Thank you for the presentation.

The Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs just finished travelling the province for pre-budget consultations. We heard from many delegations who are deeply concerned about the impacts of Bill 124 and the health care human resources crisis that has been created by such. Not once did the committee hear any support for Bill 124. Not one delegation supported this demeaning, degrading and, as one delegation called it, humiliating piece of legislation. We heard about the nurses who left and the health care human resources crisis that needs to be addressed. There’s an opportunity here for this government to undo the damage through Bill 60 that they have created with Bill 124.

My question is: Why is this government more concerned about health care profiteers, instead of people who need care from highly skilled nurses?

I would like to know—in your bill, you are setting up for basically private, for-profit, investor-owned corporations to start providing care. The care will continue to be paid by the government, but it will be offered by private, for-profit, investor-owned corporations. Where in your bill is the accountability? Where can we make sure that there are standards in place so that patients do not get over-billed or sold add-ons? What kind of inspection and oversight is present in your bill?

I want to thank both parliamentary assistants for their great remarks. They really understand, talking to all Ontarians, how important strengthening our health care system is.

In fact, I know that not too long ago I was able to announce with Minister Downey an MRI and CT scanner at Royal Victoria hospital, and PA Martin was there at GBGH to announce some great funding for them. That is a growing area, and critical infrastructure is needed at the hospital. I was wondering if PA Martin could elaborate a little bit more on that great announcement that she did at GBGH.

Thank you very much for the question. Obviously, a lot of this is still going to be spelled out in regulations, but the oversight is determined—we’re going to make sure that we have oversight. We have the Patient Ombudsman, of course, if people have a concern.

There’s also, of course, the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act. We want to make sure that people are able, if there is some concern, to raise that concern to an appropriate person who will deal with it. In the legislation, each of the entities would have to have their own complaint mechanism.

All of this will be under the auspices of Ontario Health because it will be integrated into our health care system. That is the whole point of that part of the legislation: to integrate these community clinics into our broader health care system.

The important part of the announcement was that Georgian Bay General Hospital has never had an MRI there. We were able to provide the funding to continue operations and hire staff, etc., to have an MRI right there on the premises of the hospital. This is among 49 MRIs we’re putting in community hospitals. I know the other parliamentary assistant, PA Gallagher Murphy, has done some announcements as well in various venues.

I also went to the riding of Hastings–Lennox and Addington and announced an MRI in that hospital, which had never had one. This will make a huge difference for convenience for people to get services closer to home, and that’s part of the plan.

Question?

Thank you very much to the member opposite for the question. Frankly, what we’re concerned about is making sure that people get health care quickly, conveniently, in their communities. That’s what this legislation is all about. In the last election, I believe Bill 124 was an issue of discussion. We did have an election result which re-elected this government with an even greater majority. I think the people have spoken.

If you talk to them, the people who receive services want our health care system to be better, and that’s what this government is focused on doing. That’s what this Minister of Health is focused on doing: making a better, more convenient health care system to provide services to all Ontarians and good results for all Ontarians so we have better health care.

I understand that people like to use words in debate. They like to use the words “private” and “public,” but I think those words confuse people, because most people don’t have the same meaning in mind.

I heard Dr. Jane Philpott say this on TVO’s The Agenda when she mentioned these. They were having a debate about this whole issue, about public versus private health care. People don’t care about that issue. What they care about is whether they’re paying with their OHIP card, and that is the most important thing. You will continue to pay for health services with your OHIP card.

Ontarians are tired of waiting for health care. We want them to get their health care sooner. It’s better for their health. It’s better for diagnostics. It means they have a better chance of having a great outcome, and that’s what we are—

Speaker, I have to use these reading glasses now, but I don’t need the reading glasses to see through the nonsense being peddled over here. Let’s be clear: They said they scanned and they asked, “Who could help us? Who could help relieve the backlog of surgeries?” There was no public tendering. There was no RFP. The ministry reached out directly to Tory-friendly, private, for-profit health clinics, like the Herzig Eye Institute in Ottawa, which is going to get 5,000 surgeries and charge 33% more for them.

Who protects the taxpayer? Who protects the taxpayer from this gouging of the public purse? How could this possibly be a Conservative government when they light the public money on fire and disrespect health care workers? This bill is a disgrace.

I’d like to thank the member from Whitby for the question. That is what this is about: giving people quality of life. As we spoke to in our speeches earlier, it is all about wait times. We have better outcomes for patients if they can get the MRIs and the CT scans faster. The faster they get those, the better outcomes for the people, the better quality of life that they may have. So—

Speaker, good morning. You’ll know out of the great representation that you do for the riding of Ajax that we have close to a million people in the region of Durham. They rely on, in many instances, community surgical and diagnostic centres in the region of Durham. We have across that region, as you know, probably about 20 of them at the present time, including the Oshawa community clinic that’s in close proximity to my riding.

