I didn’t hear an actual answer in that non-answer. What I heard was excuses. I heard a technical response. So, Speaker, let’s try this one more time.

It’s worth noting the government didn’t hire Mr. Massoudi by name to provide these services to the government, following his departure. Instead, they hired the company that he owns, Atlas Strategic Advisors, to write the Premier’s speeches and provide communication advice.

They also admitted that this undertaking was already happening until a few weeks ago—just a few short weeks. That same company is registered to lobby and is actually doing quite a bit of lobbying. In fact, the Integrity Commissioner has been looking into this, “looking into Atlas Strategic Advisors for allegations of illegal lobbying since June.” By the minister’s own admission, Mr. Massoudi was providing these services until only a couple of weeks ago.

People deserve honest and lawful government. Does the minister understand that this arrangement with a close friend of the Premier’s could potentially be illegal lobbying?

I’d like to thank that member for his work and for his mentorship. He has been such a strong advocate for Sarnia–Lambton.

And it’s true, Speaker: As someone who is proudly from rural Ontario, we recognize that we need all corners of this province flourishing if we’re going to unlock the economic potential and might that is Ontario. I’m proud to highlight two important funds that our ministry is working on, that the incredible team is working on to support rural Ontarians: the Skills Development Fund, which is open right now until November, and the capital stream. This is making a difference.

This morning, I just met with beef farmers. Processing capability is a big, big issue for so many farmers in communities like mine. We talked about the Skills Development Fund as an important tool to unlock the capabilities of the next generation in processing. This is just one small example of a difference this government is making to unlock the potential that is rural Ontario.

And what does that mean? It means we can expand—

Interjection.

That means expanding thyroid cancer—

Interjection.

We’ll take no lessons from a man who can’t get the bloody transit in Ottawa right. And he’s heckling us? We’re going to get workers working in the province of Ontario, save taxpayer dollars—

Ma question est pour le premier ministre. Plus tôt cette année, le gouvernement a apporté des changements aux plans officiels de Waterloo, Wellington, Guelph, Barrie, Belleville et Peterborough. Ces changements ont déplacé 4 700 hectares de terres agricoles et d’espaces verts à l’intérieur des limites urbaines.

Une note obtenue par les néo-démocrates révèle que le gouvernement a été averti au sujet de « questions litigieuses potentielles » qui pourraient découler de ces changements. La note avertissait le gouvernement que les relations avec les Premières Nations seraient affectées et que les municipalités considéreraient ces changements comme une ingérence.

Monsieur le Président, pourquoi est-ce que le gouvernement a apporté des changements drastiques aux limites municipales malgré les sérieux avertissements de son propre personnel?

Supplementary?

I’ll once again remind members to make their remarks through the Chair.

My question is for the Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development. For far too long, many Ontarians have had to make the decision to uproot their lives and move or face long commutes every day in order to find employment. Unfortunately, this means that people experience the loss of leaving their communities, because many businesses are located in large cities or downtown Toronto.

Building up communities across our province will help to strengthen our economy and build a stronger Ontario for the next generation. That is why it is important that our government continues to implement innovative solutions that bring economic development opportunities to more communities across Ontario.

Speaker, can the minister please share what our government is doing to help bring good jobs to every part of our province?

People should be able to work near their families, friends and the places they know and love. That is why our government must continue to deliver on the actions that show respect for the working people of Ontario.

Speaker, can the minister please elaborate and explain how those decisions, such as relocating the WSIB head office to London, will help to build a stronger Ontario?

Supplementary question?

The next question.

Interjections.

Start the clock. Supplementary question.

First, I want to give my appreciation to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing for celebrating the province’s investment in 3100 Meadowbrook—truly a home that its residents can be proud of.

Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Long-Term Care. All seniors in Ontario deserve to be treated with dignity and receive the quality of care they need. The successive investments made by our government into building and redeveloping long-term-care homes has become a reality in many communities across the province, including my own, with 36 new and 60 upgraded beds at Brouillette Manor in Tecumseh. However, at the same time, Ontario seniors are entering long-term-care homes later than ever before and often with more medically complex needs. Our government must continue to do all that we can to minimize the need for these residents to be transferred to acute-care hospitals because the long-term-care homes do not have the equipment, supplies and services they need.

Speaker, can the minister please explain how our government is supporting long-term-care homes to better address the increasing care needs of our seniors?

I have truly seen the impact of the local priorities fund first-hand. The Village of Aspen Lake, which coincidentally was where my grandmother lived, is a long-term-care home in East Riverside. It has received $199,065 from the local priorities fund to help purchase equipment that will make access to care faster and more convenient.

As a government, we must maintain our commitment to ensuring that residents in long-term-care homes get the quality of care and quality of life that they need and deserve, both now and in the future. Mr. Speaker, can the minister please elaborate on how our government is expanding specialized services in long-term-care homes that will support residents with complex needs?

