go over the Liberals’ report card for a little bit here. The first grade was for accelerating development of the Ring of Fire. Colleagues, can anyone guess what the grade for whether or not they were able to expedite these types of things was?

The second grade—it does get a little bit better, but we don’t really get above a C here, so—

Interjection.

So what was the grade for following through on the regional framework agreement between the Chiefs of Matawa member First Nations and the government of Ontario? They got a C on this one, so we’re getting a little bit better here.

The next grade was for addressing the physical infrastructure deficit of the Ring of Fire: C-minus.

Oh, it gets better: on capturing more value-added processes in Ontario, a D.

Finally, on addressing the barriers that impede the development of the Ring of Fire and the competitiveness of the mining sector, they got another C.

With report cards like that, it’s no wonder that Ontarians grounded them in 2018. They had a lot of failing grades, so that grounding may last a little while. I’d love for some of the members of the Liberal opposition to stand up and refute me on this in questions and comments, but we’ll see what happens. I’m looking forward to it.

With that, I’m proud to say that our government has given the mining industry—and the opportunity for future generations—the respect that they deserve. I think that’s very important. The Liberals would not answer the call on this file, but we will.

Earlier this week, our government made an announcement at the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada—or PDAC—annual convention in Toronto. We announced that our government has approved the terms of reference for the northern road link, and this is very important. The northern road link will connect First Nations communities to the Ontario highway network and the critical mineral deposits that are contained within the Ring of Fire. This will help secure the supply chain for electric vehicle manufacturing here in Ontario. Those at the announcement included the Minister of Mines; the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks; the Minister of Northern Development; the Minister of Indigenous Affairs; and, of course, the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade. Really, I think that just goes to show how serious we are in this government about seeing these things, which the Liberals failed for so many years on, actually come to fruition. In a Liberal government, ministers wouldn’t even pick up the phone, whereas we’re sending four or five ministers to PDAC to make sure that we are engaging with the sector as best we can. We know how critical it is to support this industry, especially when we move into the future. The mining industry in Ontario is responsible for—this is a pretty staggering number—over 75,000 jobs across the province. It produces $11.1 billion worth of minerals that contribute approximately $13 billion to Ontario’s now—ready for this, colleagues?—for the first time in history, trillion-dollar economy.

The Ontario government released its Critical Minerals Strategy last year—a five-year plan that includes addressing regulatory challenges to get mines built more efficiently. And the Building More Mines Act that we’re here to speak about today is an important part of that plan. In November, our government launched the Critical Minerals Innovation Fund as part of that Critical Minerals Strategy. We are supporting the critical minerals sector by funding research, development and commercialization projects to stimulate investments in Ontario’s critical minerals supply chain and protect the province’s economic interests—some tongue twisters in there. Holy smokes.

As I kind of digress here a little bit—these funds really are very important in positioning Ontario as a global leader in supplying critical minerals to grow the economy. These create good-paying jobs and connect resources for future clean technology that I think we can all agree is going to be very important as we move forward. These are such things as electric or hybrid vehicles that we will be manufacturing here in the province of Ontario.

The goals of the fund are to help increase exploration, development, mining production and processing of critical minerals within the province to enhance collaboration between industry, post-secondary institutions, start-ups, research and development firms. As part of this week’s event at PDAC, the Minister of Mines announced the first recipients of that fund.

As I begin to wrap up my remarks here today, I really want to hammer home the magnitude of mining opportunities in Ontario.

The Ring of Fire region has long-term potential to produce chromite, cobalt, nickel, copper and platinum. Critical minerals like these play a role in the future of low- and zero-emission vehicles and transportation, and they help support the transition to a cleaner, sustainable global economy. We are able to mine, refine and manufacture here in Ontario, here in Canada, where we have some of the most stringent regulations in the world—where we’re not relying on countries like China or Russia to be mining, refining and then shipping, exporting these into the areas where they’re actually manufactured.

The world will continue to increase demand for these minerals as we move forward through the 21st century. We have a chance to lead the way with world-class environmental standards, like I mentioned. These are opportunities that Ontario cannot afford to lose. After years of missing out under the Liberals, we are finally back on track.

