Thank you to the minister for his dedicated work for this province.

Under the previous Liberal government, years of high taxes and endless red tape led to countless businesses to pack up and leave that province. Thankfully, from the first day we took office, we’ve been focused on lowering costs for businesses, which is why we’ve seen record investment in job creation across the province. Yet last week, a Liberal member in this House spoke in support of a federal carbon tax—a tax that’s making everything more expensive for businesses.

Speaker, can the minister please explain how the federal government’s plan to continue hiking the carbon tax will affect Ontario’s businesses?

Thank you very much, Speaker.

We have to think about where we were in 2018. Speaker, we had lost 300,000 manufacturing jobs. The Liberals, supported by the NDP, had left Ontario completely unprepared. In fact, in 2019, Reuters announced there would be $300 billion spent on the EV supply chain and not one penny of it was scheduled to come to Canada—not one penny of it.

Our government took office, reduced the cost of doing business by $8 billion annually and, as a direct result in our negotiations with all of the companies, we landed $27 billion worth of auto and EV. Bloomberg has announced us as the number two global supply chain and that’s because we kept taxes low.

The Liberals lost 300,000 manufacturing jobs. They wanted us out of manufacturing and into the service sector. They jeopardized our competitiveness. They tripled the carbon tax. They are tripling the carbon tax by 2030—they’re going to add 37 cents a litre. They’re going to continue to jeopardize our competitiveness, just like they did for the 15 years that they were in office. Speaker, we cannot go back to the days of the Liberal tax-and-spend. That’s why we want them to axe the carbon tax.

Interjection.

I appreciate the opportunity to talk about the judicial advisory committee and how they work. I’ll tell you, Mr. Speaker, we have been working to make the system more transparent and more fair.

Talking about choice, when we came to government, the committee would give two names to the Attorney General for choice. They could get a hundred applications. They could do fifty interviews and two names would come forward. Those are the only two names that you would see. In one occasion, I got John Smith and Joan Smith in one location; and Joan Smith and John Smith in the other—effectively, giving you choice: “Would you like vegetables? It’s peas.” That’s it. There was no choice.

So we changed in 2021 to allow for six names per appointment, because the Attorney General is charged with making that appointment. We’ve also made other changes to improve the process. We’ve been very open about our criteria.

Now, rather than the conspiracy theories that abound in NDP, I would like to know which one of the 83 judges I have appointed she doesn’t like.

What I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, is that we work closely with the Ontario Bar Association, with the Law Society of Ontario, and with the Federation of Ontario Law Associations. We work with the judiciary. And the Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee is that. It’s an advisory committee. Of all of the Chief Justices, the regional senior judges, the JPs, the regional senior JPs, the Associate Chief Justices, and the 83 judges that this government has appointed, I challenge the NDP to tell me one that is inappropriate.

On several occasions, the legal sector magazine Canadian Lawyer has raised legitimate concerns about this government’s pattern of politicizing the judicial appointment process.

Internal government documents show that on November 19, 2021, the Attorney General was notified of an imminent judicial vacancy in Cornwall. This provided more than enough time for the Attorney General to work with the Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee, a non-partisan and respected advisory body, and choose from the committee’s highly qualified and vetted list of candidate recommendations.

Speaker, it’s been two years since that notification and Cornwall is still short one sitting judge. Is the Attorney General ignoring the committee’s advice because his Conservative candidate choice was not on the list of qualified and vetted recommendations?

Political interferences has produced dire consequences for Ontario’s justice system. Under this Conservative government, there have been record-high tribunal wait-lists, massive court staffing shortages, courtrooms literally falling apart, charges against violent offenders being tossed for unconditional court delays, and much more.

Considering their insistent political meddling with tribunal and judicial appointments and the current criminal investigation of this government for reported corruption, how can anyone from the legal community or the general public ever trust this government again?

Interjections.

