All day long—take the member from Orléans, who talks about how if everyone just got a heat pump and used electricity to power their homes, why, they’d be better off. Is the member from Orléans not aware that dozens of remote and isolated communities rely on diesel fuel, and that heat pumps in places like Kenora don’t actually work when temperatures move beyond minus 20—something that’s going to be happening very quickly?

We’re hard at work to make sure that our northern, remote and isolated communities have affordable, clean energy, but it turns out that old saint Justin gave us a lump of coal during this holiday season. It was only the folks from Atlantic Canada who got relief from that carbon tax.

We moved off coal under the leadership of Premier Harris and other successive governments.

We don’t need coal. We need to scrap the carbon tax.

Thank you to the member for that great question.

Speaker, our government has done tremendous work to make sure that our roads stay safe. That’s why we have some of the safest roads in North America. When we take a look at legislation introduced by our government, we take a look at the MOMS Act and all of the wonderful things that came with that particular act. That was taking real action on ensuring that our roads continue to stay safe.

Like I said to the member opposite in debate earlier, our door is always open to take good ideas, but the proposed idea that’s been given to the ministry, labelling vulnerable road users, that is left up to the courts so they can make the right decision based on each individual case. Each accident is different, and the courts should have the power to make that determination, not a blanket legislation that’s going to take over and then label all of them into one particular category.

We’ll be introducing more legislation in the coming months, but our government is committed to ensuring that we have the safest roads in North America, and we’re open to taking all ideas because it’s a non-partisan issue.

Thank you to the great member from Thornhill for the question and for advocating so passionately for job creators in her riding.

I’ve had the privilege of hearing directly from entrepreneurs across the province, and maybe the member from Kanata–Carleton should do the same in her riding. Time and time again, they express real concern about the burden of rising costs from the federal carbon tax, combined with upcoming deadlines like CEBA loan repayments. The carbon tax inflates expenses at every step of the supply chain. Whether they’re farmers producing food, manufacturers leveraging our skilled workforce or shops anchoring our main streets, Ontario’s job creators all agree this punitive tax hits hardest just as they’re getting back on their feet.

Many business owners have shared fears that it could make them reduce staff, raise prices or even shut their doors for good. Unlike the Liberals and NDP, our government is listening to entrepreneurs. We’re taking action on affordability. We would like them to join us in calling on Ottawa to scrap the carbon tax.

I am proud to be part of a government under Premier Ford’s strong leadership, who has from the start spoken out against this job-killing tax. I’m glad to see Premiers, right across all political stripes, join us in calling on the federal government to expand exemptions for the carbon tax and to lessen the burden on consumers and job creators.

Every day I meet inspirational entrepreneurs who are pouring their hearts and souls into building something from nothing, providing jobs and hope. That’s why we’ve been there with our million-dollar investment in Futurpreneur Canada, which helps young entrepreneurs access financing, mentorship and resources to turn their bold ideas into thriving businesses—or Digital Main Street, which helps existing businesses create and enhance their online presence and generate jobs.

We’ve stepped up to the plate for small businesses. It’s time—

My question is to the Associate Minister of Small Business.

Small businesses contribute significantly to Ontario’s economy; however, the carbon tax is making it more difficult for many small businesses to survive. That’s why it was so shocking to hear last Thursday that the member from Kanata–Carleton rose in this House to defend the federal carbon tax. The member claimed that the vast majority—the vast majority—of households in Ontario are better off with a price on carbon.

Speaker, the reality is that no one is better off because of the carbon tax. With over 6,000 retail trade employees working in Kanata–Carleton alone, many of these businesses and their workers feel this regressive carbon tax is negatively impacting them.

Can the associate minister please explain how the carbon tax impacts small businesses across Ontario?

Our government must continue to respect the importance of small businesses. We know that the carbon tax is harmful to their success. Cutting the carbon tax has been one of our top priorities, since day one, in order for our small businesses to grow and thrive.

