It’s now time for questions and answers.

I want to thank the member from Hamilton Mountain for your speech today, and I’m so glad that you are the critic of children, community and social services, because it’s obvious from the member’s speech that she has a real passion for defending children, and especially for fighting for children in care and making sure that they get the best opportunities that are possible.

Currently, you also described—there were a number of anecdotes, but one that stuck out for me is that you were talking about a child with autism who’s staying in a children’s aid office, I believe. Could you just talk about how that happened and how we fix that? How do we make sure that every child in care is actually in an appropriate home?

Understanding that Bill 188, the Supporting Children’s Futures Act, will not be our final bill with MCCSC, I just wanted to touch upon the Ready, Set, Go Program. On April 20, 2021, the Leader of the Opposition stated, “The research is clear and it is exhaustive. It shows that the system needs to be overhauled to prepare youth better to transition into adulthood. Kids now are aging out with no transitions or supports past the age of 18.”

Our government understood the challenge, and that’s why we launched the Ready, Set, Go Program, a program for youth leaving care across the province to set them up for success until the age of 23. When approval of that measure came up for a vote in this House, every single member of the opposition present voted against it. Does the member opposite now regret this?

To the member from Hamilton Mountain: Thank you very much for your speech here today. I can tell there was a lot of feeling there, so thank you.

When the Fostering Privacy Fairness Act, which contained many of the same privacy measures as in this bill, came up in debate in 2021, the Leader of the Opposition said, “It perhaps goes without saying, Speaker, that children end up in the system through no choice of their own, and they should be protected accordingly. But then, as adults, they find that their personal information can be accessed. This has been proven repeatedly to be a barrier as they enter into adulthood, seek jobs and so on.”

My question: Does the member agree with the sentiment from here and what this bill is doing now?

I want to commend the member from Hamilton Mountain. Of course, it’s not an easy feat to speak that long on a piece of legislation, and she was able to complete that—

Interjections.

She did indicate that she did support a piece of the legislation which was on the privacy aspect. I was in committee while she was there, and we heard three deputations where that was supported.

My question is a very simple one: Is she going to support this piece of legislation and move it forward after she was able to air her concerns?

Absolutely. That’s a great thing about this bill. I commend everyone who worked on that—Jane Kovarikova from Child Welfare PAC. This has been going on for years. I’ve been meeting with Child Welfare PAC for years as the critic under this file and so, yes, I applaud that being here. There are measures that are missing under that same piece. Yes, they should have—but they need to have access to their files. They need to have self-access to the files, and they need to be able to correct their files when they know that there’s something seriously not right in it.

That’s absolutely egregious that we see that in the province of Ontario, and it starts with a lack of services right from the start with the autism services.

I wonder if the member regrets his vote against the amendments from the Ombudsman and from the Information and Privacy Commissioner. That member was one of the members who voted against every amendment that was brought forward to this legislation. The question goes back: Does he regret voting against kids at that time?

I’m interested in whether there is space in the bill—any indication of a return of the Child and Youth Advocate. The reason I’m asking about this was because I had the privilege of attending an event sponsored by the Child and Youth Advocate. At this event were all kinds of leaders, community leaders, who were sitting around the table, and a group of young people who had been working together on a program called Feathers of Hope came and shared poetry, skits, talks, talked about their lives. The purpose was, really, to inform the leadership of their experiences. It was an opportunity to give them voice and it was very powerful.

So my question is, do you recognize the importance of the child and youth advocate and are you optimistic that that position can return?

I’ll be sharing my time with the member from Mississauga Centre.

This is one of those bills that, when I first looked at getting involved in politics, was something that I thought had a great deal of value and something that we should be doing. I really do commend the minister for this.

We’ve taken a look at some of the challenges that we have in child protective services, in the CAS, in foster care, and we’ve looked at how we can ensure that every child, no matter the situation they come from early on in their life, has an opportunity to succeed. I have to commend the minister on this because he’s done some excellent things.

