Mr. Speaker, it is why I put stickers on those gas pumps a couple of years ago, to remind folks where this was headed.

I want to thank the member from Sault Ste. Marie for his advocacy in his community. He’s an outstanding MPP.

What he heard and what I heard during constituency week last week was not just about the cost of everything to our ordinary, hard-working families, but integrated supply chains like steel. Thank goodness we’re coming along with electric car technology to save on some of those costs.

In production to manufacturing, you’ve got significant rises in costs. In the integrated supply chain in forestry, we have woodland operators—logging trucks, pulp mills—cutting board feet at increased costs, which drives up the cost of housing.

In food, all this talk about baloney got me to thinking about how much it costs, from the farmer to the abattoir to the counter—for that cost of baloney. It has all gone up for this tax.

Scrap the tax. It’s a bunch of baloney.

This is no laughing matter. The Dryden Eagles and the Fort Frances Muskies live 200 kilometres away from each other. Think of how much that costs, Mr. Speaker, when they go to have a sports tournament. Think of Sachigo First Nation today, where milk is $9 a jug, a box of Pampers is $30 for half a package. Do you know what’s driving up the cost of bread, which has now eclipsed $6 in those isolated northern communities? The carbon tax. Flour: $25 for 10 kilograms in those isolated communities.

This is serious. We appreciate the support of the NDP. This tax needs to be scrapped, and the Liberals need to get on board with that.

Speaker, to the Premier: Nell Toussaint died roughly a year ago. She was a constituent of mine whose life was cut short by a lack of timely medical care. Ms. Toussaint was a migrant working in Ontario who did not qualify for medical care, even though she was employed and paying taxes. She was struck down by an operable disease, lost a leg, and then had a heart attack and stroke. She died early.

Why are she and others, even when they pay taxes, still left without medical care?

As the member opposite knows, there are a number of programs available for—whether they are refugees or individuals who are waiting for permanent residency. Where we have programs—in fact, our agricultural temporary foreign workers is one such example where we ensured that OHIP coverage is available for those individuals.

Of course, our community health centres are another example of where we provide primary care access through multidisciplinary teams, specifically related for some populations, including, of course, individuals who are awaiting permanent residency or here for other reasons.

This speaks to the expansion of primary care and why it is so critical in our province.

This bill amends the Planning Act with respect to official plans and bylaws.

The amendments state that official plans and zoning bylaws may not have the effect of prohibiting the use of four or fewer residential units on specified parcels of urban residential land. They also may not impose a floor-to-area ratio on residential buildings or residential structures that contain three to six residential units, may not prohibit residential buildings or residential structures from being four or fewer storeys in height, and may not require parking spaces to be provided in connection with residential buildings or residential structures that contain at least four residential units.

I would like to thank Cathy Orlando from Sudbury for this petition.

“Transform Ontario’s Energy Sector.

“Whereas residents are struggling with energy bill increases and need relief; and

“Whereas natural gas is no longer the cheapest way to heat homes because electric heat pumps are now much more efficient, can provide all heating needs even in the cold climates, and result in far lower energy bills compared to gas heating; and

“Whereas natural gas is methane gas, which is a fossil fuel that causes approximately one third of Ontario’s GHG emissions and must be phased out”—

“Whereas natural gas is methane gas, which is a fossil fuel that causes approximately one third of Ontario’s GHG emissions and must be phased out because it is inconsistent with all climate targets, while heat pumps result in the lowest GHG emissions and are consistent with a zero-carbon future;”

They petition the Legislative Assembly as follows:

“(1) Amend the natural gas expansion program to allow municipalities to redirect funds toward heat pumps, including for ongoing phase 2 projects; and

“(2) Ask the Ontario Energy Board to determine in gas expansion leave-to-construct applications which option would result in the lowest energy bills—directing the subsidy to gas expansion or to heat pump subsidies.”

I am happy to sign, and I will ask Emily to bring it to the Clerk.

Point of order.

Thank you, Speaker. I was somewhat caught by surprise by this point of order, but in cases where the petition isn’t overly lengthy, isn’t meant to waste the time of the Legislature, I think it would be beneficial to allow the petition to be fully read on behalf of the people who actually went to all the work of putting it together and getting the signatures. Thank you, Speaker.

I will ask the member for Nickel Belt: Has she taken the petition to the table and had it certified prior to its presentation?

Interjection.

Point of order.

Merci, monsieur le Président. This one is certified.

“Health Care: Not for Sale.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario”—I’ll make sure I read it very clearly so that all my colleagues have a chance. Anyway, I will read it—

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas Ontarians should get health care based on need—not the size of your wallet;

“Whereas Premier Doug Ford and Health Minister Sylvia Jones say they’re planning to privatize parts of health care;

“Whereas privatization will bleed nurses, doctors and PSWs out of our public hospitals, making the health care crisis worse;

“Whereas privatization always ends with patients getting a bill;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately stop all plans to further privatize Ontario’s health care system, and fix the crisis in health care by:

“—repealing Bill 124 and recruiting, retaining and respecting doctors, nurses and PSWs with better pay and better working conditions;

“—licensing tens of thousands of internationally educated nurses and other health care professionals already in Ontario, who wait years and pay thousands to have their credentials certified;

“—10 employer-paid sick days;

“—making education and training free or low-cost for nurses, doctors and other health care professionals;

“—incentivizing doctors and nurses to choose to live and work in northern Ontario;

“—funding hospitals to have enough nurses on every shift, on every ward.”

I fully support this petition. I will give it to Olivia to bring to the Clerks’ table.

This petition is called “Urgent Family Doctor Shortage in Chinatown in Ontario.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas there is a looming primary care provider shortage in Toronto’s Chinatown area, impacting many Chinese Canadian residents;

“Whereas a significant number of doctors in downtown Toronto who provide service in Cantonese or Mandarin are nearing retirement or have retired, leaving thousands of residents without a family doctor;

“Whereas the lack of primary care is forcing residents to rely on emergency rooms for basic medical needs, contributing to the overburdening of our hospitals; and

“Whereas over 2.2 million Ontarians do not have a family doctor, and that number is expected to increase to 4.4 million by 2026;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“—guarantee everyone in Ontario has access to a primary care provider;

“—increase investment in primary care in the next provincial budget;

“—expand primary care options in Chinatown and other areas with service gaps by investing in primary care, as well as non-profit and public health clinics;

“—make it easier for internationally trained doctors and nurses to work in Ontario’s health care sector;

“—cut the administrative burden on family doctors to make the profession more attractive;

“—ensure the government will cover translation fees for minority-language-speaking groups.”

I support this petition, and I am affixing my signature to it.

Speaker, I used to do this—as you know, I present a lot of petitions. Once I have presented a petition and it does not conform, the Clerk lets me know.

Those are petitions that I’ve presented many times—and the table never let me know that it was not, so I took it for granted that I was able to read it again because I have handed it to them, they have signed off on it—

J’aimerai remercier Diane Lemay de Garson dans mon comté pour ces pétitions.

« Soutenez le système d’éducation francophone en Ontario ...