I do appreciate that, but I think the member is incorrect. Really, the policies that have been ushered in by this government and the significant housing supply action plans brought in by the former minister have actually helped us increase housing starts across the province to their highest level in over 10 years. In fact, purpose-built rentals, because of those policies, are at their highest level in over 15 years. Because of the policies that the Minister of Finance fought for to ensure that we took off the HST on purpose-built rentals, the federal government finally, after a year, came on board and has matched that.

What we’re doing is working with our municipal partners to get more shovels in the ground as quickly as we possibly can, removing the obstacles that the Liberals put in the way, and we’re going to continue to do that. Our policies are working, and they’re working because we know how important it is to remove obstacles, to cut red tape, to reduce taxes so that people can get out of their parents’ basement and into a brand-new home for themselves.

Yesterday, the Premier said the people of Ontario “don’t give two hoots about” his government’s attempt to carve up the greenbelt, but I disagree. So do hundreds of people who signed petitions and joined rallies to oppose this government’s decisions. I imagine also Ontario’s Auditor General, the Integrity Commissioner and the RCMP would disagree.

My question is for the Premier: How can the Premier say people don’t care about his government’s shady greenbelt deal when it was public pressure that forced him to reverse the policy in the first place?

It sure looks like the government is intentionally blocking the public from participating at committee. Are you doing this to avoid being held accountable by the public for preferential treatment of the greenbelt’s special speculator friends?

What the Premier was saying yesterday was how important it is for the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and for the government of Ontario to focus on the priorities of the people of Ontario. Those priorities include affordability. Those priorities include building homes. The people of the province of Ontario are worried about the increasing interest rates.

Now, today is the day where the federal government is, at four o’clock, giving a fiscal update which will include, presumably, measures which will either hurt or harm the economy of the country. Have the NDP asked even one question on the economy? We’re now, what, 40 minutes into question period and the NDP have yet to ask a question on the economy because they don’t care about the people of the province of Ontario.

What they care about is ensuring that people are dependent on government. It is an overriding theme for them. While we want to give people the tools to succeed, they want people to be dependent on government. We’re going to do what we think is right: cut taxes so that—

It is listed on the Environmental Registry right now. People have the opportunity to comment. If they are against the changes that we are making, they will have that opportunity to say so in committee, but we will continue on to provide the maximum protection of the greenbelt, despite the fact that they never did it. This party will stand up for the greenbelt. We will stand up for the environment and—

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Energy.

I hear from my constituents that they want to be treated equally and fairly when it comes to the carbon tax. They see how the federal government has moved quickly to provide a pause on the carbon tax for Atlantic Canadians, and they are asking that Ontario be provided with the same opportunity. I agree with my constituents; all forms of home heating in Ontario should be exempt.

As winter approaches, home heating costs are top of mind for many families. Unfortunately, the independent Liberals and opposition MPP do not appreciate the hardship many Ontarians face because of the carbon tax. Speaker, through you: Can the minister please explain how the carbon tax negatively impacts Ontarians who need financial relief?

Along with the minister, I fully support the government House leader in calling on the federal government to at least pause the collection of HST from home heating bills, even if they won’t scrap the disastrous carbon tax. Ontario households should never have to choose between heating and eating just because of the federal Liberals’ carbon tax.

It is shameful that the majority of Liberal members have once again demonstrated that they just don’t care about affordability by voting against our government’s carbon tax motions, even after they themselves suggested that they would support this very same measure.

Speaker, through you, can the minister please elaborate on how the federally imposed carbon tax negatively impacts the people of Ontario?

Mr. Speaker, I find it very ironic, the member from the Green Party saying all this, when he votes against every single piece of legislation we have to speed up development, to make sure that municipalities have all the tools they need to get things built. I want to remind you, once again, in his own riding—they voted against student housing on Guelph University’s property themselves; I never heard a word from them.

Maybe if Mr. Green comes on board and starts voting for building homes and cutting out red tape and making things happen—you’re welcome to come to this side of the aisle any time.