One thing that I really think hasn’t gotten an awful lot of conversation about that we have to really point out is increasing the age from 21 to 23. The reason I say that: There are so many things that we do in government, there are so many things that we do in society, and we look at it and we’ve taken that arbitrary age—typically, it’s 18—and we’ve said, “Once you hit 18, something changes. A switch is flipped.”

But the reality is, every one of us matures at a different rate at different stages of our lives. By increasing it from 21 to 23, what we’re recognizing is that sometimes your chronological age of 21 doesn’t actually match your emotional age, and by increasing it to 23—yes, it is still a chronological age. But what it’s doing is, it’s giving the ability, then, to recognize that some of those individuals who have had traumatic experiences, who have been through different situations that maybe none of us actually truly understand—their emotional state may not put them in that same position as if they were coming from a more well-off family that has provided all kinds of supports for their kids. We’re recognizing that every child in this province deserves to have that opportunity to succeed, and the difference between age 21 and age 23 isn’t that great when we’re talking about the number of days, but it could make a massive difference in someone’s life.

I have three kids, and my kids all matured at different rates, as well. One daughter was ready to be on her own at 18. Another daughter of mine probably wasn’t ready to be on her own until she was 20. My son is 26 and still lives in my basement, but he is a kindergarten teacher and he is trying to move on. And he’s not in the basement because of his emotional state; it’s because his mother doesn’t want him to move out.

There are so many things that we take for granted as parents, and one of them, in particular, that I want to touch on is, I don’t have a scorecard or a spreadsheet or a filing cabinet in my house where I have kept track and documented everything that my kids did. I can’t go to the filing cabinet and pull something out and say, “On January 21, 2017, here’s what you did, and here’s what our reaction was to it”—but our child protective services, our CASs, actually do have that. And the ability, then, as an adult, once you’ve left the system, to know that everything you did that was documented, that was put down on paper is not going to be held against you, I think, is one of the most valuable things.

We take a look at social media now—and I’ve seen this talked about a number of times. I was born in the 1970s, but I really was an 1980s kid, in terms of what I did. All the things I did as a child, all the things I did as a teenager are not documented and put on the Internet. We’ve got kids today who, through no fault of their own, were placed in protective services; the CAS was involved. They were taken to a foster home—trying to give them something of a better life. And yet, we documented all of that stuff, and that was made available. What this bill does—one of the key things for me is, it takes that away. The things that you did once—you have the right for it to be forgotten. That’s something that’s enshrined in this bill, and I think it’s very, very important that it is.

We’ve made some changes to child protective services workers and police, so that someone who has been human-trafficked at the age of 16 or 17 can be taken from that situation and can then be given an opportunity to improve their lives.

There has been a lot of conversation about sex crimes over the last six years, and even before. The member from Haliburton–Kawartha Lakes–Brock introduced a private member’s bill—Saving the Girl Next Door—bringing some of that to light, and one of the scariest statistics on it is that the average age of a girl who has been human-trafficked is 12 years old. In Ontario, that is going on. Making it so that the police and social workers have more tools to help rescue some of those young women, to give them that opportunity to actually have a meaningful and fulfilling life, and to escape some of those challenges—that’s something that is enshrined in this bill, and I think it is something that is very, very powerful.

One of the things that I was surprised on, but the chief of staff for MCCSS talked to me about it a few times: She was not allowed to talk about her experiences, her own lived experiences, because she was someone who was in a foster home, and this changes that, so that those individuals who have gone through the system, who have had other issues while they were in the system, have the ability—without breaking the law—of standing up and saying, “This is what my lived experience was.”

When you think about that, every other aspect of our lives, you’re allowed to stand up and say, “This is what happened to me.” But for the longest time, that was not something that was afforded to an individual who was in foster care. These kinds of changes are transformational for a lot of these individuals. There’s nothing wrong with someone standing up and saying, “I was in foster care. Here’s what I went through. Here’s how I have succeeded in life, and I can be a role model for someone else”—but the law prevented them from doing that, previously.