« Attendu que les enfants francophones ont un droit constitutionnel à une éducation de haute qualité, financée par les fonds publics, dans leur propre langue;

« Attendu que l’augmentation des inscriptions dans le système d’éducation en langue française signifie que plus de 1 000 nouveaux enseignants et enseignantes de langue française sont nécessaires chaque année pour les cinq prochaines années;

« Attendu que les changements apportés au modèle de financement du gouvernement provincial pour la formation des enseignantes et enseignants de langue française signifient que l’Ontario n’en forme que 500 par an;

« Attendu que le nombre de personnes qui enseignent sans certification complète dans le système d’éducation en langue française a augmenté de plus de 450 % au cours de la dernière décennie; »

Ils et elles demandent à l’Assemblée législative de l’Ontario « de fournir immédiatement le financement demandé par le rapport du groupe de travail sur la pénurie des enseignantes et des enseignants dans le système d’éducation en langue française de l’Ontario et de travailler avec des partenaires pour mettre pleinement en oeuvre les recommandations. »

J’appuie cette pétition, monsieur le Président. Je vais la signer et je demande à Anne de l’amener à la table des greffiers.

“Coverage for Take-Home Cancer Drugs.

“Whereas cancer drugs administered in a hospital or similar setting are covered for all eligible Ontario residents; and

“Whereas coverage for cancer drugs taken at home are a mix of private insurance, out-of-pocket costs, or provincial programs; and

“Whereas British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Quebec all cover” the cost of “cancer drugs taken at home; and

“Whereas the Canadian Cancer Society has called on the government to cover take-home cancer drugs, as their data supports that access saves lives;”

They petition the Legislative Assembly as follows:

“To prioritize access to cancer treatment by developing a provincial program that provides full coverage for eligible cancer drugs taken at home.”

I fully support this petition, will affix my name to it and ask page Tyler to bring it to the Clerk.

Mr. Thanigasalam, on behalf of Ms. Mulroney, moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 174, An Act to authorize the expenditure of certain amounts for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024 / Projet de loi 174, Loi autorisant l’utilisation de certaines sommes pour l’exercice se terminant le 31 mars 2024.

I have a petition entitled “Pass Anti-Scab Labour Legislation.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the use of replacement workers undermines workers”—

“Stand Up for Local Conservation Authorities.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the Ford government’s devastating changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and Bill 23 create substantial risks to people, properties and the environment; and

“Whereas these changes allow developers to dig, build, and excavate without oversight from conservation authorities; and

“Whereas Ford’s government would allow the sale of conservation lands—including endangered or threatened species habitat, wetlands, and areas of natural and scientific interest; and

“Whereas these changes will increase risks of flood, fires, and droughts in our province;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to reverse the reckless and harmful changes so conservation authorities can properly protect Ontario’s watersheds and wetlands.”

This is a very significant, important certified petition. I’m going to add my name to those of my constituents and give it to page Krishna to take to the table.

Further debate?

It’s always a pleasure to stand in this House to represent the good people of Scarborough–Rouge Park.

I look forward to hearing the remarks from the parliamentary assistant to the President of the Treasury Board, the member for Mississauga–Lakeshore, and from the official opposition.

It is an honour to rise in the House this afternoon, in my role as parliamentary assistant to the President of the Treasury Board and as a member of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, to speak in support of Bill 174, the Supply Act for the 2023-24 fiscal year, introduced by my friend the government House leader.

Speaker, this is the fifth year that I have had the privilege to rise in the House to speak in support of the annual Supply Act. As you know, this discussion and the vote that will follow are critical steps towards the final approval for all spending for the fiscal year, which ends in less than two weeks, on March 31, 2024.

It is important for me to note that the government is not proposing any new spending today. Those debates and those votes have already taken place. This House is required to pass the Supply Act in every fiscal year to approve all spending by the government of Ontario and the offices of the Legislature that has already happened through the year which was outlined in the estimates. Members will recall that this House gave its concurrence to the 2023-24 estimates two weeks ago, on March 6. This allows us to move on the Supply Act, where we are today. This is a very important part of the fiscal process because it gives the government an opportunity to outline the provincial fiscal position for the record and because, if passed, it represents the final agreement of the House with the estimates proposed by the government, including the supplementary estimates tabled last month.

Speaker, as I said here two weeks ago, this process will not be the subject of water-cooler discussion tomorrow; it won’t trend on Twitter, and it won’t be covered on the nightly news. But as we approach the end point of the fiscal cycle, I believe it is important for the general public and, especially, for all members in this House to understand how this Legislature approves all government spending.

As I’ve said before, the previous Liberal government and the previous Liberal Minister of Finance did not follow public sector accounting rules. Some members will remember the Auditor General saying that the previous Liberal Minister of Finance and the previous member for Mississauga South was making up his own rules, treating billions of dollars of losses as assets to avoid recording it as a deficit.

This government was elected to restore fiscal accountability and transparency to the provincial government.

I know this has been said many times, but I want to reiterate that every dollar spent by the province comes out of the pockets of hard-working Ontario taxpayers. This is the lens through which we should look at all government spending here at Queen’s Park and, for that matter, every level of government.

Speaker, Ontario families and small businesses are dealing with high inflation, high interest rates and global geopolitical uncertainty. The federal tax increase on April 1 is also adding to their challenges—including a 23% increase in the federal carbon tax.

I want to take a moment to thank the members for their support for my motion 81, calling on the federal government to stop its alcohol tax increase on April 1. With many of our local breweries and restaurants still struggling to recover from the pandemic, now is not the time for another tax increase.

But there are economic pressures right across the province, in almost every sector. These challenges have touched all areas of our lives. So it has never been more important to remind everyone who is paying the bills and to review how the government handles the public purse with even greater scrutiny.

At the same time, as we look to the future, the most important factor is the resilience of Ontario’s workers, businesses and families. The people of Ontario are our best asset. That is why the government must account for every dollar that we spend. That is what the people of Ontario expect from their elected representatives, and that’s what they deserve. The fiscal decisions that we make today will affect generations of Ontarians to come. This is a heavy responsibility, but I’m confident that we are on the right track.

At this point, I would like to provide a quick overview of our government’s fiscal cycle. I know that some members have been through this process many times—for them, this will be a review—but some members may be going through this process for the very first time.

The former President of the Treasury Board tabled volume 1 of the 2023-24 estimates on April 20, 2023. This volume of the estimates provided a detailed public record of government ministry and office budgets, based on the spending plans outlined in the 2023 Ontario budget.

Of course, the government may also table supplementary estimates to ensure that the government has the resources it needs throughout the fiscal year. And in 2023-24, supplementary estimates were tabled twice: first, on November 29, 2023, and again just last month, on February 29, 2024. Combined, they provide additional funding for the contingency fund, to add flexibility to the fiscal plan, and for new education and transportation initiatives.

The President of the Treasury Board also tabled volume 2 of the 2023-24 estimates on November 29, 2023. This second volume of the estimates outlines the spending plans of the independent legislative offices, including the Office of the Assembly, the Office of the Auditor General, the Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, and the Ontario Ombudsman.

Together, the estimates provide details of the operating and capital spending needs of ministries and the legislative offices for the 2023-24 fiscal year. They represent the government’s formal request to the Legislature to approve its spending requirements. Every Ontario government must complete this annual process to provide each ministry with the legal authority to spend their capital and operating budgets. Basically, this allows us to proceed with the essential business of the government. It’s how we fund the programs and services that Ontarians rely on every day.

And for anyone curious about the estimates or the public accounts, they are all available to the public. I urge everyone to visit ontario.ca/estimates. This is an excellent resource, because the estimates are available going back more than 20 years. The public accounts are available online going back 30 years, to 1994.

