I think all colleagues of the House should just give a round of applause to the Solicitor General. I know he’s been a dog on a bone on this issue—

Okay, thank you for the long leash this morning, Madam Speaker. I’ll get back to my prepared remarks.

It’s an honour to be here, as always, on behalf of my constituents in Brampton North and today in my capacity also as a parliamentary assistant to the Solicitor General. It’s a responsibility, a privilege and an honour to serve the people in this way and a job that we all have to take seriously every day. This PUPS Act, if passed, will support our government’s public safety priorities by targeting puppy mills in Ontario.

I, like many members of the House, am an animal lover, and I am saddened and disgusted, as we all are and all must be, when we see images of severely emaciated, crated dogs on television or online every time a puppy mill gets busted. Dogs are often found in filthy conditions sitting in their own feces—sitting in their own feces, Madam Speaker—which is absolutely heartbreaking.

No true animal lover would operate a puppy mill. No dog lover would knowingly buy from one unless they were seeking to stop the suffering. People are buying these sick and mistreated dogs unknowingly, while operators are cashing in on such abusive practices. Experts have told us that online advertising and sale platforms—the minister mentioned Kijiji, Craigslist, others—and the greater demand for puppies during the pandemic has contributed to an increase in puppy mills and high-volume breeding. Whatever is driving the growth in puppy mills, it must end, which is why we are here today debating the PUPS Act.

If passed, the Preventing Unethical Puppy Sales Act will make amendments to the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, the PAWS Act, to help stop harmful dog-breeding practices associated with puppy mills.

Failing to keep a dog with a contagious disease away from other dogs or animals and failing to keep the dog’s environment sanitary would also be prohibited.

Finally, if passed, the proposed legislation will create new regulation-making powers so the province can set conditions that must be met to sell a dog and require the keeping of records through future regulations.

Speaker, I would now like to do a deeper dive into the prohibitions of the proposed PUPS Act. If passed, some of the prohibitions proposed in this legislation will come into force upon royal assent, while others will come into force at later dates.

The prohibitions that will come into force if the bill is passed upon royal assent are those that seek to immediately prevent the spread of disease and ensure that dogs are kept clean and living in sanitary conditions. They will also prohibit people from supporting or benefiting from the operation of a puppy mill.

I should stress that while the legislation is aimed at combatting puppy mills, the provisions being proposed within the PUPS Act will apply to the dog-breeding sector writ large.

Good breeders and others involved in responsible operations should be able to comply with these prohibitions immediately. They shouldn’t affect their day-to-day operations.

Other provisions that will come into force at a later date will be supported by record-keeping regulations.

As has been previously mentioned, owners or custodians of dogs are subject to all measures in the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act, the PAWS Act. This includes prohibitions against causing distress—and general standards of care that apply to all animals covered by this legislation. But there are no prohibitions in this act related to key facets of what constitutes a puppy mill.

That is where the proposed legislation comes in—and the problem we are looking to solve.

If passed, the PUPS Act will prohibit harmful dog-breeding practices common in puppy mills. These include prohibiting inbreeding between sibling dogs or between a parent dog and a dog in one of their litters. This practice can be common in puppy mills, especially where breeding is largely unsupervised. This can result in puppies that can suffer their entire life due to inherited health problems.

Another prohibition coming that will come into effect, if passed, is breeding a female dog at too early of an age. Dogs need to be physiologically capable of breeding and raising a litter. Some pre-breeding health tests such as hip dysplasia screening can only be done once a dog is 12 months old. Giving dogs a little extra time allows a breeder to get to know the temperament and behavioural traits of the animal and will help in making better breeding decisions.

Another prohibition that’s coming in is breeding a female dog too early in its reproductive cycle. Many dogs’ first estrus or heat cycle is unlikely to allow for successful breeding. It is industry best practice to wait until the second or even third heat cycle before breeding. It’s also just the right thing to do for the dogs in your care.

The proposed act will also prohibit allowing a dog with a contagious disease to interact with other dogs or animals or to use the same objects, such as food or water containers. Isolation of dogs with a suspected or confirmed contagious disease is obviously critical to preventing the spread of illnesses that can be fatal, such as parvovirus, which is a virus that attacks white blood cells and the gastrointestinal tract of dogs and can damage the heart muscle.

Another prohibition: Breeding dogs in an environment that is unsanitary, such as failing to prevent an accumulation of waste that would pose a risk to a dog’s health. I talked earlier about finding some of these animals sitting in their own feces. These kinds of conditions around sanitation can be disastrous—the spread of disease. They can cause infections, parasites. And it’s just plain gosh darn gross.

Another prohibition we’re bringing in will be the failure to address severely matted fur, visible parasites or emaciation. This is to ensure that in addition to the spread of contagious diseases and cleanliness of a dog’s environment, which is already addressed in the proposed act, the breeder can be charged with the offence of operating a puppy mill if conditions such as severely matted fur or visible parasites and emaciation are not addressed.