We’ve talked so much—our society has talked so much about lived experiences and being able to be that role model, being able to stand up and say, “It is possible for you to break that cycle. It is possible for you to aspire to something better. It is possible for you to live a fulfilling life.” When it came to kids in foster care, we didn’t let them say that.

Think about that powerful message. Think about that child who perhaps was sex-trafficked, who got pulled out of that system, who got put into a supportive foster care position, who grew up, who got to take advantage of Ready, Set, Go, who got a great education, who then continued to give back to the community, who was that positive example and they weren’t allowed to talk about it—they will be able to now.

How many more kids, then, in protective services, through foster care, are going to be able to look to those individuals and say, “I want to be like you. I want to be like Jane. I want to be in the position to succeed just like she is”? That’s what this legislation does, and that is why it is so powerful, because it is transformational for so many of these kids.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I am going to turn my time over to the member from Mississauga Centre.

Thank you to the member from Thunder Bay. Yes, the advocate was one of the greatest offices and advocates that the children of Ontario could possibly have had.

I was also at that table, Feathers of Hope, in Thunder Bay a few years back and heard those voices and the pleas for help from those young people to hear what they had to say. We’ve seen so many young people die on the streets of Thunder Bay, and the lack of what’s been done still to date continues to provide ill fate for those young people.

There is nothing more that I would like than to see the child advocate’s office be re-implemented to ensure that children, regardless of where you fit in, will have a voice and an advocate and peers around them to be able to support—

Interjection.

Further questions?

The member from Mississauga Centre.

I’m so glad to follow my colleague who gave such a great narrative speech. I’m going to stick to my notes, but it’s always impressive when members can speak from the heart. I think that’s a learned skill, and the longer we are here I think the better we should get at that skill. But I will stick to my notes for this particular bill.

Mr. Speaker, the proposed bill aims to elevate the standard of care for children and adolescents, which will enhance self-sufficiency as they transition into adulthood. Our government has embarked on redesigning the child welfare system, motivated by the fundamental belief that every child and youth across Ontario should be provided with a nurturing environment and a stable home. As part of this redesign, this bill will bring a series of new initiatives that will enhance the quality of care provided by out-of-home care systems, further strengthening the commitment to the well-being of Ontario’s children and young people.

This proposal seeks to improve the quality of services for children, such as safeguarding the privacy of individuals who have interacted with child welfare. Bill 188 seeks to give individuals more control and ownership of their narratives and experiences, enabling them to share information about their involvement with child protection according to their own preferences and decisions.

The children and youth services sector plays a vital role in supporting individuals with diverse needs all across Ontario. If passed, this bill will strengthen the service sector, ensuring enhanced support for our youth and children, whether it means protecting a child from abuse and trauma or empowering them with resources to overcome challenging times.

Speaker, this bill’s proposals would introduce new enforcement tools, such as compliance orders, restraining orders and administrative penalties, alongside enhancements to existing powers, including the ability to refuse licences. The criteria for obtaining a first licence would be strengthened with more detailed application requirements and a new minister’s power to refuse permits in the public interest. Approved regulatory changes would establish stricter requirements to safeguard children in licensed settings, prohibit harmful practices and ensure privacy in designated areas. Additionally, amendments would clarify processes for hearings by the Licence Appeal Tribunal and streamline administrative procedures for inspectors dealing with non-compliance.

Mr. Speaker, this proposal aims to enhance program administration and delivery by focusing on transparency improvements. If approved, legislative changes would involve expanding publicly available information about licensed settings to encompass all newly proposed enforcement measures. Specific individuals, including societies, would be mandated to report to the ministry director if there are concerns about an immediate risk to a child’s well-being in a licensed setting. Approved regulatory amendments would require societies to notify the ministry when initiating child protection investigations involving children in licensed settings.