Je dois vous dire, monsieur le Président, que les médias qualifient les changements apportés par le gouvernement aux plans officiels des municipalités comme la « ceinture verte 2.0 ». En effet, non seulement ils s’attaquent aux terres agricoles et à l’intégrité des systèmes naturels en étendant de force les limites urbaines, mais ils accordent également un traitement préférentiel aux spéculateurs financiers privilégiés, enrichissant ainsi ces initiés aux dépens du public.

Le premier ministre ordonnera-t-il un examen de toutes les modifications ministérielles apportées aux plans officiels municipaux et annulera-t-il toutes les modifications qui sont fondées sur l’accès au gouvernement et non sur les preuves?

Speaker, any official plan that has been approved, the municipalities did have the opportunity to comment on that. The only one that has, of course, is Hamilton, and we know why Hamilton is commenting on that, because they disagreed with their own planner’s assessment that they didn’t have enough land available to meet the long-term goals of housing in their community. So they’re fighting us to stop housing from being built in their community—not today, not tomorrow, but in the future, and that is everything that is wrong with the NDP, right? It’s everything that is wrong about them. All they think about is today. They have no concern about the future of the province of Ontario.

That is why, with the Liberals, they helped put red tape in the way. They built up huge debt and deficits. They destroyed the energy sector. They wiped out jobs and economic growth. And it kills them—

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker, the member from Ottawa maybe forgot that, back in the election, we won an overwhelming majority—the largest since 1929—and it was based on the 413 that their government put the original route in. They flip-flop back and forth; we’re building the 413. We have a clear mandate from every riding in Mississauga, every riding in Brampton, every riding in Caledon—the whole region wants the 413.

They don’t believe in building. They don’t believe in spending $184 billion in building infrastructure. Not only are we building the 413, we’re building the Bradford Bypass, we’re building Highway 7, we’re expanding the 401 east out to your area so that people can get back and forth a lot quicker, we’re expanding Highway 3. We’re building this province because it was ignored for 15 years and we’re building homes for the young students that were—

I can’t believe what the members opposite are saying here. I want to take them on a trip. Whether it’s through Brampton or Mississauga—I offer them any time, any day of the week—the people of Brampton and the people of Mississauga are stuck in gridlock. The members opposite are so far out of reality.

This is about a project that is going to bring home over $350 million in GDP. We’re going to create over 3,000 jobs, and we’re going to unlock thousands of homes. We’re going to unlock thousands of jobs by building this. Unfortunately, the members opposite refused to listen to the people of Brampton and Mississauga for 15 years. They never invested in those cities. They never invested in those regions.

Under the leadership of Premier Ford, we’re building Highway 413, we’re building the Bradford Bypass and we’re building new hospitals all across this province. It’s because this government believes in building and investing in infrastructure and transportation, and we will take no lessons from the members opposite on how to—

Interjections.

My question is for the Premier. The construction of Highway 413 will require the destruction of sensitive lands currently within the greenbelt. Yet, the Premier has been very clear about his support for this project. The Premier already promised Ontarians that he would not touch the greenbelt and then promised $8.3 billion worth of land to friends through a flawed and biased process.

The Premier recently apologized for removing those lands and has once again committed to protecting the greenbelt. Mr. Speaker, protecting the greenbelt and building Highway 413 are incompatible goals.

Will the Premier please be clear with Ontarians? Will he once again remove lands from the greenbelt so he can build Highway 413 or will he learn from his mistakes and finally keep his promise to Ontarians?

Mr. Speaker, Ontarians do not need more highways cutting through the greenbelt. They need more public transit. Highway 413 has been widely recognized as a terrible investment. It is estimated that, at a cost of over $6 billion, the new highway would move 7,000 people per hour at peak capacity, but investing the same $6 billion in public transit instead could move over three times that number of people.

This government claims to be fiscally responsible, but it’s clear that Highway 413 does not make financial sense for everyday Ontarians. Despite the many questions surrounding this project, the government refuses to provide Ontarians with a clear business plan for it. Will the Premier explain why Ontarians should trust this government’s decision regarding Highway 413 when it refuses to be transparent about how much the project will cost taxpayers and how many hectares of prime land will be destroyed?

This government has made record and historic investments in GO rail transit across this province. In fact, on the Kitchener line, just a couple of months ago, the former Minister of Transportation and our entire team announced the revised station upgrades to the Bramalea GO station.

Mr. Speaker, we appreciate and understand how important this is. That is why we have increased services on the Kitchener line and will continue to make those investments, even though that member opposite has voted against our investments each and every time. When we talk about GO rail investment and the increases that we’ve made in this province, for every single budget or fall economic statement, that member has stood up in this House and voted against that investment. That is unacceptable. On this side of the House, we’ll continue to make those investments and build transit across this province.

We are going to continue, thanks to the great advocacy of members on that Kitchener line, whether it’s the members from Kitchener, from Waterloo. On this side of the House and in this government, we’re committed to building that transit system across this province and to investing in GO rail. That’s why we’ve also launched the largest investment in public transit in the history of this province. Over $70 billion in the next 10 years are being invested across not only the Kitchener line but across this province.