As noted, the proposed act would create new penalties on bad actors, including a minimum $10,000 fine for operating or facilitating the operation of a puppy mill, and a minimum penalty of $25,000 for anyone who causes or permits a dog to be in distress or exposes a dog to risk of distress in relation to the breeding or selling of a dog. These new measures would make Ontario the first province to introduce minimum fines for the operation of a puppy mill. Depending on the number of charges laid, the fine amount could become substantial and exceed the minimum amount in more severe cases.

I want to talk about some personal points to this. In my debate during second reading, I talked about Georgia, who I got to spend time with on Friday last week—a wonderful dog that was rescued from the most deplorable conditions. I know dog animal rescue services across Ontario are working morning, noon and night, 24/7, to rescue as many dogs from vile conditions as they can. Previously in my life I was able to caretake a rescue dog from Texas.

I note that in committee we had many witnesses come, including Brampton Animal Services, and they do fantastic work in the city of Brampton to keep dogs safe. If you haven’t seen their recent reel of their potential adoptees, Madam Speaker, I suggest you check it out. I thought Bodhi and Butter Ball were particularly cute on the Brampton Animal Services’ Instagram page.

I want to note something the minister mentioned in his remarks that this isn’t a bill intended to go after just bad breeders. All of the prohibitions that I outlined earlier in my speech are things that are common sense for good, decent, honest, ethical people. There are dog breeders that either do it for the love or for the money—many times more love than the money—but they’re in it because they love dogs, they love what they do and they breed in an ethical capacity. But when we have situations like puppy mills where they’re not taking care of their dogs, they’re not providing sanitary conditions, they’re not establishing strong minimum ages for breeding and preventing sibling dogs or parent-child dogs from breeding—when they’re not caring for these animals, that’s when it is our moral obligation as a government, as a society, to crack down on these people and hit them with fines of $10,000 or $25,000 in more severe cases.

Another change that’s being proposed in the Preventing Unethical Puppy Sales Act includes a clarifying change relating to enhanced debt collection tools. The Strengthening Safety and Modernizing Justice Act included amendments to build on the PAWS Act to make it stronger, and one of those amendments improves the recovery of costs incurred by animal welfare services through greater specificity on the types of recoverable costs when providing care to animals that are in distress or have been removed by animal welfare services. These costs are itemized in a statement of account.

A statement of account is an invoice served to an animal owner or custodian for costs incurred by animal welfare services while providing necessary care for an animal that had to be removed from a distress situation or due to concerns for care. Under the current law, the Ministry of the Solicitor General can only enforce the collection of the debt through standard collection tools such as call-outs and follow-up letters. But in order to build a more robust system and activate the enhanced collection tools under the Ministry of Revenue Act, the PAWS Act must be amended, and, if the PUPS Act is passed, an amendment is included therein to the PAWS Act which would authorize the use of these mentioned enhanced debt collection tools which would support the collection of debts owed, resulting in higher levels of reimbursements of government funds and improving the cost-recovery rates for animal welfare services.

The proposed PUPS Act introduces measures that will enable the province to zero in on puppy mills, their operators and their facilitators, including making Ontario the first jurisdiction in Canada to explicitly include the term “puppy mill” in law. To assist with the enforceability of the new prohibitions and future regulation-making authorities and offences, the legislation also proposes new definitions for the term “dog” and “transfer.” A “dog” would be defined as “canis lupus familiaris” or any domesticated descendant of the wolf. It would include an animal which is a cross between a dog and another member of the canis family, including a wolf or a coyote. The definition of “transfer” would be specific to future conditions related to the sale or transfer of a dog and includes such practices as trading or bartering a dog. It would not include gifting.

Substandard conditions and unethical sales practices are the currency of these dog breeders. It is what keeps puppy mills in business and puppy mill operators turning enormous profits. No Canadian province has specific prohibitions on operating a puppy mill. Ontario is leading the way by proposing tougher rules to hold those who abuse dogs to account. If passed by the Legislature, this act will make the necessary changes to the PAWS Act to help stop harmful dog-breeding practices associated with puppy mills with proposed legislated minimum penalties that will give real teeth to this act—the $10,000, $25,000 fines I talked about previously.

Colleagues, think about what this means. This means that dog breeders will have to clean up their act. Unsanitary kennels will be prohibited. That means cracking down on kennels rotting with feces and other waste.

Changes in this act will allow the province to establish record-keeping regulations to help animal welfare services inspectors investigate potential puppy mills, and establish conditions that must be met to sell or transfer a dog in Ontario, to help stop unethical sales practices. This also means less pressure on municipal animal shelters and veterinary clinics. I gave a shout-out to Brampton Animal Services earlier. This will be very, very good for the day-to-day workers who do such a great job at Brampton Animal Services. This act will also mean greater trust in reputable dog breeders whose industry has often been tainted by bad actors.

We’re coming for those people who think these breeding practices are acceptable. Enough is enough.