En outre, les ajustements réglementaires connexes obligeraient les sociétés à rendre des visites plus fréquentes aux enfants dont elles ont la charge, passant d’une fois tous les 90 jours à une fois tous les 30 jours. Nos enfants méritent dévouement et amour. Ces visites réglementaires garantiront la sécurité et le bien-être des jeunes et des enfants placés hors de leur foyer.

Mr. Speaker, the changes proposed in this bill will help the licensed out-of-home care sector to provide better-quality support for these youths.

Across the province, there are 50 children’s aid societies primarily funded by our government. They are responsible for Ontario’s public adoption, planning and recruiting adoptive parents. If passed, Bill 188 will add 20 positions across Ontario, which will support the management, inspection and oversight of these service sectors.

Engaging extensively with the community and service providers to enhance support for children and youth is vital for a more significant impact. This bill will strengthen customary care arrangements, prioritizing family-based options such as kinship and foster care to ensure that children, youth and families play a pivotal role in decisions regarding their care.

This bill focuses on directing efforts towards enhancing the quality of child welfare data to establish standardized measures across children’s aid societies for public reporting. This information could be helpful during an investigation to support an action in a timely manner. However, exceptions to confidentiality have been added to the bill that respects the privacy of individuals.

Mr. Speaker, this bill will implement an outcomes-driven performance measurement framework. This will help achieve excellence within our out-of-home care facilities in Ontario. Additionally, the release of the Children and Young Persons’ Rights Resource aims to empower children and youth by educating them about their rights and encouraging them to advocate for themselves. Simultaneously, this bill is laying the groundwork for their future success by ensuring that comprehensive support systems are in place to assist youth as they transition out of care, ensuring that they have the skills and opportunities to flourish and thrive.

We have heard this in committee, when we had members of the public come and present to us—that, for those who were in the system, they were not notified about their rights and they didn’t know that they could turn to the Ombudsman, for example, for more help or more information about their rights. And that is why we are strengthening, with this bill, the information that children will be provided about their rights and about the Office of the Ombudsman.

Mr. Speaker, it has been reported that only some out-of-home care service providers are meeting the standard service. The proposed modifications in this bill will only impact service providers that are not performing in good faith. The bill will be adjusting licensing procedures and enforcement mechanisms for instances of unethical behaviour. Operators offering excellent care will not be impacted, as they are already offering high-quality service that addresses their individual needs while prioritizing their safety and security.

It is also important to point out that this bill will aim to ensure clarity regarding the obligation of children’s aid societies and licensed out-of-home care providers to inform children in their care about the Ombudsman’s office and its function. This proposal aligns with the government’s broader initiative, the Children and Young Persons’ Rights Resource, initiated a few years back, which aims to empower children and youth by educating them about their rights outlined in the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017.

It is imperative for children and youth to be aware of their rights and where to seek assistance if they feel their rights are being disregarded by service providers. This legislation mandates service providers to explain these rights in an understandable manner, be available for clarification, and regularly check in with children and youth regarding their rights.

Mr. Speaker, I want to conclude by saying that I did appreciate the comments from the member for Hamilton Mountain where she shared her story about how her own parents fostered many children. I think that gives us a greater insight and perspective about her passion and what drives her work, and that’s why she is doing that work that needs to be done and holding the government accountable, as is her role in this critic role. You know, we rarely get the opportunity to know members a little bit better, and I think when we share these personal stories, that gives more meaning to our work here. So I did appreciate hearing that unique perspective.

I also want to express my gratitude to the deputants that came and gave their testimonials in committee. Many of them were involved in the child care system themselves and they have come out to be incredible advocates. We had a doctor who came. We had lawyers and others. This gives a testament to the fact that people, despite their challenges, can become incredible professionals and have incredible careers and then give voices to those children through their personal experiences.