I’ll remind the members to refer to each other by their riding name or ministerial title as applicable.

The next question.

Government House leader and Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Interjections.

Start the clock. The next question.

The member from Whitby—the great member—is absolutely right: There is a better way. I talked about it last week, and it’s around carbon capture utilization and storage, one of the great things we’re doing here in Ontario to make this province a global leader in reducing emissions. We can do this by creating jobs and creating opportunity.

Enbridge appeared at committee last spring, and they said the path to net zero in Ontario is achievable by 2050 with cost-effective, reliable and resilient approaches, one where CCS is expected to play a key role. It’s critical for industry, communities and governments to continue working together to create the right frameworks to support CCS opportunities in Ontario, opportunities like creating low-carbon hydrogen.

Speaker, the way isn’t to drill into the wallets of Ontarian families; the way is to make sure that we’re creating jobs for Ontarians every day, while meeting our obligations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. That’s what we’re doing through my ministry. That’s what this government is doing every single day.

Last week I talked about the great work of the Minister of Mines. Boy, I love looking at the Minister of Mines. He’s excited to go to work every day and make sure that we build that road to the Ring of Fire, make sure we extract those metals, make sure that we build the EV battery capital here in Ontario. The Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade is on the case every day.

Mr. Speaker, we know in Ontario that it’s not about taking money from Ontarians and saying, “Oh, trust us; we’ll give it back to you later.” It’s about creating jobs. It’s about meeting our obligations. We are focused on that. We are doing it every single day. We’ll continue to do it every day. I’m hoping at 4 p.m. today, the federal government realizes that and takes the opportunity to get rid of that carbon tax.

My question is for the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry.

What’s clear is that the carbon tax is not working to reduce emissions. However, the carbon tax is working to drive up inflation and make the products we need every day even more expensive. Businesses across Ontario are forced to pay this tax instead of making investments to expand their workforce by hiring more workers. It’s not right that this federally imposed, regressive tax is making it difficult for businesses to innovate and grow. There are other ways to reduce emissions without this useless tax.

Speaker, can the minister please explain how our government is supporting businesses to strengthen economic growth and curb emissions?

It’s clear that carbon capture technology is just one way that our government has supported job creators and our shared goal of reduced emissions. Investments in job creation and innovation are key to building a better Ontario. Many sectors have great potential to integrate new technology that will significantly reduce emissions. That’s why it’s so concerning that the independent Liberals and the opposition NDP insist on supporting this job-killing and regressive tax.

Speaker can the minister please elaborate on the importance of enabling the technology that is essential for reducing emissions in Ontario?

I am absolutely thrilled that the member opposite is finally talking about an expansion of primary care in the province of Ontario—an initiative that our government brought forward and he voted against. To suggest that we are in any way delaying this expansion is a complete fallacy. We are assessing all of those expressions of interest. And I will say, there are some wonderful examples of innovation, that we will be able to expand primary—the first primary expansion of multidisciplinary teams in the province’s history. I’m very happy to do it. I’m finally pleased that the member opposite is on board and supporting it.

What I know is, primary expansion in the province of Ontario is expanding. We are assessing those expressions of interest. We have literally received hundreds of applications. We’re seeing innovation. We’re seeing partnerships. We’re seeing community care, health care centres coming forward and showing that they can help and be part of the solution. We’ll continue to do that work. We want to make sure that primary care expansion is absolutely at the core of how we are improving health care services in the province of Ontario.

I have to say, Ontario still is leading Canada in the number of people who have connections with a primary care clinician—we’re at 90% in Ontario. These are not my numbers; these come from CIHI. We’re going to do better, with this most recent announcement of primary care expansion.

Mr. Speaker, in January, this government forced the walk-in clinic in Mallorytown to close after they changed how virtual clinics bill OHIP. It was the only one of its kind in Leeds-Grenville, and over 1,000 rural residents were left without another option.