Every single one of those investments, the members opposite have voted against. Whether it’s improving the Kitchener line, whether it’s improving GO rail transit, whether it’s building subways like the Ontario Line or the Scarborough extension, there’s one common denominator: The members opposite are against building transit.

My question is for the Premier. It seems that every time the Premier makes a major public policy decision, wealthy well-connected insiders always seem to come out on top. We saw it with the greenbelt, where a small group of insiders became billionaires overnight. Are we really supposed to believe that this decision was about 1.5 million homes and not about $8.3 billion? Accordingly, when it comes to the Premier’s expansion of private, for-profit health care, can we blame Ontarians for wondering where his priorities truly lie?

Mr. Speaker, this week, a walk-in clinic in Ottawa is operating that will charge patients desperate for primary care $400 a year just to have the privilege of paying for visits. We know that’s not the only one of these kinds of clinics popping up in Ontario.

To the Premier: While cash-for-access arrangements may be commonplace within this government, is it fair that he expects the people of Ontario to count this as the norm within their own health care system?

But I’d like to remind the Premier of a saying he has burned into the minds of Ontarians this year. He said, “All you need is your OHIP card—never your credit card.” It kind of reminds me of that famous video where he promised not to touch the greenbelt, and then he did.

History is repeating itself. Walk-in clinics like the one in Ottawa are just the beginning. Bill 60, which was executed swiftly just like the greenbelt, was said to be about clearing the surgical backlog, but it’s just another cash cow. It opens the floodgates for private clinics to profiteer on publicly funded surgeries, meaning the people of Ontario will be bankrolling clinics that have a financial incentive to provide the lowest-quality care possible.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier said that real leadership is about being able to admit when you’ve made a mistake. Will he reverse his decision on private, for-profit health care, the same way he reversed his decision on the greenbelt?

What an ironic question coming from the member opposite, who just recently endorsed the only person in the province who still supports building on the greenbelt. What a question from that gentleman.

You know what, Mr. Speaker? We have said that we are not going to do that. We are going to continue to make investments in building homes across the province of Ontario. Because of that, we have to make more investments in building hospitals all over. Do you know why we’re doing that? I’ll tell you why we’re building hospitals and reinvesting in hospitals and long-term care: Because for 15 years, the government that you are now a party member of literally never did it. They built 611 long-term-care homes across the province.

I would ask the member this: If he could call his partner and say, “Listen, the people have spoken. We need help building homes, but building on the greenbelt isn’t the way to do it.” I wonder if he might do that to the person he just endorsed in the Liberal leadership, because I saw the other candidates, and they are simply against that as well.

Speaker, I want to be very clear, and I want the member opposite and everyone to understand that we will never tolerate clinics and organizations to charge OHIP-funded services. We will make sure that is the case.

Having said that, in terms of expanding the access to primary care and to surgical diagnostic centres, we 100% need to do it. We have done it. I talk about a change that the Premier made in January, where we expanded cataract surgeries. We have now, as of that one change, had 19,000 minor eye surgeries in the province of Ontario, because we made an extension in January. We have a plan. That plan is working.

I understand that the member opposite is suggesting that he would like to shut down some of these organizations that have been doing minor surgeries in communities for decades in the province of Ontario—

The supplementary question.

I will elaborate, and I will remind this Legislature that Windsor, Essex and Tecumseh were ignored for so long when it came to our seniors, and it took the leadership of this Premier and this Minister of Housing to fix that situation.

What the member highlights is exactly those investments: local priorities. He mentioned one very specific to his riding—a wide variety of needs. Seniors aren’t at long-term care with the same needs. We need to recognize it. That’s why we’re expanding those specialized services, including our behavioural specialized units, an innovative model designed to support residents with complex care challenges like dementia.

We’re not going to stop there. Last week, we were in Cambridge, Kitchener, Guelph—we’re going to go across this entire province. We’re going to make sure we take care of our seniors with record investments, not just into building homes, but into human health resources.

Speaker, I’ll remind this House: Seniors took care of us. It’s our turn to take care of them.

Speaker, the people of Kitchener-Waterloo have been waiting a decade for two-way, all-day GO service. Despite Metrolinx CEO Phil Verster’s promise yesterday that Kitchener-Waterloo would finally get trains “every 15 minutes or better on the Kitchener line,” the people of KW still have no timeline. Ten years of waiting for what we were promised is simply unfair.

Yesterday’s GO train network outage that caused such chaos is exactly the reason why the public requires a comprehensive plan and timeline, and this needs to be very transparent. Too many students—so many students—are left behind and waiting for buses. Those buses are packed. A three-hour commute is not acceptable for the people of Kitchener-Waterloo.

To the new Minister of Transportation: When will Kitchener-Waterloo finally get two-way, all-day service every 15 minutes, as they were originally promised?

We all know that trains are good for business, good for people and good for the environment. Again to the Minister of Transportation: Why doesn’t Kitchener-Waterloo deserve what they were originally promised, and when can they finally expect to see two-way, all-day service every 15 minutes? Stop leaving Kitchener-Waterloo waiting at the station.