Once the estimates are introduced, they are referred to the standing committees for review. These committees then select ministries to appear, to answer questions about the estimates. The committees review specific allocations, referred to as “votes” because the committee votes on each allocation. It is also important to note that almost all the ministries have their estimates reviewed by all-party standing committees, so the spending we are being asked to approve today has already been discussed over the last several months.

I want to reiterate that the government is not proposing any new spending today. The government is only asking us to approve the spending outlined in the 2023-24 estimates, based on the 2023 budget and the fall economic statement, for the current fiscal year.

Combined with the public accounts process, the Supply Act can be seen as crossing the finish line for the fiscal year. If any member should vote against this bill, they would be voting against the programs and services that the people of Ontario depend on.

Speaker, again, I appreciate the opportunity to address this House this afternoon to outline the important process in the provincial fiscal cycle.

At this point, I would like to outline some of the top-line numbers to provide an update on the overall picture of Ontario’s economic and fiscal outlook. These are the most up-to-date numbers reported by the Ministry of Finance in the third-quarter finances just over a month ago, and I believe they give us a clear picture of exactly where the province is right now.

The provincial deficit is a key measure of Ontario’s financial health—because it is not fair to the next generation to leave them with an unsustainable debt.

With that being said, the 2023-24 third-quarter finances project the province’s deficit to be at $4.5 billion this year. There is no denying that this is a significant amount of money, but it is also important to note that this is an improvement of $1.1 billion compared to the outlook in the 2023 fall economic statement. This is a significant improvement, and it deserves to be recognized here because it is a great sign that the province is moving in the right direction. The reduction in the deficit was mainly due to increased revenue and lower interest on the provincial debt. This is great news for all Ontarians.

Of course, to see the overall fiscal picture, we need to look at the provincial revenue. Government revenues in 2023-24 are projected to be $202.7 billion. That’s $942 billion more than the forecast in the 2023 fall economic statement. It is reasonable to ask why revenues were almost $1 billion higher than what was predicted, and the answer is actually quite simple. There were stronger and expected tax revenues and slightly higher tax revenues as a result of new information received from the federal government since the fall economic statement.

In 2023-24, overall program expenses are now projected to be $193.4 billion. That is $424 million higher than the previous forecast in the 2023 fall economic statement, and it is also $2.8 billion higher than the 2023 budget plan. Again, the question that seems obvious is “Why?” Well, there are a few reasons for this increase.

Firstly, there was an additional $1.7-billion investment in health care, mainly for compensation costs, cancer treatment services and other health initiatives. There was also a new $704-million investment through the New Deal for Toronto, including $504 million for transit and transportation funding and $200 million in operating supports for shelters. And lastly, there was a $583-million increase in the college sector, offset by third-party revenue. These three examples where program expenses have increased represent three of the top priorities for the government: health, education and infrastructure.

Speaker, in a perfect world, our initial projections would be 100% correct 100% of the time. But one of the strengths of this government is fiscal flexibility and making adjustments to meet the changing needs of the province. That’s the reason for our quarterly spending updates.

The bottom line is that Ontario’s economy is expected to see continued growth in 2024. In the context of the global economic situation, this is a win. In large part, this is because of the resilience of the people of the province of Ontario, but also the targeted investments and the prudent fiscal management of this government, under this Premier and this Minister of Finance.

Speaker, as I said, the Supply Act supports the spending plans outlined in the 2023 Ontario budget, Building a Strong Ontario.

As a member of the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs last year, I also had the opportunity to travel across the province for pre-budget consultations, in Kenora, Thunder Bay and Sault Ste. Marie in the north; in Ottawa and Kingston in the east; in Windsor and Essex in the southwest; and of course, right here in Toronto. As I’ve said before, the 2023 budget reflects the priorities of the people we heard from right across Ontario during this process. It was a long-term, prudent and realistic path forward for Ontario, designed to make life easier and more affordable for families, workers and businesses across the province.

As the parliamentary assistant at the Treasury Board, I had the opportunity to work with the Minister of Finance and with our colleagues on some important measures for small businesses and manufacturers in the 2023 Ontario budget. And I’d like to give just a few examples.

Firstly, we are expanding access to the small business corporate income tax rate by increasing the phase-out range. This provides Ontario’s small businesses with income tax relief of $265 million from 2022-23 to 2025-26.

Secondly, the new Ontario Made Manufacturing Investment Tax Credit provides a 10% refundable corporate tax credit to help local manufacturers lower their costs, invest in their workers and become more competitive. Manufacturers will receive a tax credit of up to $2 million each year, because we recognize that it is critical that we rebuild our manufacturing sector in this province.

As the Minister of Economic Development said earlier this month, before we were elected in 2018, companies were leaving Ontario. Ontario had lost over 300,000 manufacturing jobs, including many in the auto sector. Sergio Marchionne at Fiat Chrysler told former Premier Wynne that she had made Ontario the most expensive place to do business in North America. And at the Ford assembly plant in Oakville, where I worked for 31 years, we watched as Ontario lost auto sector jobs, while the former Liberal Minister of Finance from Mississauga South, at the time, told us that assembly line manufacturing was a thing of the past. Well, he was incorrect, because today we’ve been able to attract $28 billion of automotive investment in this province, under this Premier.

Speaker, our government has a very different approach. The Premier, the Minister of Finance and our team have made Ontario open for business again. This government is focused on driving growth by lowering costs, cutting taxes, red tape and energy costs, and attracting more jobs and more investment to Ontario. These policies have produced an economic recovery that leads the country.

Since 2018, Ontario has added over 715,000 new jobs. In fact, in 2023, Ontario created more manufacturing jobs than all 50 US states combined. Can we just imagine that? All 50 US states—we are creating more jobs here in the province of Ontario.

There is no better example than the auto sector, where we have attracted over $28 billion in new investment from global auto manufacturers in the last three years alone. They see the enormous potential in Ontario’s Critical Minerals Strategy. They’re excited about all the work we’re doing to build new, made-in-Ontario supply chains, connecting critical minerals from the north, including the Ring of Fire, to manufacturing in the south.

Instead of worrying about their jobs, my friends at the Ford assembly complex in Oakville are now working to transform the facility into a global hub for manufacturing electric vehicles.

Again, I want to thank the Minister of Economic Development and the Minister of Mines for all the work they’re doing on this. I was proud to join them both at the PDAC convention this month. My son Joey, a student at the Queen’s University department of mining, attended as well. I know that he is excited about the province’s $3-million investment through the Ontario Junior Exploration Program. This is a program designed to help companies search for mineral deposits and attract even more investment in this growing sector.

Growth has given us the revenue we need to invest in our hospitals, schools, transit, highways, and other key infrastructure. I would like to speak about some of these investments now in greater detail.

The 2023 budget includes over $81 billion for the health care sector this year; that is up by 40%, from $59 billion in 2017-18.

I would like to give the members an example of what this means for us in Missisauga. Provincial funding for Trillium Health Partners has increased by over $356 million over the last five years, from $281 million in 2018 to $1.2 billion now. That is an increase of almost 50% for Trillium Health Partners over the last five years. As I mentioned earlier, the estimates and the public accounts are available online, going back over 20 years. That means we can also look at the five-year period before 2018, and I would really encourage all members to do this. Under the previous Liberal government, provincial funding for Trillium Health Partners increased from $768 million in 2013 to $821 million in 2018. That is an increase of under 7% over five years, or only about 1% each year.