In April, a funding application was submitted for a nurse-practitioner-led clinic, another option for rural residents. An announcement was supposed to be made in September, and then October, and then the fall economic statement—crickets. The mayor just called it “a very deathly silence.”

In the meantime, you’ve still got rural Ontarians without access to primary care. More people with more complex problems crowd the Brockville emergency room. How many times is this kind of thing being repeated in rural and northern Ontario?

Mr. Speaker, innovative ideas for primary care are ready to roll across the province. Why can’t this government make up its mind and get rural Ontarians access to primary care?

The minister is probably going to make up some attack on the Liberal record in her answer to this supplemental question, so let me just say here that the first nurse-practitioner-led clinic in Canada was in 2007 in Sudbury, in the first term of a Liberal government. Team-based primary care began in 2005 in the first term of a Liberal government.

Mr. Speaker, the government’s MPP for Leeds–Grenville–Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes has been standing up and asking about this critically important rural health care issue in this Legislature. To the minister: Why does the Liberal MPP next door have to fight for health care in rural communities?

To reply, the Deputy Premier and Minister of Health.

Well, I’m happy to speak about some of the efforts that we’re doing to improve real estate management in the province, such as the bill that will be before the House this afternoon, in terms of centralizing real estate assets and having better oversight and a sightline into the use of our real estate so that we can address some of the most pressing challenges in society that we are facing today, like affordable housing and long-term care. I’m very happy to speak about that further.

My question is to the Premier. Last week, Infrastructure Ontario announced that Colliers Project Leaders would continue to provide project management services for the province’s real estate assets. In 2017, the Auditor General criticized Infrastructure Ontario’s previous procurement of project management services. She said that procurement had been structured in a way that favoured large companies like Colliers. There were only three bids for two massive contracts. The new Colliers mega-contract appears to be even bigger.

What is the value of the new Colliers mega-contract, and how many eligible bids did Infrastructure Ontario receive?

Mr. Speaker, there has been no government in the history of this province that has done more for public transit than this government, under the leadership of Premier Ford.

In fact, on the Kitchener line, we have increased service by over 27% since 2020. And guess what? That member from Waterloo has voted against every single one of those service increases. This government has been committed to making sure the tunnels are built, to ensure that we can have all-day, two-way GO across the Kitchener line. But then again, when we put those investments forward in this House, in the budget, that member stands up every single time and votes no—votes no for expansion of GO rail transit across this province, specifically on the Kitchener line, and says no to the people of Waterloo for better public transit.

My question is to the Premier. Over the last couple of weeks, the NDP, the official opposition, have put forward two motions that would make life more affordable for Ontarians. Both of these motions have been shut down by this government. Last week, we tabled a motion simply calling for a clear timeline and a clear, firm funding commitment for the expanded, two-way, all-day GO train service between Kitchener and Toronto. The business case for this is very sound, but the government chose to vote against that motion, even though in 2018 and 2022 this Premier promised the people of Kitchener-Waterloo that he would get it done. This Premier also has a candidate in Kitchener in the by-election right now, and when they announced him, they promised to deliver two-way, all-day GO service. I wonder how this candidate feels now that the government has voted down a firm funding commitment and a firm plan for two-way, all-day GO.

My question is very simple to the Premier of Ontario: Why does he keep leaving the people of Kitchener-Waterloo behind, stranded at the station?

Interjections.

Speaker, just yesterday, we saw this government again vote no to a measure that would benefit the lives of Ontarians. The NDP motion to make heat pumps subsidized, actually, in co-operation with the federal government, to help Ontarians with energy-saving retrofits was the only solution, so far, put forward in this House to tackle affordability and climate change. This would create good, local jobs. It would address the underground economy. It would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It’s a good idea. But this government is not going to go down that road. Our proposal actually would make homes so much more efficient and lower people’s energy bills.

To the Premier: Why does this government continue to vote against the interests of the people we are elected to serve in Ontario?