This is part of our government’s broader package around public safety. This is a government that, under the leadership of the Solicitor General, the past Solicitor General, the Premier, the PC caucus—who vote in favour of every single bill. This is a bill that has done away with the tuition for the Ontario Police College—not reduced it; done away with it altogether, because we understand we need more boots on the ground, more police in our neighbourhoods to keep our neighbourhoods safe, to keep people safe in our communities. This is a government that invested half a billion dollars in correctional facilities to make sure that they’re held to the right standards so that when people do a bad thing, when they’re put in jail—and make no mistake: They’re put there for a reason. But we need to make sure that we have the right conditions in place—a half-billion-dollar investment, 2,000 more correctional service officers hired in the last few years, under this Solicitor General’s leadership. This is a government that just launched the fire prevention grant, a $30-million investment for fire services all across Ontario, to make sure that no matter what corner of the province you’re in in Ontario, you’re kept safe.

This record of public safety is something that we need—and with this act, we are doing, bringing—to help and protect our furry friends as much as we are protecting humans and people in our neighbourhoods.

I’d like to give a little shout-out to some of the witnesses we had at committee. This is a bill that has gone through some fine-tuning in committee, and we couldn’t have done that without help from the community. We saw the city of Brampton, Brampton Animal Services—I’m partial to them. We also saw Animal Justice Canada: Camille Labchuk, the executive director, came and gave excellent testimony on where we need to go with the bill. The Animal Shelter Professionals of Ontario: We saw Lindsey Narraway come and testify. We saw Humane Society International, with Ewa Demianowicz. We had Donna Power from the Humane Initiative. We had John Atkinson and Pamela Bruce from the Canadian Kennel Club.

I’ll give you an example of something where the committee did some really good work, Madam Speaker. You see, on this side of the House, in the PC government, we believe in parliamentary democracy, and we believe that Parliament can be a force for good and should be a force for good. One of the gaps that we put forward in the bill—initially, we had $10,000 fines for the puppy mill owners; we had $25,000 fines for the egregious cases, but we didn’t include a fine for people who facilitate a puppy mill. Like, if I owned a basement and somebody else runs a puppy mill, but it’s in my basement, and I’m facilitating and aiding in that crime—those people are just as guilty. They are guilty by association, and they are doing wrong, harmful things to animals in Ontario. Those people should pay a big fine.

I give credit to my other colleagues on the Standing Committee on Justice Policy. That’s something that, through clause-by-clause, we actually amended and we actually fixed and has been included in third reading of this bill.

This is a chance for Ontario, for the Legislature, for colleagues on both sides of the aisles to stand up and say that animal welfare matters and matters in a real way. It’s a first-of-its-kind legislation in Canada to actually codify puppy mills and the definition of a “puppy mill” in law in Canada. It’s something that’s never been done before. And full credit to the Solicitor General and the team at the Ministry of the Solicitor General: Thank you, sir, for bringing this bill forward. This is an important bill and a historic opportunity for all members of this House to stand up and say that the safety and well-being of dogs matter.

Now, we know there is more to do. We know there is more that can be done. In the same way, Madam Speaker, that this PC caucus will never stop fighting to do more to get more boots on the ground, to get more police into our neighbourhoods, we’ll do more to get more correctional services officers to make sure that we have more capacity, proper capacity; to make sure that our first responders have the mental health supports that they need—a $45-million investment in first responder supports; $3 million for the families of fallen first responders who died either on the job or because of the job. This is part of a track record of this government of putting public safety first and saying that public safety matters, which is a message out there in Ontario, certainly in my riding, certainly in places that I visit, that people really need to hear right now.

This is an important bill. This is an important step forward. I commend the minister for bringing it forward. I certainly will be voting in favour of this bill. I encourage my PC colleagues to do the same, and I encourage all members of this House to please vote in favour and pass third reading of the PUPS Act.

I want to thank the member for the question. This will be enforced by the animal welfare inspectors, the same way as always. Some of the important provisions that we’re putting in are allowing them to do their jobs.

I want to caution: The members opposite have a tendency to try to poke holes in our bills to find excuses to vote against them. This isn’t a very good bill to vote against. This is the kind of bill that I think the members should be supporting. We’re bringing in minimum fines: $10,000 if you’re operating a puppy mill or facilitating a puppy mill, $25,000 if that results in the death of a puppy. These are tangible tools that we’re giving our animal welfare inspectors and our front-line workers, resources they need to hold these bad actor puppy mills accountable.

So I’d caution the members: Don’t do what you normally do and vote against this just because you’re opposition. This is a good bill. You should vote in favour of it.

One of the important ones is around record-keeping. Bad actor puppy mills won’t have the ability to say, “Oh, I don’t know how old the dog is. I didn’t keep a record of it.” We’ll have record-keeping provisions maintained within, that they have to maintain or else face a fine—the $10,000 fine for having a puppy mill, $25,000 if resulting in a death.

But I want to say that my colleague believes in parliamentary democracy just like I do, just like every member of the PC caucus does. This is a case where we have amendments in the bill through the committee process that are really, really quite strong. That $10,000 for assisting and facilitating a puppy mill was something we didn’t bring forward in second reading, a gap that we knew that we had. We brought the amendment forward, the committee did the right thing, and we hope all members do the right thing by passing the amended bill.