As former Liberal Deputy Premier and Minister of Health George Smitherman said, “Ontario Liberals really starved health care for five years, and that is not spoken enough.” I want to reiterate that: Minister of Health George Smitherman said, “Ontario Liberals really starved health care for five years, and that is not spoken enough.” And I agree.

They left us with overcrowded hospitals and badly outdated facilities that simply were not up to the challenges we faced during the pandemic.

As well, we know that the new leader, Bonnie Crombie, told TVO that she would have spent even less on health care. Can you imagine that? She would have spent even less on health care.

Under the leadership of this Premier, in the 2023 budget, the government committed over $54 billion over 10 years in the largest hospital and long-term-care building programs in Canadian history. Speaker, $32 billion in capital grants are getting shovels in the ground to build the health care infrastructure Ontario needs, including over 50 hospital projects, with 3,000 new beds.

In Missisauga–Lakeshore, this includes a historic multi-billion dollar investment to build the largest and most advanced hospital in Canadian history, with 22 storeys, three million square feet and almost 1,000 beds. This will include a 200,000-square-foot women’s and children’s hospital, which will be the first of its kind in Canada. In total, it will be triple the size of the current hospital, which first opened in 1958. I was born at that hospital, and both of my sons were born there—and not only that; my mother worked in the kitchen, as a first-generation immigrant, and my niece was a candy striper at that same hospital.

The truth is, we needed a new hospital 20 years ago, and the former Liberal government kept saying no. Now the RFP process for the new hospital has closed, and construction is expected to begin next year, in 2025.

To the east, by Etobicoke Creek—for my friend from Etobicoke–Lakeshore—we’re expanding the Queensway Health Centre, with a new nine-storey patient tower, with 600,000 square feet, and over 350 new hospital beds in a modern centre for complex care.

To the north, in Brampton, we are working with the William Osler Health System to transform the Peel Memorial hospital into a 24/7 patient hospital.

And I could go on with examples from every corner of this province that will provide better health care for patients and their families.

Of course, any new facility that is being built is going to require staff—more trained doctors, nurses, PSWs and other health care professionals. That’s why we are building a stronger health care workforce. Ontario has added over 10,000 new doctors and over 80,000 new nurses to the health care system over the last five years.

And as the Deputy Premier announced last month, the government is investing $110 million to connect up to 328,000 people to primary care teams. Combined with historic investments to expand medical education and the work that we are doing to allow internationally trained doctors to care for patients, the Ministry of Health expects that up to 98% of Ontarians will be connected to a regular health care provider within the next few years.

In the 2023 budget, the province announced significant investments to reduce hospital wait times by offering more surgeries at community surgical and diagnostic centres. This allows hospitals to turn their attention towards more complex and high-risk surgeries, reduce surgery wait times, and ease emergency department pressures. I’m pleased to be able to say that we have already seen the results of this approach. As of June 2023, the wait-list for surgeries has been reduced by more than 25,000 people from the peak in March 2022. I know that we are all committed to learn from this and to reduce wait times even further, by expanding funding to existing community surgical and diagnostic centres, and funding new centres for MRIs and CT imaging, and other surgeries and procedures.

Of course, reducing hospital wait times is just one part of our vision for the health care system in this great province of Ontario.

We’re also making great progress on our plan to build modern, safe and comfortable long-term-care homes for seniors and residents. The 2023 budget included a historic investment of $6.4 billion to build over 30,000 new beds and to upgrade 28,000 long-term-care beds across the province by 2028. In my community of Mississauga–Lakeshore, this includes the largest long-term-care home in Ontario, which we just opened in November.

Speaker, it is important for me to pause here to note that from 2011 to 2018 the former Liberal government was only able to build 611 beds across the entire province. Speaker, can you imagine that? From 2011 to 2018, they only built 611 beds across the province. In one location in my riding of Mississauga–Lakeshore, we have 632 beds—more than what the previous Liberal government built throughout the whole province.

As the number of Ontarians over 75 grew by 75%, the number of long-term-care beds increased by less than 1%. There were over 4,500 people on the wait-list for long-term care in Mississauga alone, when I was elected five years ago. We had 20% fewer long-term-care beds than the provincial average—and, again, many were badly out of date.

That’s why, during the pandemic, I joined the Premier to announce the Accelerated Build Program, in Mississauga–Lakeshore, to build modern, comfortable and safe new homes that follow the latest standards for design and safety. As I said, 632 new residents have just moved into Wellbrook Place, the largest long-term-care home in Ontario—even larger than the Credit Valley Hospital when it first opened 38 years ago. Mr. Speaker, can you imagine that a long-term-care facility that has 632 beds is larger than the Credit Valley Hospital when it first opened 38 years ago? This is an incredible achievement from our Minister of Long-Term Care and our Premier, who committed to build long-term care throughout the province of Ontario.

It is part of a new campus of care for seniors, including a new health services building and the first residential hospice in the city of Mississauga.

Another thing: You can’t imagine that in Mississauga, being a city as large as it is, we do not have a hospice there yet, but we will under this Premier.

Again, I want to thank Karli Farrow at Trillium Health Partners and Tess Romain at Partners Community Health and their teams for all their great work.

It is important to note that there are projects like this under way right across the province of Ontario.

And since the 2023 budget, a number of new long-term-care homes have been completed and opened to new residents, including the Humber Meadows Long-Term Care Home with 320 beds, which opened last June in North York.

We all recognize that Ontario’s population is growing rapidly. In fact, Ontario grew by over half a million people last year alone, and we’re on track for at least another half a million people this year. That’s more growth than any US state, including the fastest-growing states, like Florida and Texas—our population is growing faster than all the US states combined. This represents a tremendous opportunity, but it also demands action.

It’s one of the reasons this government has the most ambitious capital plan in Ontario’s history. Ontario’s plan to build includes investments of $185 billion in infrastructure over the next 10 years, including $20.4 billion this year alone and almost $26 billion next year, in 2024-25. That is the largest capital plan in the 156-year history of Ontario. I’m going to repeat that, Mr. Speaker: It’s the largest capital plan in the 156-year history of this province.

I want to thank the Premier, the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Infrastructure for building Ontario, which was neglected for so many years.

It includes $71 billion for transit infrastructure, including $7.5 billion this year—the largest investment in transit in Ontario’s history. This will continue to transform the GO Transit rail network into a modern and reliable rapid transit system.

It also includes the largest subway expansion in Canadian history, including the Ontario Line, the Scarborough subway extension, the Yonge North subway extension and the Eglinton Crosstown West extension. These are game-changing new projects, like the Ontario Line here in Toronto, which will connect to over 40 other transit routes including GO Transit lines, TTC subway and streetcar lines, and the Eglinton Crosstown LRT line. In my community of Mississauga–Lakeshore, it includes the new 18-kilometre Hazel McCallion LRT line on Hurontario, connecting with a new BRT on Lakeshore, which will connect the Lakeview development that is going to have over 16,000 new residents over the next 30 years.

The government’s plan also includes $28 billion over 10 years to support highway expansion, maintenance and repair projects right across the province, to improve our highway network, because we know that highways and roads are critical to the economic well-being of Ontario. This includes Highway 413, a new 400-series highway and transport corridor, which will connect Peel, Halton and York regions to support the movement of people and goods across the western GTA. Hundreds of thousands of new residents are moving to the area every year. We don’t have the highway capacity we need to support this growth. All of our major highways in the western GTA will be over capacity within the next 10 years. Highway 413 will finally bring relief to an area that needs it the most, saving drivers up to 30 minutes each way.