Can the member from Newmarket–Aurora speak a little bit about how this proposed legislation further leverages community surgical and diagnostic centres to help the million people in the region of Durham?

This is a rather sad day for me, Speaker. This is a day that I knew was coming, but this is not a day that I was looking forward to.

I come from the party of Tommy Douglas, a party that believes in medicare, a party that believes that care should be based on needs, not on ability to pay. With this bill today, this is about to go out the window. This government is taking a step that we’ll never be able to backtrack on; that will destroy a program that defines us as Canadians, a program that defines us as Ontarians—that we care for one another, that you don’t have to have money to receive the care you need. This is the Canadian way. This is something that we’ve built for decades, and today, we’re taking a huge step to destroy it.

I want to talk a little bit about clarifying the public and credit cards and health cards in all of this. Right now, in Ontario, we have publicly owned facilities. Publicly owned facilities are community health centres, public health units, that kind of stuff. We have privately owned not-for-profit facilities. Those are our hospitals. Our hospitals are owned by corporations, but they are not-for-profit. There are four of them that were granted when medicare came into place, but they play a very, very small role; 152 hospitals in Ontario are not-for-profit.

Then we have physician-owned small businesses. Those are most doctors’ offices. They care for 1,000 or 2,000 patients. They pay for their rent and the cleaning and the secretary and maybe a nurse, and they are the doctor’s office. They are physician-owned small businesses. That’s not what we’re talking about in this bill.

In this bill, we are talking about private, for-profit, investor-owned corporations. Those are corporations that have nothing to do with care. They are willing to invest the millions of dollars it will take to build surgical suites, to build MRIs and everything else that the government wants to privatize, to make for-profit. They are willing to invest that money. Why? Because there is a lot of money to be made off of the backs of sick people. How do they do this? Well, sure, the surgeons, the physicians will bill OHIP for their services, like they would in a hospital, like they would in their private clinic, but what those private, for-profit, investor-owned corporations do is that they use the power imbalance that exists between the physician, the specialist, who’s about to put a laser to your eye, who’s about to cut open your knee, your hip, your whatever—there is a real power imbalance between the person who provides the care and the person who needs the care. What those private, for-profit, investor-owned corporations do is they use this power imbalance to ask for money, and there’s no shame in asking for a ton of money from people who are sick, from people who need care.

Unfortunately, it is already happening a little wee bit in Ontario right now—more than a little wee bit; it’s already happening in Ontario. Now, we are about to open the door to those private, for-profit, investor-owned corporations that are just biting at the bit to come into Ontario, because Ontario is a very lucrative market where it doesn’t matter if they will have to put upfront millions of dollars to set up those surgical suites. They can guarantee their investors double-digit returns for years on end. And we are not talking 11% returns here; we are talking into the 25%, 30% returns. So if you have the money to invest in those million-dollar, private, for-profit, investor-owned corporations, they will guarantee you a huge payback. The payback will come from sick people, like you and I—I don’t wish harm upon anyone. I wish we could all be healthy all the time, but we know that this is not the reality. Some of us will get sick; some of us will need care. Then they will charge, and they will charge lots. This is where most of their profit will be made. Some will do double billing—not that many, I hope, but it will be there.

When we look at some of the myths that they are putting forward, the first one is that those new private, for-profit, investor-owned corporations will alleviate wait times in the public system. There is tons of evidence that shows that this is not the case. Australia was the last one to introduce a parallel system, in 1997, and we’ve seen what happened. Basically what happened was they made the wait times worse for most of us. A few rich people will pay for the extra and will get faster care, but most Ontarians won’t. For most of us, it will mean longer wait times.

Myth number two: Private, for-profit ownership of health care facilities leads to better health outcomes. This has been studied to death also. The body of evidence is really strong. I can name you study after study that shows that the profit model does not incentivize high-quality care. In fact, for-profit delivery has been associated with an increased mortality.

There are some who will have you believe that private, for-profit, investor-owned corporations will make health care more efficient. All of those have been studied. All of those have been looked at. None of those pull through. They are not more efficient, and the list goes on.

Today, with this bill, we are opening up the door to private, for-profit, investor-owned corporations who will deliver the care. The single payer will stay in place. The Ontario government will continue to pay for medically necessary care, for medically necessary surgery. They will continue to pay. What will change is that those corporations will find hundreds of ways to make you pay.

