I would like to welcome Carlos Santander, Matthew Roy and Gordon Robitaille, who have come here from Thunder Bay. Gordon had to do an extra hour to get here from Nipigon. Welcome.

I’d like to acknowledge Dr. Charles Frank from the Ontario Dental Association, from my hometown of Tecumseh, who is here today.

I have many friends in the audience in the chamber today. I wish to acknowledge the Ontario Dental Association, the OPSEU health professionals division, Western University, the Scleroderma Society of Ontario and OSSTF. Thank you, and welcome to you all.

On behalf of the official opposition, I’d like to welcome all the amazing members of the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation, including president Karen Littlewood. Thanks for all the hard work that you do for our students, and thanks for coming here today to share your stories with us.

J’aimerais aussi dire un mot de bienvenue aux représentants de l’AEFO. Merci pour votre travail important, aussi.

The member for Davenport will come to order. The member for Toronto–St. Paul’s will come to order. The member for Ottawa Centre will come to order.

The Premier has the floor.

Interjections.

So once again, if you repeatedly ignore the request of the Speaker to come to order, I will move to warnings, and we know what happens after that if you ignore that, okay?

Start the clock. Supplementary.

Final supplementary?

The member will withdraw his unparliamentary comment.

Interjections.

I will ask the member once again to withdraw his unparliamentary comment.

Mr. Tabuns was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Interjection.

MPP West was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Ms. Stiles was escorted from the chamber.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Interjection.

MPP Andrew was escorted from the chamber.

My question is to the Premier.

While this government is actively stripping away the collective bargaining rights from workers, we’ve been listening to education workers in my community of Niagara Falls, in Fort Erie and in Niagara-on-the-Lake.

In Niagara, we spoke to Carrie, a school secretary who has been a loyal worker for nearly 20 years. She still makes under $39,000 a year, and she has a second job just to make ends meet. She even considered getting a third job because of the increased cost of food, gas and housing.

Does this Premier think that education workers should have to work two extra jobs in order to avoid using food banks?

Let me remind the member opposite that children in this province should have rights too, and they should be in school in this province.

Mr. Speaker, we have been clear—

Interjections.

We have an obligation to ensure stability. We asked the union to bring forth a proposal that withdraws a strike on Friday. We gave them multiple opportunities to do so, and yesterday night, at 10 p.m., hearing from the mediator and through the mediator—

Interjection.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker, so long as the union regrettably proceeds with this unacceptable strike, the government will have no choice but to proceed with legislation to avert a strike and keep these kids in the classroom, where they belong.

Interjection.

Again to the Premier: The government’s use of the “notwithstanding” clause to ban workers from collective bargaining is wrong. It’s something the Prime Minister and I seem to agree on, and I don’t agree with him on almost anything.

Here’s what the Prime Minister had to say—your good buddy: “The suspension of people’s rights is something you should only do in the most exceptional circumstances, and I really hope that all politicians call out the overuse of the ‘notwithstanding’ clause to suspend people’s rights and freedoms.”

The Premier is fond of standing shoulder to shoulder with the Prime Minister. I’ve seen the photos. So will the Premier change tack today, join the Prime Minister—his good friend—and condemn the use of the “notwithstanding” clause?

LIUNA was first out of the gate in endorsing Ford last election, but had harsh words for this government. International vice-president Joe Mancinelli: “On behalf of LIUNA, we call on Minister” Lecce “to revoke anti-union legislation and restore the collective bargaining rights of CUPE members and act in good faith to reach an agreement that prioritizes both keeping students in school and the rights and respect of all workers.”

So to the Premier: Will he listen to his friends at LIUNA and rip up Bill 28?

Interjections.

Back to the Premier—but before I ask my next question, maybe, out of respect for our veterans, the Minister of Education should put a poppy on. Everybody else in the House has one on.

While their charter rights are ignored by this government, and they hold back $2.1 billion in spending, we continue to hear from education workers that are struggling. Our office spoke this week to Jennifer, an educational assistant with over 20 years on the job. She’s never seen it so bad. Schools do not have the EA supply staff they need. Staff are facing rising violence in our schools. They can’t hold on to staff due to low wages. There are serious health and safety concerns.

Does the Premier think that trampling on the Charter of Rights and refusing to invest in our education system is going to fix the crisis we have in our schools? Premier, answer the question.

The government of Ontario has a responsibility to parents and students. This is a sacred trust. That responsibility includes the guarantee of top-quality education for our children and placing the most qualified teachers in front of our students.

We’ve heard many times about the need for students to remain in class and what students will learn in these classes. However, the individuals teaching these classes matter just as much as a subject’s content. From principals and vice-principals to math, art, music and science teachers, and the many more types of educators we have in this province, we need the most qualified individuals at the front of the classroom.

Speaker, to the Minister of Education: What has our government done to ensure the right educator is in front of our children?

In the last year, young educators and veteran educators across my riding have expressed their delight in this government’s revoking of regulation 274. They are grateful that our government recognized and provided a solution to the previous hiring practices that neither rewarded hard work nor gave the best chance of having the best possible educator in front of our children.

As our province’s population grows, our government must focus on the future to ensure we have enough educators in places experiencing that growth. Can the Minister of Education please explain how revoking regulation 274 encourages teacher mobility?

To reply, the Minister of Education.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Ms. Fife was escorted from the chamber.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Mr. Gates was escorted from the chamber.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Ms. Karpoche was escorted from the chamber.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Mrs. Gretzky was escorted from the chamber.

Interjections.

Member for Ottawa Centre, come to order. If you persist, you will be named.

Interjection.

Mr. Harden was escorted from the chamber.

Interjection.

MPP Vaugeois was escorted from the chamber.

Minister of Education.

Supplementary question.