As our government works to make life more affordable for Ontarians, it’s concerning that the member from Kanata–Carleton is not supporting the small businesses in her riding.

Can the associate minister please elaborate on how our government continues to support small businesses in Ontario by fighting the federal carbon tax?

To the Premier: This is a critical time of the year when Ontario’s conservation officers are hard at work to deter unsafe hunting practices and protect wildlife. Conservation officers also investigate gruesome injuries and deaths that result from tragic hunting-related accidents, and they are responsible for laying charges in cases of careless hunting. They are working in some of Ontario’s most isolated locations, with limited access to support and assistance from other enforcement agencies. But conservation officers are not classified properly or compensated fairly for the work they do, causing low morale and a retention crisis.

My question: When will this government acknowledge the duties that conservation officers undertake and commit to reclassify them accordingly?

I will say, Speaker—through you to the Premier and to the House leader—that’s a pretty disappointing answer. After 10 years of advocacy in this place, after members from every single political party in this House championing the exact words before this House in Bill 40—that is a very disappointing answer. It’s a disappointing answer to the 3,066 pedestrians who were struck by reckless drivers in 2022—these are the government’s own numbers—the 1,412 cyclists who were struck by reckless drivers. Speaker, 466 of those pedestrians were either critically injured or died. One hundred and thirty five of those cyclists were either critically injured or died.

Is there—I ask the government through you, Speaker—an acceptable amount of road violence in our streets? The government has taken action around stunt driving. They talk about safety a lot. But now is the moment to justify to this House, with real words, why you are deciding to vote against Bill 40. Tell your government; tell yourselves. This is the moment to stand for safety and vote for Bill 40. Please change your answer.

To respond, the government House leader.

To reply, the member for Brampton East.

I think that we were clear that we would not be supporting it on second reading. Having said that, there were a number of significant legislations that were brought in by the former Minister of Transportation with respect to road safety across the province of Ontario, and we’ll continue to build on that.

I seek unanimous consent that, notwithstanding standing order 45(b)(iv), the time for debate on opposition day motion number 5 on subsidizing the cost of heat pumps and other energy-saving retrofits be apportioned as follows: 56 minutes to each of the recognized parties and eight minutes to the independent members as a group.

We are, of course, aware that OPSEU and the employer are working on a classification review. I’m actually quite confused by the idea that the NDP would support government interference in that process. I also understand that the director of our enforcement branch is part of the committee designed to review this classification. They will make sure that the work, the skills, the importance of the conservation officers are specifically addressed during this review. This government responded by creating new positions to support these officers, and we will continue to value the work of our conservation officers and the continued effort to support them in any way we can.

I’m hearing a lot of lip service from the government side. In the meantime, morale continues to decline because experienced conservation officers are leaving the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry to take jobs where their pay actually matches their training and experience.

Conservation officers are paid up to $31,000 less than OPP officers, despite being held to the same standards of training; they have the same levels of risk and the responsibility to carry sidearms. With a stroke of the pen, the government could provide the reclassification of these workers that these workers have long deserved.

Will this government recognize that the training and duties of conservation officers far exceed their compensation and commit to reclassification?

The ayes are 88; the nays are 8.

Supplementary? The member for Thunder Bay–Superior North.

There are three members who wish to raise points of order.

Agreed? I heard a no.

Call in the members. This is a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1148 to 1153.

On November 15, 2023, Mr. Jordan moved private member’s notice of motion number 70.

On November 15, 2023, Mr. Blais moved an amendment to the motion.

On November 16, 2023, Mr. Calandra moved an amendment to the amendment to the motion.

On November 16, 2023, Mr. Jordan moved that the question be now put.

We are now going to vote on Mr. Jordan’s motion that the question be now put. To explain, if this motion carries, I would then immediately put the question on Mr. Jordan’s original motion. This means that should the motion carry, both Mr. Blais’s amendment and Mr. Calandra’s amendment to the amendment would not proceed. If this closure motion does not carry, then the main motion, the amendment and the amendment to the amendment would remain on the order paper—just to make everything perfectly clear.