The Bradford Bypass, a new, four-lane, 16-kilometre freeway connecting Highway 400 in Simcoe county and Highway 404 in York region, will save commuters even more time, up to 35 minutes per trip.

Highway 7, a new, four-lane, 18-kilometre highway between Kitchener and Guelph, would save commuters more time.

Again, I could go on with many more examples.

In my own community, the first phase of the QEW/Dixie interchange improvements is now complete in Mississauga–Lakeshore. And the $314-million QEW/Credit River Improvement project is well under way, with traffic now open on the new twin bridge over the Credit River. We’re rehabilitating the existing heritage bridge. So we will have two bridges going back and forth to move commuters back and forth.

Speaker, I also want to take a few moments to speak about some of the measures in the 2023 budget that were designed to keep costs down for individuals and families across the province.

Firstly, we have extended the province’s gas tax and fuel tax rate cuts until the end of June 2024. This simple move means savings for the people of Ontario every time they go to the gas pumps. It means putting money back in your pocket to help put food on the table or to help buy other essentials to support your family. As Jay Goldberg, Ontario director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, said, “This will ensure that critical tax relief continues into 2024.”

At the same time, we continue to call on the federal government to stop their 23% carbon tax increase, which would add 17.6 cents per litre to the price of gas on April 1.

My first job was at the Pioneer gas station in Port Credit. At the time, a litre of gas was 33 cents. By 2030, the carbon tax will be 37 cents more than a litre of gas was when I first started my job there.

I also want to take a moment to highlight the One Fare initiative, which eliminates double or triple fares for most local transit services across the GTA, when commuters also take GO Transit, saving an average of $1,600 each year. Soon, commuters will be able to travel on the GO Transit Lakeshore West line, the new Hazel McCallion Hurontario LRT, the new Lakeshore BRT corridor, the TTC, and on other municipal transit systems right across the GTA on only one single fare. I want to congratulate my friends the Minister of Transportation and the Associate Minister of Transportation on this excellent initiative.

The 2023 budget also provided support to more seniors with an expansion of the Guaranteed Annual Income System. Starting this July, it will allow for 100,000 more seniors to be eligible for this program, including payments of up to $166 per month for single seniors or $332 per month for senior couples. It is important for me to note that this benefit is now adjusted each year based on inflation.

Our government is also committed to support the province’s most vulnerable people, with an additional $202 million each year for the Homelessness Prevention Program and the Indigenous Supportive Housing Program—a 40% increase over 2022-23. Both of these programs were designed to help those who need it most. As I’ve said before, in my community of Mississauga–Lakeshore, this investment is helping to double the capacity of Armagh House, the only transitional housing facility in the region of Peel for victims of domestic violence. Again, I want to thank the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing for all his great work on this program.

These are just a few examples of the actions that this government is taking to keep costs down for some of this province’s families, businesses and people right across Ontario.

In every budget, the government has to make some difficult choices. It’s always a balancing act, but I’m happy that our targeted tax cuts and assistance programs have been able to help those who need it most.

I would also take some time today to highlight some important initiatives from my ministry, the Treasury Board Secretariat. I think members will agree that these are great examples of the approach this government is taking with the public purse.

Firstly, I’m very proud to remind the House that a new regulation under the Building Ontario Businesses Initiative Act, or BOBI, was approved and will come into effect in just a few weeks, on April 1. This will help to level the playing field for Ontario businesses, providing greater access to procurement opportunities across the entire public sector, including ministries and agencies, hospitals and schools. This will promote economic growth and help Ontario businesses to sell more goods and services and create more jobs right across Ontario. We expect that by 2026, contracts worth at least $3 billion will go to Ontario businesses every year. That’s $3 billion back into our own economy.

And when you think about it, it’s obvious that Ontario businesses should benefit from the spending of their own government. We will do this by changing the way we evaluate bids and by taking into account all the extra costs Ontario companies pay to comply with our high standards to protect worker health and safety and the environment.

I am so pleased with all the hard work that went into preparing this new regulation. It demonstrates the kind of common-sense approach that our government is taking with the public purse. And I know we will continue to look for new ways to protect and promote our small businesses.

To take another example, the government is now using innovative procurement strategies and a variety of delivery models to make it easier to work with builders on project requirements, design and pricing. This is helping to ensure that Ontario gets strong and competitive bids on our infrastructure projects. We are now separating large, complex projects like the Ontario Line into smaller contracts to generate more market interest, to build more transit, highways and other infrastructure better and faster.

The government is also using modular builds and promoting design standardization, and working with municipalities to get shovels in the ground faster and approvals faster. These initiatives are helping us to get shovels in the ground, creating new jobs, and helping to build much-needed new infrastructure. That is why we introduced the Building Transit Faster Act to streamline progress on priority transit projects. As well, the Supporting Broadband and Infrastructure Expansion Act and the Getting Ontario Connected Act have made it easier for Internet service providers to deploy infrastructure, to provide faster access to reliable, high-speed Internet.

Speaker, it is absolutely essential that the government addresses these infrastructure needs. Ontario’s taxpayers cannot fund the infrastructure that the province needs alone.

That is why we set up the Ontario Infrastructure Bank, a new, arm’s-length, board-governed agency. As the government moves forward with our plan to build, we are always searching for new ways to attract trusted investors, like Canadian public sector pension plans, to help build the essential infrastructure that we all need. Many of these plans already make investments in infrastructure around the world. For example, the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan has over $200 billion in investments around the world. Can you imagine that, Mr. Speaker? The Ontario Infrastructure Bank will give pension funds like this new options to put their members’ investments to work right here in Ontario, to help the government deliver large-scale infrastructure projects right across Ontario. The province did not reinvent the wheel here. We are following in the steps of our own federal government, the UK government, and many US states, including California and Connecticut. We’re working to deliver more infrastructure faster, with new capital from investors, and the new Ontario Infrastructure Bank will help the government deliver it.

Speaker, thank you again for the time to speak on the Supply Act this afternoon. I would like to close my remarks by thanking all the members who are here today listening to this Supply Act debate, as I have outlined some of the key spending initiatives of the government’s 2023-24 budget. I think I’ve touched on several critical areas where each dollar spent supports the families, workers and businesses of this province.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to reiterate some of the things just in my riding of Mississauga–Lakeshore alone.

We are building the largest hospital in Canadian history. This hospital will be 22 storeys tall—24 surgical rooms, almost a thousand beds. Mr. Speaker, when I say 22 storeys, that’s 22 storeys—not home storeys. That’s a building, so that works out to 35 storeys. Can you imagine seeing a hospital that is 35 storeys tall and having more surgical rooms than any other hospital in Canadian history?

As well, 632 long-term-care beds in Mississauga–Lakeshore—more than the previous Liberal government built from 2011 to 2018, in one location.

I can continue with the new Credit River bridge—$314 million to build a new bridge over the Credit River to get our commuters back and forth from Toronto to Burlington to Hamilton to Niagara Falls, to get our products to market much quicker; with $28 billion of investment coming into this province in automotive investment. We need the highways so that we can transport our parts into plants much quicker due to the fact that the plants nowadays work on a just-in-time system. If the part is not there on time, the line goes down in production. We need these plants so we can compete with the world.

And we’re attracting automotive investments, from the Minister of Economic Development—the largest VW plant in history. It will be the fourth-largest building—1.6 kilometres long and one kilometre wide. Can you imagine a building of this magnitude being built right here in Ontario?

Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate that every dollar spent by the government comes out of the pockets of the hard-working Ontario taxpayers. I also said earlier, it is a heavy responsibility to be trusted with the hard-earned tax dollars of the people of this province, and it’s not to be taken lightly. The government made a promise to be responsible and transparent with the economic and fiscal situation of this province, and I believe that during this fiscal cycle, this is exactly what we have done.

Finally, I want to reiterate that the government is not requesting approval for any new spending here today. All of these important investments have already been made.

I’m looking forward to voting for the Supply Act, and I hope that all members will join me here today to support the spending here from the 2023-24 fiscal year.

I just want to thank all members here for listening to me. Like I said, this will not be talk at the water cooler tomorrow, and it won’t be on the news this evening. The Supply Act is what we have already spent this year in our province of Ontario—and these are historic investments that we have made in Ontario.

I always look at the 2017-18 budget, and I look at the previous Minister of Finance, and the previous government spent $152 billion.

Today, under this Premier, this Minister of Finance and this government, we’re spending $202.7 billion without raising a tax for the regular families here in Ontario. And I think that’s the most important thing—that we are not raising taxes, and we’re giving money back to our people here in Ontario.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for giving me this opportunity today to speak on this.

Further debate?

Thank you to my colleague for his debate. One of the things he said near the end was that every dollar spent comes out of the pockets of hard-working taxpayers, and it’s something I’ve been thinking about recently because—I’m sure we’re all hearing this in our communities, about the money that was spent on Super Bowl ads or, if you’re listening to podcasts, the money that’s spent on podcasting ads talking about the amazing work that is being done or, more recently, the $2.2 million that was spent on a Metrolinx ad basically really disdainfully talking down to people riding the TTC about how long it has taken, more than a decade, for some of the projects to be finished. I don’t think that’s an effective use of our taxpayer dollars. It’s not specific to this bill, but it was just something I thought of recently.

The money that we’re spending—I don’t know what it costs to get a Super Bowl ad, but I’m sure it’s millions of dollars. A billion dollars? I’m not sure what it is for a Super Bowl ad. But I do know it’s one of the most expensive ad spaces you can buy.

I don’t know what it costs to be in podcasts—you’ve got to compete with the mattress factories and everything else. Every single podcast has one or two of these ads, as well. That Metrolinx ad I do know, because I read the article yesterday—$2.2 million.

If we could have taken that money, those millions of dollars, and put it into actually getting work done, put it into investing in people, put it into getting Metrolinx finished, put it into retaining our nurses, put it toward—instead of having Bill 124; not having Bill 124 and allocating that money so that nurses, for example, as public sector workers, wouldn’t be exiting the province and going to other provinces where they’re treated fairly and treated respectfully.

Yesterday, when this was first announced—normally, when we table a bill, and you’d know this, Speaker, you’ll read the name, there’s a bit of formality, and the Speaker will say, “Would you like to explain the bill?” The member said, “It’s pretty self-explanatory,” and I thought, “Not really.” The bill is titled An Act to authorize the expenditure of certain amounts for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024—point being, it’s not hard to tell what it’s about, but it’s not really, really straightforward.

When I looked at the bill, this number caught my eye: $6,079,277,000. The full quote says, “For the period from April 1, 2023, to March 31, 2024, amounts not exceeding a total of” over $6 billion “may be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund or recognized as non-cash investments to be applied to the investments of the public service....” The reason that caught my eye, that six-billion-plus dollars, is because that’s what we know Bill 124 is costing this province to date.

Bill 124 was a bill put forward that was unconstitutional. It said that, for anyone in the public sector, you could not bargain your wages more than 1%, and it would stay in place for three years. In debate, we said it was unconstitutional. As labour critic, I said, “This is unconstitutional, and you’re going to lose this in court.” In fact, they did lose it in court. The Conservative government decided they would appeal it, and I said, “You’re going to lose the appeal,” because what the Chief Justice had ruled in it—I don’t read a lot of legal text, but I do read a lot of arbitration rulings; it was a pretty embarrassing outcome for the Conservative government. Everyone they put up as a witness contradicted the reasons for having the bill. It was probably a very frustrating day.

Interjection.

So what we know is that when you do something that’s unconstitutional, it basically means it’s illegal. We know from the Liberals that when you do this it’s going to cost you a fortune—not you, because, as the member said earlier, every dollar spent comes out of the pockets of hard-working taxpayers. So you’re writing cheques with taxpayers’ dollars. You’re writing cheques to fight court battles that you’re going to lose because the Liberals proved you’re going to lose. The Liberals did the same thing and wrote cheques with taxpayers’ money to fight these court challenges, and then the penalties and the payouts afterwards for the Liberal Party were hundreds of millions of dollars. But in this case, $6 billion plus and counting—$6 billion plus.

I want to be clear about this. This isn’t a surcharge. This isn’t a penalty. This isn’t like when you watch Matlock or something and there’s victim fees and stuff. What you did—the Conservative government did—is basically equal to wage theft. You took money out of people’s pockets that they deserved, they fairly could have got the money for, and they never got the interest on.

I’m allowed to say you broke the law. It was unconstitutional, so it was a violation of law. It was ruled that way.

It was wage theft. For the last six years as the labour critic, I have been wondering, why isn’t the Conservative government, if they care so much for workers, going after the $10 million they know that unscrupulous employers have stolen from workers—actual wage theft that’s been reported, proven? They’ve been found guilty, but the Conservative government has refused to collect it. I can’t wrap my head around it, because it seems like an easy win. I would like to think that some of these businesses, if they’re unscrupulous and not taking care of their employees, perhaps they didn’t survive, so you couldn’t get some of that money. But why not go after even a dime of that money?

It hit me, when I saw this announcement about the $6 billion of wage theft, that the Conservative government is the biggest wage-theft employer in the entire province—$6 billion at this point. It could be more than $13 billion, according to the Financial Accountability Officer. It’s wage theft. You took money out of workers’ pockets.

And the Premier—the gall the Premier had is that, “I had to do this to save jobs—to save jobs.” That’s a ridiculous statement. Number one, we have lost more nursing jobs than probably any other time of our lifetimes—nurses walking out the door.

Well, the member opposite said no. You probably could conclude the time when Mike Harris laid off a whole bunch of nurses, but I’m talking about nurses just exiting, nurses who don’t want to be here anymore.

I went to a graduation ceremony at Laurentian University. I met a wonderful young woman who was studying nursing. I was on the stage, got to shake her hand and everything, as many of us get invited to. I saw her at the reception afterwards. I said, “Congratulations. We really need nurses.” And she said, “I’m never working in this field. I had my placements. It is a terrible working condition. Nursing today is not like it was when I started the course. I’ll never work in this field ever. I just paid my tuition, so I thought I should graduate my final year.” That’s the reality for people. The reason the Conservative government counts the number of people signing up to be nurses is because they don’t want to pay attention to the number who are exiting, who are taking their pensions early, who are graduating and saying, “No, not for me, man.”

We have to address this. I’m here to help you. It sounds like I’m insulting you, but I’m here to help you, because this is a crisis that is affecting all of us. We cannot have a health care system where people don’t want to be there and working. I don’t want to work in health care. That’s a specialized job where you care about people and you take care of people in vulnerable moments. It’s critical. I’ve been in the hospital. I had vertigo a couple of years ago and had no idea what was wrong with me. I just felt nauseous. I was concerned about all kinds of stuff. The people who work in health care—amazing, amazing. When you’re at your most vulnerable, that’s who you put your faith in.