We have been clear: We believe children should be in the classroom. They have to be in school every day, after two years of disruption and the strikes that preceded it just a few years ago.

We brought forth a reasonable, fair offer to the union: 10% over four years, maintaining benefits and pensions and sick leave, which most people in this economy do not have. Even with that said, we told the union, “Rescind this strike on Friday that impacts every single—

Interjection.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker, it was over a decade ago that the former Liberal government consented in a union negotiation to a regressive regulation called O. Reg. 274, a regulation that permitted exclusive hiring and promotion in Ontario based on seniority—

Interruption.

Interruption.

We believe new educators, young educators and those with the qualifications should triumph in hiring, not someone who’s simply been in the union the longest. This is about quality. This is about ensuring the best staff member could inspire a child. That’s why we removed this regulation, which even the former Liberal Premier agreed went too far. The Ontario Principals’ Council said they supported it, parents support it, and the government will continue to do everything possible to enshrine quality in the schools of this province.

My question is to the Minister of Education.

My office has been flooded with calls and emails from workers and parents alike outraged that this government seeks to use the “notwithstanding” clause to violate the labour rights of education workers. I heard from Linda in Welland. She has been an administrative clerk for 10 years, and in that time, has seen only a $2 wage increase. When you factor in inflation over that time, she suffered a 10.7% wage cut. Linda says, “The minister has no concept of the work we do. Come and see what we do in our schools. Spend one day with me.”

Can the minister tell Linda why this government continues to forge ahead with legislation that disrespects her work, tramples on her rights and pushes her further into poverty?

Can the minister tell Ella Marie and her colleagues, most of them women, how they are supposed to live on wages that don’t cover the bills and an insulting pay increase that plunges them further into poverty, and why is this Premier acting like a dictator and a thug?

Supplementary question?

Mr. Burch, you are named. You will leave the chamber for the day.

Mr. Burch was escorted from the chamber.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Interjection.

Mr. Kernaghan was escorted from the chamber.

People fought and died for our human rights. Shame on all of you.

My question is for the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade.

In their final economic outlook, the previous Liberal government announced that “Ontario would shift from goods-producing to service-producing sectors” and “shifting from goods-producing industries, in particular manufacturing, to service-sector industries.” Those are direct quotes. For families in Essex, the message from the Liberals was clear: Get out of manufacturing. My constituents want to know that this government will do things differently.

My question to the minister is this: What is this government doing to help support economic growth and tap the amazing workforce that we have in the county of Essex?

But businesses also want to know that our government is removing excessive red tape—barriers, obstacles to success. And so my question to the minister is this: What else is this government doing in Essex county and in Ontario to ensure economic growth and opportunities and jobs for my constituents?

I want to echo the member opposite’s sentiment of gratitude to the people who work in our schools. That’s why we’ve hired 7,000 since we came to office. It’s why in this proposal we’re going to hire 1,800 more. We’re going to increase their wages every single year—2.5% every single year, 10 points over four years. We’re going to maintain their pension and their benefits and their sick leave program of 131 days. That is a demonstration of commitment to the workers.

We believe children in this province should be in school. That should not be a position which we disagree with. The Premier asked a simple question: Will you vote for a bill that ensures stability for the kids we all represent in this province?

I know that, for many of these workers, they want to be with their kids. That’s why I’m urging the leadership of the union to withdraw this strike that will impact that member, the children in his riding and all of our ridings.

Two million kids will be out of class Friday because the union has decided alone to proceed with a strike that no one wants or should accept. These kids should be in school. They’ve been through the incredible difficulty of pandemic disruptions and strikes that preceded it.

At what point does a government say, “Enough”? These kids deserve to be in school. They have rights too, and we will stand up to ensure stability for every single child in this province, Speaker.

When we were elected, our government made a commitment to support the province’s regional manufacturing economies, and in 2019 we delivered by launching a $100-million Regional Development Program.

To date, we’ve attracted $716 million in investments and 1,300 jobs in southwestern, southeastern and rural Ontario through that program. We were there with the member in Essex recently at MC3 Manufacturing and at another company, Idol Core. These two companies are investing $11 million in creating 29 well-paying manufacturing jobs with a total investment of $1 million from the province.

Speaker, this is how we’re supporting economic growth and those skilled workers in communities like Essex, because these companies are showing the world that Ontario is open for business.

In fact, costs have been lowered by $7 billion every year. This is attracting record numbers of investments and entrepreneurs to southwestern Ontario.

In Essex, our automotive program attracted over $500,000 in investments from Industrial Fastener, B&B Tool and Mould, and Windsor Industrial Services.

And with a further $631,000 invested in the Small Business Enterprise Centre there, their entrepreneurs have all the tools they need to start and grow their own businesses—and another $182,500 for their Summer Company. That helps students and young entrepreneurs start their businesses because, Speaker, this is how our government is driving growth in Essex.

Ma question s’adresse au premier ministre.

Debbie Premo, une gardienne à la retraite, a appelé mon bureau hier. Son époux, Bill, travaille comme concierge pour le conseil scolaire du district d’Algoma. À plus de 60 ans, Debbie m’a dit que maintenant, à sa retraite, elle envisageait de retourner au travail parce qu’elle n’était pas certaine qu’ils pouvaient garder leur maison avec le seul salaire de son mari en tant que concierge.

Elle me dit : « Mon mari travaille toujours et pourrait prendre sa retraite, mais en raison des salaires, il travaillera toujours, jusqu’à ce qu’il ne puisse plus. »

Tout ce que Debbie et son mari veulent est qu’il puisse prendre sa retraite confortablement après plus de 35 ans de travail.

Pourquoi le premier ministre pense-t-il que Debbie et Bill ne méritent pas une qualité de vie respectable?