I want to conclude by saying I was raised by a single mom. Times were tough, and my mom did everything she could to ensure that me and my brother had everything that we needed, whether that’s food on the table, clothing. We had a very old car, and I was quite embarrassed when my mom was dropping me off because the muffler was broken, so I asked her to drop me off two blocks away from school.

But she worked extremely hard to ensure that we grew up to be productive members of society. Going through those challenges, I can only imagine what children who don’t have caring parents, who don’t have people to advocate for them go through, and that’s why this bill is so important, to give voices to those children and to strengthen all the provisions that we can to ensure the safety and well-being of all children in Ontario.

I am glad to ask a question of the members regarding the committee process and the importance of this bill and some of the voices that were heard at committee, specifically Carly Kalish, the executive director of Victim Services Toronto. I always appreciated Carly’s work when she worked in the Durham region. Her role as a trauma counsellor and with her experience working with children, she brought an important perspective to committee, as did anyone else who took the time to get their voices on the record.

So my question: When there were very thoughtful submissions made at committee about how to improve this bill, how to fine-tune to make it the best version it could be, why were all of those amendments and all of those voices unceremoniously rejected without consideration?

Questions and comments?

I want to thank my colleagues for their comments and their generosity to each other in how they characterized each other speaking.

I had a question for the member for Mississauga Centre, who I thought was extremely generous talking about our colleague from Peterborough–Kawartha but also talking about the member of the opposition’s comments as well, and you did end up speaking from an extemporaneous place and from the heart, and so I really appreciated that the member for Mississauga Centre was able to do that.

I was wondering if you could just talk about what matters most to you in what we are achieving in Bill 188 in the child welfare redesign.

I think the most important thing is that we are giving voices to these children and informing them of their rights, and with information comes power. We have heard over and over in committee that these children were often unaware of their rights and didn’t know where to go, and so we’re changing that.

We’re also increasing the number of inspectors in the system, and so I want to believe that, by and large, most foster parents and foster homes are doing the job because they love caring for children and they’re doing the very best job. But just like in any industry, in any sector, there are, unfortunately, some bad players, and by increasing the amount of inspectors and giving more tools to these inspectors, we’ll be holding them accountable, and I think that’s extremely important.

Either one of the members opposite can answer this. It’s actually three in one. What specific plans does the government have to ensure that inspections are both thorough and unannounced, including night visits when children are at home? And are you able to provide clear answers to communities and families across Ontario on how many inspectors will be added to the current roster? As well, how will their training be enhanced to detect and address issues proactively?

I appreciate the question from the member from Oshawa. When we look at the committee process, it’s not something that is new for any of us. We’ve all been through it multiple times. A lot of times, things get put forward on it that can tweak us in different ways to have a secondary look at what we’re doing as we move forward, because we know that we’re going to have more legislation that’s going to come forward on certain topics, and a lot of the times, you have to do things in a stepwise or incremental way.

And it’s not that those ideas aren’t great ideas; they are great ideas if they come forward. It allows us to take a look at things from a different perspective as we start to introduce more legislation. It’s not that those things get lost; it’s that we’re focused on what we’re doing at that moment and what we’re trying to accomplish with it, and sometimes when suggestions or amendments are being put forward by the opposition, they are truly good ideas, but they don’t fit in with what we’re trying to accomplish at that point, but it does tweak us to move forward so that we can introduce something else that will start to address some of those other things.

I want to thank both the member from Peterborough–Kawartha and the member from Mississauga Centre for presenting here today, and I also would like to thank them for sharing their personal stories. Some of us wouldn’t be as frank as that, and it’s nice to know that they can share those stories that they’ve shared with us here today.

I think the centre point of this bill is that the health, safety and well-being of children is paramount, whether they are in care or not, and it is crucial that we, as legislators and as a society, do everything in our power to ensure that these cases are heard and work towards a better direction. This bill takes many steps forward.

Could the members please expand on what regulations are currently in place to ensure those who work with children and youth are qualified to do so?