But with Bill 124, for 53 months, we treated these workers—not just in health care but all public sector—like dirt. I’m going to take that back. Not “we”—the Conservative government chose to treat them like dirt. You’ve got to wear that. And there was a pandemic and in the worst conditions of time, you treated them terribly.

The outcome of this: When Bill 124 was ruled unconstitutional, I started getting phone calls from hospitals, from school boards, asking, “Is there going to be additional funding? Because now we have these payouts.” All these unions that have these clauses allowing them to renegotiate—when they renegotiate what’s happening is, when they go to arbitration, the arbitrator says, “Yes. You were entitled to this. You should have got this.” They’re getting these payouts, and it creates this additional crunch on hospitals that are already underfunded. They’re feeling this crunch and saying, “Now we’ve got this giant price tag, courtesy of the Conservative government, but there is no extra funding to date or announcements or promise of funding to date from the Conservative government.” So I look forward on Tuesday in the budget for the relief that the school boards, the schools, the hospitals and other organizations like that are desperately looking for when it comes to that sort of money.

The other thing, when I was thinking about cost of living and expenses, was the minimum wage, because Bill 124 was one of the first things the Conservative government did, but freezing minimum wage was probably the first thing. There was an expectation that minimum wage was going to climb, but before it could, the Conservative government passed a law to freeze it at $14 an hour, and they froze it for two years at $14 an hour.

Deena Ladd said, “What he did”—talking about the Premier—“was basically take away a dollar increase, then take away the adjustments for two years, and then start to adjust it again in 2021.” So 2018, nothing; 2019 nothing; 2020, nothing; 2021, it started to readjust. So, if you cost that out, each minimum wage worker would since have earned between $3,000 and $6,000 more between 2018 and 2021.

I’m starting to think that the reason they don’t want to go after the wage theft is because they are helping people with wage theft. Between $3,000 and $6,000 from minimum wage workers was stolen from their pockets that they were entitled to.

The authors of the estimate write, “Many minimum wage workers put their own health at risk to keep working on the front lines of our economy throughout the pandemic. The three-year delay in raising the minimum wage to $15 cost them dearly.” That’s a sad thing.

Minimum wage used to be a whole different thing. Whenever I hear minimum wage, I always think of Chris Rock saying minimum wage means if they could pay you less, they would. And do you know what? The Conservative government is allowing multi-billion-dollar companies to pay workers less. They’re finding a loophole in the digital worker rights protections act, which is a fantastically fictional name because it doesn’t offer any protections for these workers. What it does is protect these large gig companies—Uber, the food delivery companies, the driver services—to pay workers less than minimum wage.

What it does is it says that you have to pay at least minimum wage, but only for the amount of time you’re actually doing work, only while you’re doing work. So if you work it out per hour, while the person is working, they make less than seven bucks. It’s like $6.36, but let’s just say less than seven bucks—way below minimum wage. Then you take out the expenses, and it’s less than three bucks.

You think, if you have insurance and a car, you’re paying for your brakes, you’re paying for your gas, you’re paying for tires over time, and you’re making less than seven bucks an hour—and so instead of rushing to the aid of these workers to ensure that, “Hey, the Employment Standards Act says, ‘You have to pay minimum wage. It’s here; you’re only way down here. PS, you’re a multi-billion-dollar company. You’re not a struggling mom-and-pop. You’ve got billions of dollars, so you can at least pay minimum wage.’” Instead of doing that, what they said is, “No, no, we’ll write legislation. Did someone say billionaires? We’re running over. We’re right there for you because we’re going to write legislation to ensure that you can continue to pay these workers less than minimum wage.”

And so they started off the last session freezing minimum wage so that the lowest-paid workers wouldn’t get a raise, could barely make ends meet. They continued in this session by saying, “Is there a way we can pay workers even less? Oh, yes. Yes, there is a Conservative way to do that, absolutely. Let me tell you how I can help you out, Mr. Billionaire-Company-Owner and your shareholders.” Because there is nothing more important for the Conservative government than jumping for wealthy and well-connected friends over the top of just regular working-class people.

And the shortage of this—I was thinking—I was talking to my son, actually, who is going to graduate this year. When I was going to school, I had my own apartment. I had a job that paid just slightly over minimum wage, but I only worked on weekends. Any other day I worked was for other expenses, if I wanted to get new clothes or treat myself or something, but my core expenses—food, rent, hydro and all that—was by working on the weekend.

And when I wanted to find an apartment, it was based on where I wanted to live. Do I want to be near the beach—because Sudbury is fortunate to have a couple of beaches that are right downtown—or in the core city? Do I want to be near my school? Do I want to be downtown where the nightlife is? And all of that was a range of about 50 bucks. All of that was affordable. All of those places were places that you would bring your parents to and not feel embarrassed of the conditions.

Do you know what I see lately? I see people renting out their garages as if it’s an apartment, and for a rent that seems unbelievably high. A garage where you use the local restaurant’s bathroom is being rented as an apartment. That’s shameful. When you look at rents in Toronto where people are making minimum wage, because many people here represent downtown Toronto, I don’t know how you’d make ends meet. And in even my riding, looking for an apartment, it starts at about a grand. You’re not going to be able to afford that with minimum wage—not even close.

Here’s the reality of what’s going on with the investments, and I listened to the last hour about the investments and how great this is for the economy, but I have to tell you, I live in a reality in Ontario that seems different than the Conservative government’s. I live in a reality where more and more people come to me and tell me it has never been this bad. Affluent people tell me this, people struggling to make ends meet. Middle-class people tell me this. Definitely not-for-profit industries tell me this on a regular basis. They have never seen it this bad, this critical, this need for help.

The stats from Feed Ontario reflect this. This is from Feed Ontario, “Ontario’s food banks were visited more than 4,353,000 times throughout the year”—this is their last stat—“an increase of 42% over the last three years.” This is the startling one that hits me, especially as labour critic: There has been “a 47% increase in people with employment accessing food banks since 2018.” I think the stat is up to 2022, but every year, that number increases—47% increase in people working, going to food banks.

I shared stories about Charity, back when Bill 28 was attacking education workers, and Charity allowed me to share her story so many times. I really thank her, because there is a position where you wouldn’t want people to know this about you when you are working full-time at a government job, working for the province, being paid by the province and making so little money that you go to the food bank with your children. You don’t even have enough money to leave your children with somebody else to go to the food bank so they don’t have to know. You have to bring your kids with you. You have to tell them, “As a mom, I work full-time, but I don’t make enough from the government of Ontario, my employer, to make ends meet. I have to go to the food bank to feed you.” That’s disgraceful. And this trend keeps getting worse.

This isn’t me. I know sometimes people think in opposition we just say stuff, because we want to hurt your feelings. This is Feed Ontario’s stats. I’m just amplifying it so you’re aware of it. You can’t look the other way. This data is not working for you. If more and more people every year are using food banks, well: (1) it’s the wrong direction; but (2) fewer and fewer people can afford to donate to food banks. I think if we’re going to do an oath or something we want to do substantially, that if you’re sitting on the government’s side, then you don’t get to stand outside of food banks and do photo ops, because they’re an earmark of the failure of the government. I don’t care if the government is Liberal or Conservative, Green Party or NDP, that you no longer get to stand around and brag about how much money was collected under your watch as government, when you can do something about it.