All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

I am now required to put the question on the main motion.

Mr. Jordan has moved private member’s notice of motion number 70, relating to carbon tax on fuels and inputs for home heating. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard some noes.

All those in favour of the motion will please say “aye.”

All those opposed will please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

Call in the members. This is another five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1158 to 1203.

On November 15, 2023, Mr. Jordan moved private member’s notice of motion number 70 relating to carbon tax on fuels and inputs for home heating.

All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Motion agreed to.

Deferred vote on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 40, An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act to provide for consequences to those who cause injury or death to certain road users / Projet de loi 40, Loi modifiant le Code de la route pour prévoir les conséquences qu’encourent les personnes qui causent des blessures à certains usagers de la route ou leur décès.

The division bells rang from 1207 to 1212.

On November 16, 2023, MPP Harden moved second reading of Bill 40, An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act to provide for consequences to those who cause injury or death to certain road users.

All those in favour, please rise and remain standing until recognized by the Clerk.

Second reading negatived.

The House recessed from 1216 to 1300.

Afternoon meeting reported in volume B.

On a point of order, I would like to wish the 26th Premier of Ontario a very happy birthday.

Applause.

I’d like to correct my record. I said to the parliamentary assistant of the Minister of Health that the report was out five days ago; it was actually out 18 days ago.

Thank you to the member from Brantford–Brant for this very important question.

Speaker, a U of T study shows that creating one new mine creates an over-$300-million increase in Ontario’s GDP and creates approximately 2,000 jobs. That’s why we want more mines. But the carbon tax is threatening these opportunities to grow our economy.

The NDP and the Liberals support this disastrous tax. They support hiking up fuel costs for the exploration companies in my riding that are working out in the bush, searching for new mines. They support hurting small businesses in Timmins by making it more expensive to get the drills turning and ship the core samples to the labs around Ontario. They support making it more expensive for large mining companies to reinvest their opportunities and extend mining opportunities in their own ridings.

Speaker, we need the opposition to join us in telling their friends in Ottawa to axe this tax.

I’ve said it many times: There’s no electric vehicle revolution without mining.

I was encouraged this past year when the feds followed our lead by creating their own critical minerals strategy to support the homegrown electric vehicle supply chain. But they can’t have it both ways. You can’t put a tax that will raise the costs of our minerals at a time when we are competing globally. Yet, they’re imposing a tax that ensures that every part and process required to make electric vehicles is more expensive, especially our critical minerals. You heard it right, Speaker; the members opposite support the federal carbon tax that burdens the people and industries required to build EVs. It’s shameful that they support a tax that makes life more unaffordable for families and makes job-creating industries less competitive.

It’s time to axe this tax.

My question is for the Minister of Mines. Mining is an essential part of the supply chain that we are building for electric vehicles and is a source of significant economic opportunity. For many northern communities, mining provides stable and good-paying jobs and brings prosperity to regional economies. Unfortunately, the opposition has voted against every action our government has taken to support the mining sector.

Speaker, what’s even worse is that the independent Liberals and the opposition NDP support the federally imposed carbon tax, which harms this critical sector. While our government is taking urgent action, other members in this House are supporting a regressive tax which will hold back progress in expanding the mining sector.

Can the minister please explain the impact of the carbon tax on Ontario’s mining sector?

According to the Mining Association of Canada, the minimum federal carbon tax is set to increase by $15 per tonne per year until it reaches $170 per tonne in 2030.

At a time when our government has attracted investments that position Ontario to become the global leader in manufacturing every component of clean, zero-emission electric vehicles, the impact of the carbon tax will cause significant consequences.

It is unacceptable that the independent Liberals and the opposition NDP continue to support the federal carbon tax.

Can the minister please explain the impact of the carbon tax on major job creators for our economy, like the mining sector?