I have the example of Mr. Dutton, who—I need to wrap up—

I’m pleased to rise about a constituent of mine from Greely: Anna Bailie. Anna is a tireless advocate for Ontarians with congenital heart defects and has been working with other board members of the Canadian Congenital Heart Alliance to raise awareness through Congenital Heart Defect Awareness Week, which took place from February 7 to 14. This is a part of February itself being Heart Month.

Congenital heart defects are structural problems that are present in the heart from birth. While once considered a disease that was fatal during childhood, progress has been made over the last 50 years in diagnoses, surgery, and interventional catheter-based procedures. Because of these advancements, about 90% of children born with heart defects survive into adulthood.

For Congenital Heart Defect Awareness Week, the Canadian Congenital Heart Alliance organized several events to raise awareness, including lighting monuments across Canada red and giving proclamations in major cities.

I would like to thank Anna Bailie and the Canadian Congenital Heart Alliance for their hard work and advocacy to educate Ontarians about congenital heart defects and to continue to raise money for research to ensure that Canadians with congenital heart disease can receive the most innovative treatment.

As Ontarians, let’s support the hard work of Anna Bailie and the Canadian Congenital Heart Alliance.

Today is Pink Shirt Day, and I’m so grateful to be speaking to this topic today with my colleagues.

In 2007, two young men in Nova Scotia stood up for a fellow classmate who was being bullied. That child’s crime? He was wearing a pink polo shirt.

Bullying has no place in our schools, in our workplaces or anywhere in our province, full stop. We must ensure that students across this province are treated with respect and dignity at all times.

Pink Shirt Day is all about being kind and lifting one another up. Moments of kindness, empathy and understanding can mean so much to children impacted by bullying. Quick fact: One in five kids are affected by bullying.

It is important that bullying behaviour is called out when you see it. It is also important to simply offer support and connect with people being bullied.

In this House, we may not agree on everything; however, I am truly impressed with so many members showing their support by wearing pink today. As we are lifting each other up, let’s encourage others to lift one another up.

Madam Speaker, thank you for this opportunity to stand in this chamber today to raise awareness against bullying.

This Saturday, February 25, I will be participating in the Coldest Night of the Year event, joining thousands of Canadians who walk to raise awareness and funding for groups and organizations that are helping the homeless and the needy.

And the need is very great. In my riding, people are sleeping in tents, in parks. They’re living on the TTC. They’re sleeping in foyers. They’re raising their children in shelters. They’re being evicted because they cannot pay the rent. They’re dying of cold, and they’re dying of exposure.

I want to recognize the volunteers, the people and the fabulous groups in my community who are participating in the Coldest Night of the Year: Fort York Food Bank; Street Haven, Canada’s first women’s shelter; Yonge Street Mission, which helps families and youth living on the street in need; and Sistering, a welcoming drop-in shelter on Bloor. Please go to cnoy.org and find an organization to support. They need your help. They are looking forward to walking and working with you.

And I want to issue a challenge. The additional challenge is this: As we provide our charity and our support on Saturday night, I urge us to emphasize our support with a call to action to push this government for province-wide change, to call on this government to have a plan to address homelessness and poverty, to call on this government to double social assistance rates, to bring in affordable homes and to bring in strong rent control to keep people housed. I look forward to seeing you on the 25th.

Thank you to the member from Nickel Belt.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

I rise today in solidarity with 250 workers from the Windsor Salt mine and over 400 workers at Highbury Canco. Windsor Salt workers, members of Unifor Locals 240 and 1959, are on strike for job security and to fight the company’s move to contract out their jobs to third-party and non-unionized workers—classic union-busting.

Over 400 workers from the Highbury Canco plant in Leamington, members of UFCW Local 175, are on strike for wage improvements. Their employer is busing in replacement workers, scabs, and paying them more than the permanent workers and offering them benefits—again, union-busting.

From beverages, food products and even road salt, these dedicated workers in Windsor and Leamington work hard every day. Scab labour undermines collective bargaining, prolongs labour disputes and removes the employer’s incentive to negotiate in good faith.

New Democrats have tabled anti-scab legislation numerous times but neither the previous Liberal government or the current Conservative government has passed it. To be clear: Conservatives showing up for photo ops on picket lines isn’t solidarity; passing anti-scab legislation is.

Conservatives claim to be friends of labour, but real friends don’t allow scabs to cross picket lines. Friends don’t attack education and health care workers, like the Conservatives did with Bill 28 and Bill 124.

Speaker, 98% of collective agreements are settled without a strike. With the Conservatives consistently undermining the collective bargaining process at every opportunity and refusing to pass anti-scab legislation, strikes will continue to happen.

To Unifor Locals 1959 and 240 and UFCW Local 175: I stand with you in this fight. One day longer, one day stronger.