As we continue our work to land historic investment in new technologies, such as battery manufacturing, we need to support mining in the province as well. So I commend the Minister of Mines for his steady commitment.

As I said, I am very, very proud to support this bill. I cannot wait to see what it’s going to do for communities in northern Ontario, like the community that I came from, that I left when I was in my 20s, just like many other people in my age bracket who could not find a quality job. Too many jobs were chased out of the province, whether it be through manufacturing, whether it be through the forestry sector or through the mining sector, under the previous Liberal government. I am glad to see this progressive Conservative government stand up for not only the people of Ontario, but more importantly, the people of northern Ontario.

Ontario is blessed with some of the most mineral-rich deposits in the world, including critical minerals like nickel, cobalt and lithium used in manufacturing batteries for electric vehicles, smart phones, pharmaceuticals and advanced manufacturing technologies.

My question for my colleague is, what will this bill, Bill 71, do for northern and Indigenous communities?

It’s an honour to rise to participate in second reading of Bill 71.

I want to be very clear to everyone watching today: Mining is going to play a critical role in Ontario having a competitive advantage in the fast-growing climate economy. We need critical minerals that are mined in a sustainable, ethical way. We need to have a mining-to-manufacturing supply chain not only to build electric vehicles but to also build renewable energy generation, battery storage, micro-grids, electrified public transit. Critical minerals are going to play a vital role, so I want to say to the government, let’s not be hostile to renewable energy anymore. Let’s have this Critical Minerals Strategy be a part of building low-cost renewable energy and resilient grids.

I also want to say to government—and I said this to the Liberals when they were in power—if we’re going to avoid delays in developing the Ring of Fire, then two key critical things need to happen. One is a comprehensive, sustainable land use planning system in place ahead of time to minimize environmental damage and to ensure that we mine in a both fiscally and environmentally sustainable way; and, two, that we work with Indigenous communities to ensure that there’s free, informed and prior consent in the development of mining projects and that we work with those mining companies—and I have met with them—who want to have Indigenous equity ownership as part of mining development in the north.

We can do this. Sudbury’s already leading the way globally in developing sustainable mining practices, especially if you look at places like the mining innovation centre in Sudbury—

One is the phased financial assurances plan that’s in the bill. There can be very good reasons why you would phase that in, but we need to do it in a way that protects Ontario taxpayers. The 2015 Auditor General report says there’s $3.1 billion worth of liabilities of abandoned mines to the people of Ontario. Let’s avoid that in this legislation, moving forward, to protect taxpayers.

And the second one is through the deferred closure plans. Again, I can see the rationale to have flexibility in closure plans, but we need to ensure that those are approved by an independent third party, not by mining companies themselves, to avoid a conflict of interest. So let’s fix that at committee, Speaker.

We need to ensure that the financial assurances system protects the taxpayers of Ontario. According to the Auditor General, we have $3.1 billion in abandoned mining liability; some estimate that’s as high as $7.6 billion now. So we need to ensure that the system is set up in a way to protect the people of Ontario.

And secondly, deferring closure plans: I can understand why we would need flexibility there, but the approval should be done by an independent third party, not by the mining companies themselves.

So I would ask for those changes at committee.

Just a quick question for my friend from Guelph—I have spoken to him about this personally. I so appreciate how supportive he is about our Critical Minerals Strategy and how we have to get this from Ontario because we can do this cleanly and greenly here. He knows and was actually educating me on how so many of the critical minerals that go into our batteries come through child labour and through horrible practices and environmental devastation in other parts of the world.

I do apologize, because I wasn’t listening as intently as I would like to, but I did want to ask him—and I think I heard that—will he be supporting this bill at second reading so that we can get it into committee and look at some of those things?

Thank you. Waste product in these—ponds? Pools? Tailing ponds? And it turns out that, because technology being what it had been before at the closure of previous mines, our technology is different now, so they could go back to those tailing ponds and basically scoop up the minerals that are in there and take a second pass at them with newer technologies. And there’s interest in that because while we’re developing—if it’s the Ring of Fire, other opportunities—there are minerals to be had if we can take that second pass at those ponds.