“The proportion of food bank clients with full-time employment doubled in the past year to 33% in 2022.” The following year up to 47%. This doesn’t make sense. This isn’t a success story.

Let me go on to other issues. Ontario Works—this also comes from Daily Bread Food Bank. A lot of people on Ontario Works, who are receiving it, are going to food banks. So Ontario Works is the money you would get if you can’t find employment or are unable to work—it used to be called welfare in the old days. It is below the poverty line. It is $733 a month. That’s the same amount it was in 2018. Since the Conservative government was elected, they didn’t increase Ontario Works at all. As inflation goes up every year, typically 2% to 3%—last year, I think it was between 6% and 7%—this has never gone up. You can’t find housing for $733 a month.

The slap in the face is there’s a portion of that that they say is for housing. I can’t remember off the top of my head what it is. But imagine them saying—let’s say 400 bucks is housing—“Don’t spend anything else because that’s for housing.” That’s a joke. You can’t get housing for $733. Basically, what you’ve done to these people is you’ve said, “Look, we know the poverty line is up here. We’re going to hold your head under the water here.”

They did the same thing for people who are disabled on ODSP, Ontario disability support. “Despite inflation having risen by 16.68%”—this is from Daily Bread—“a single individual on disability is receiving $1,229 per month to survive on,” which is, “$900 below the poverty line.” So you’re living with a disability; somehow, to make ends meet, you’ve got to come up with $900 a month.

For many of these people, it is their parents, typically seniors, who are helping to compensate for this. Many of these seniors I end up talking with are worried that they’re coming to the end of their lives and don’t know what’s going to happen to their children and are terrified for what’s going to happen to their children. I’m talking about adult children.

This is a broken system. Feed Ontario points out that, “Two out of three people who access food banks are social assistance recipients”—32.5% from ODSP, 26% from OW—“as their primary source of income.” We have a broken system that we all know is broken. No one is naive here. None of my colleagues from the other parties are naive. We just, as New Democrats, say it as loud as we can because we care about people who are starving to death. We care about people who can’t pay their bills. We think it’s important.

I know very often the Conservative government will say things like, “The best solution is a job.” It’s hard to get a job if you cannot find food, if you can’t buy clothing to go for job interviews, if you cannot get on your feet. There’s that old expression: “It’s hard to pull yourself up by your bootstraps if you don’t own boots.” It’s hard to get a job if you don’t have clean clothes or new clothes or if you can’t afford to take the bus somewhere to apply for a job.

Poverty creates horrible conditions. Poverty is one of those systems that creates the social determinants of health, that creates people with lower immune systems who are more sick and a larger burden on our health care system. Solving poverty would save us money in so many other ways, but we’re not interested in solving poverty. What we are interested—not us. What the Conservative government is interested in is investing in $2.2-million ads for Metrolinx saying that the people of Toronto who are complaining that the project has taken more than 12 years to get finished are kind of whiny and don’t really understand what’s going really on.

If you haven’t seen this ad, you can’t find it because Metrolinx has pulled it, so you’ve got to go and look up a CBC article. But you’ve got to watch this ad. It is unbelievable. I can only imagine Phil Verster wrote this ad while riding in his limousine, and this is how he imagines the people who ride the TTC look like and speak like. It is absolutely insulting and out of touch, and I think it’s a reflection of how the Conservative government feels about the working-class people of Ontario.

Speaking of ODSP, WSIB is somewhere we can invest money into. I talked the other day—yesterday, in fact—about how just raising it 5%, restoring that original 5% cut that was taken, I think, by Mike Harris back in the old days—it was promised prior to the election. Like a lot of election promises, it has kind of fallen apart because it has been almost two years since the last election. But people who are on WSIB are desperate for this 5% increase. If you restored that, it would make all the difference in the world.

I was surprised when I heard that. I thought they would be asking for a 10% or 20% increase. But they said, “Just restore the 5%.” Obviously, they would like anything, but that 5% would make a world of difference.

The thing with the WSIB is, if you’re never hurt, you think it works. If you work with people who are on WSIB, you realize how terrible it is, how broken it is. Recent government studies show that only around 170 of the approximately 3,000 annual fatal occupational cancer cases in Ontario are compensated. Imagine that: 3,000 people die from occupational cancers; about 170 of them are compensated, and I’m going to guess that those 170 are probably unionized workers who have full-time workers’ compensation officers—WSIB officers, I guess, now they would be called—and they have to fight.

I come out of a union, Local 6500. The Steelworkers have three full-time compensation officers, and I have met—because I was in health and safety, and our office that we would meet in regularly was across the hall from theirs. I have met so many retirees or people who had to retire early or people who have gone off on sick because of occupational disease. I have met so many of them who are desperate—desperate that they will hear that they had a reward before they die, so they know that their life meant something, so they know that their spouse and their kids will have something when they leave, their lives stolen from them. Speaker, 170 of the 3,000 every year get that phone call. They get into financial ruin when they’re on WSIB, and most of them end up on ODSP.

We have a limited amount of time because my colleague from Nickel Belt is going to be speaking soon.

I want to talk about supervised consumption sites.

Friday was a dark day in Sudbury. Friday, Heidi from Réseau Access—which was taking care of our supervised consumption site, The Spot—had to go and meet with her employees at The Spot. There is only one full-time employee left. She gave them their notice that they would have to close their doors. The supervised consumption site in Sudbury has been waiting just over three years for a response from the Conservative government. That cheque has never showed up. The city of Sudbury, recognizing the need, recognizing the costs to our EMS services, the cost to the people, the financial and also the emotional costs for people when their family members are dying and suffering from opioid overdose, invested for an entire year, waiting for the Premier to get off his wallet and cut a cheque for a provincial responsibility for health care—a cheque that never showed up. They saved lives for over a year. At Christmas, their funding ran out. People tried to stick around, but you’re not going to stick around very long in health care, so there’s only one employee left. The rest of the people are shuffling around from other organizations in Réseau to keep it going. On Friday, they heard it was closing.

The Conservative government arbitrarily said that 21 supervised consumption sites would be funded in the province. They took everybody who had their applications and said, “Jump through the hoops again and rewrite your applications.” Sudbury jumped through those hoops and rewrote them. To date, out of those 21, only 17 have been opened; the only one in northern Ontario is in Thunder Bay.

I want you to picture northern Ontario—the size of France. Sudbury would be at one corner, at the south end of France, and Thunder Bay would be up in the northwest corner. It would take you between 12 and 14 hours to drive there. It’s probably not going to work out too well for a supervised consumption site. It’s probably not going to be effective there—and it’s probably why Sudbury is the leader by proportion of the number of people who die by opioid overdose.

I called for help for this many, many times. I asked for a private member’s motion to declare a medical emergency. The Conservative government never answered those calls. The Conservative government voted against my motion.

We’re floating, in Ontario, around 20,000 deaths from opioid overdose. The Premier has his fingers in his ears—doesn’t care about those people; doesn’t care about their families; doesn’t care about their friends; doesn’t care about the deaths. They’re having a magical, wraparound service—that 20,000 people continue to die, and many more will continue to die.

I don’t know what this bill is, but it’s nothing to brag about. I only had a little bit of time to talk about the things that were wrong with it—but there was a lot wrong in Sudbury. And I’ll echo what I’ve been hearing time and time again from people across the province: It has never been this bad.