Today is Heart Valve Disease Awareness Day. Over a million Canadians are living with heart valve disease. Cardiologists have described this as the next epidemic of heart disease. It is easy to dismiss the symptoms as normal signs of aging, or, in my case, the effect of working 12-hour shifts at Ford Motor Co. But my wife knew it was something more.

I had a physical, including a simple stethoscope check. When the doctor listened to my heart, he heard a murmur. Fortunately, when valve disease is detected early, treatment is effective. Twelve years ago, I had an aorta valve replaced with a mechanical valve. Today, I’m living a normal, healthy life.

Some patients can have valves repaired and, increasingly, the surgery is minimally invasive. Unfortunately, based on a recent Heart Hub survey, only 3% of Canadians over 60 are aware of the most common type of heart valve disease and only 26% of Canadians had a stethoscope check within the past year.

Improving public awareness is critical, and that’s why days like today are important. Later today, I will be introducing a private member’s bill that would proclaim February 22 as Heart Valve Disease Awareness Day, and I’d like to invite all members to join us in room 247 after question period. Cardiologists from around the province are here today, and you can learn more about heart valve disease and get a free stethoscope check. It saved my life. It could save yours.

Last Tuesday, I had the pleasure of attending the launch of La’ad Canada’s Who Are the Jews? travelling exhibit, along with city councillor James Pasternak, La’ad Canada’s director of advocacy Sam Eskenasi, and representatives of Hasbara Canada. We joined Bruno Pileggi and others at the headquarters of the Toronto Catholic District School Board in the neighbouring riding of Willowdale for the launch of this new exhibit.

The Jewish people have been around for millennia. Unfortunately, anti-Semitic incidents have also happened throughout history, and they’ve recently been on the rise again, including, sadly, here in Ontario and Toronto. In 2018, La’ad Canada commissioned a survey of Canadians to gauge their understanding of Jews and Judaism. The results unfortunately revealed that Canadians have little knowledge about the Jewish people and, more concerningly, that much of the information people thought they knew about the Jews was either false or based on anti-Semitic tropes.

When the cause of anti-Semitism is misinformation, or no information at all, the solution begins with gaining knowledge, and that is an understanding of who the Jews are. Exhibition visitors here will learn about where they come from, who they are, their connections to the land of Israel and how anti-Semitism differs from other forms of racism. Also, visitors can “ask a Jew anything” and they will answer the question. Someone is on hand to do that.

The exhibit is funded through our Anti-Racism and Anti-Hate Grant Program. It’s a perfect example of how education will fix racism and anti-Semitism. I encourage all school boards to adopt this exhibit and have it go through their schools.

I was very excited to attend the grand opening of House of Friendship’s new shelter care facility just over a month ago. Our government provided over $10 million in funding to help purchase and operate a former hotel site and convert it into a new 100-bed emergency shelter. But it goes beyond shelter space, Speaker. It includes around-the-clock on-site staff as well as health and housing supports, which is very important. I want to quote Jessica Bondy, the director of housing services at House of Friendship: “Having those services and supports right on site for people who are struggling with homelessness goes an incredibly long way to helping them improve.”

I’ve been a big advocate for this project for the last few years since it came across my desk, and I want to thank all the volunteers; the staff—everybody that’s helped make this happen—John Neufeld, the executive director of House of Friendship; and of course, the fantastic team led by Minister Clark with municipal affairs and housing and all of the staff there that have helped see this come to fruition. It’s a very big project. I was glad to see the member for Waterloo there as well for the grand opening.

This is something the whole community can get behind, a great non-partisan project, and it was really great to be part of it.

Everyone in Ottawa knows that there’s a need for a new interprovincial crossing in the national capital. Thousands of semi trucks travel through the heart of the downtown every day, putting pedestrians at risk and creating an environment that is not conducive to a modern capital city. And this is not a new problem.

Going as far back as the Gréber plan from the 1940s, the National Capital Commission has studied options for a new interprovincial bridge over and over again. And for decades, every study ever done has said that a new bridge on the east side of Ottawa should be built over Kettle Island, which would connect Highway 50 at Montée Paiement in Gatineau to a corridor leading to the 417 in Ottawa.

The most recent study from 2020, which builds on the previous study from 2009, concludes that the Kettle Island corridor would be the least costly of the three proposed routes, would attract the most truck traffic and public transit, offer the most manageable environmental effects and provide the biggest boost in terms of economic development. Instead of making this decision, the National Capital Commission continues to drag the process out, leaving in limbo thousands of concerned residents in Orléans and other communities in Ottawa. These ongoing processes have been time-consuming, expensive and generate enormous anxiety for residents.

It’s time for the NCC to get it done. Kettle or kill it.