But, Speaker—and again, this is the stuff that gets me with this particular government—there was a bill that the government had passed before about—I think it was Bill 13, maybe? It gave permission to go back and scoop up through these tailing ponds for the critical minerals but said that they had to leave the ponds better than how they were found, better than it was before the recovery. So that was in the last bill. That’s where we’re at right now, that if they go back, they have to leave it better than it was. And now in this bill, if you want to scoop up tailings, you don’t have to improve the land to make it better; you have to leave it comparable to or better than it was before the recovery. They’ve added “comparable to,” so instead of “better than,” it’s “or the same.”

And why? It’s a fairly open-ended “better than.” If you look at it before, whatever that land looked like, whatever was around the pond before—I’m thinking even as simple as there was litter around, and then you clean it up. Isn’t that technically “better than”? I’m not meaning to say that’s what we should do. But it is not an onerous task to leave a place better than how you found it, especially when it does not specify what “better than” means. So for this government to go back and be like, “Aww that’s a lot. That’s really positive. And since we’re doing so much negative stuff here, let’s just make it comparable. Let’s bring it down. Let’s downgrade that. ‘Better than’ is a lot. I don’t like that.” And who asked for that? Go back to them and say, “You know what, you want what’s in the tailings? You can leave that area better than how you found it.” Because the community around there cares.

I know that we’re going to hear from the northern members about what has been left historically in the wake of different mines, big and small, of the lessons learned of how we can do better. You guys are like, “Oh, we can’t do better. Let’s just do comparable.” Again, rehabilitation is only up to the minister. I think that is a mistake. Because it wasn’t even industry that asked for that, I think you guys have some explaining to do.

Speaker, one of the things that I’d like to talk about when we’re talking about critical minerals and the opportunity in Ontario—I’d like to take a minute and share about Project Arrow. Ontario Tech is an excellent university in my neck of the woods, and they had the opportunity at the ACE automotive centre’s aerodynamic climatic wind tunnel at Ontario Tech to be a part of a really special, globally exciting project, and it’s called Project Arrow. Project Arrow phase 2 was an all-Canadian-engineered concept vehicle that just debuted earlier this year. It is a wonderful success story. And the university was chosen because of its global reputation for its excellence in energy and automotive, smart mobility. This vehicle is like the perfect vehicle. Yes, it was cool, but it went from being a concept to reality. It was to show the potential in Canada.

It doesn’t have an engine or a gas tank, so there’s room for bigger passenger compartments. It’s smaller than many crossover-style vehicles on the market today. People were quite excited to look at it. It’s part of the EV revolution. Cutting-edge-technology suppliers were involved. It’s really a wonderful focus opportunity for and a showcase of Canadian talent, Canadian product and Canadian potential. We were very proud in Oshawa to be super-secret hosts to Project Arrow before the global launch. Now, I can’t keep track of Project Arrow anymore. It’s travelling around the world; I’m not sure which country it’s in right now. But it’s a wonderful showcase.

As we’re looking to those exciting futures—electric vehicles, technologies we have yet to imagine—there are important conversations to be had connected to critical minerals but also, fundamentally, our responsibility to do things well and sustainably here in the province of Ontario. We should be leaders with everything we do. This bill is an opportunity. I’d ask the government to take it.

I appreciate what the member opposite has been discussing. But what I’d like the member opposite to appreciate is that the world is going to keep spinning regardless of what Ontario does, which means—the numbers are out there. Russia and China have a stranglehold on the market right now. So 10 to 15 years to get a project complete is going to change the economic hold of these locations. We are actually strangling these communities if we don’t allow this to happen.

My question is, does the opposition think that China and Russia are viable trading partners for critical minerals?

I want to thank the member for his very exciting information. I had no idea; we’ll have to discuss this further. But it was exciting to hear about the new innovation that utilizes modern mining techniques and solves environmental problems at the same time. Could the member please talk about how these changes will help with the Critical Minerals Strategy?