I’d like to ask a question to the member from Algoma–Manitoulin. I’m just wondering if you have any concerns about access to service. We know the objective of the bill, but in practice, in northern communities, it doesn’t always look that way. I wonder if you could speak to that.

I want to pay tribute this morning to the many non-profit organizations that operate on inadequate budgets while providing essential services to our communities. Non-profits provide supports in times of crisis, and they are also the cultural and recreational lifeblood of our communities. Demand for non-profit services is through the roof, yet the sector is running on fumes.

In Thunder Bay, we have lost the important Street Outreach Service, known as SOS, and we have also lost the sexual assault clinic in Victoriaville mall. These losses are devastating for my community.

The Ontario Nonprofit Network is warning that many more vital services will collapse without significant changes in how the government supports this sector. Organizations struggle to attract and keep staff because one-off, project-based funding means that all jobs are short-term and precarious. Organizations need stable and long-term funding that reflects the true cost of delivering services and programs. Without a significant change in how governments deal with the non-profit sector, it will disappear, and with it, our social cohesion.

Government members need to look carefully at the recommendations of the Ontario Nonprofit Network and do what is necessary to support the critical work of these vital community organizations.

Yes—but still gets overwhelmed by these long forms and all these things that you have to fill out. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if you called and a human answered the phone, and it was for a government service, and you actually could speak to someone?

That is something I’ve put out there as something for the government to think about, that when we’re actually implementing things, to be thinking about the human side: How do people find solutions? What’s the easiest for them without people feeling overwhelmed? Because the other thing I’ve seen in this particular home is that people often just kind of shrug their hands and say, “Oh, well. I can’t do anything about it,” when, in fact, there probably is something they could do but they don’t know where to reach out for that.

I do have concerns about shifting everything into regulations, and my example for that is ODSP, where there are 800 regulations. There’s a regulation in there that says if you live with somebody else, your money will be clawed back. In other words, the money that is there is not to support you with your disability. As soon as you live with somebody else, you start to lose that support.

Now, I think if the people of Ontario actually knew that that was in the regulations, they would reject it, because I think it’s a human rights violation. The problem is, you put so many things into regulations, there’s not the kind of scrutiny that needs to be there, and it does put an enormous amount of power into the minister and the ministry. Again, it doesn’t have that level of scrutiny.

Again, to mention the ODSP situation, no other person is denied the ability to pool their resources with someone else, but if you’re poor and you’re disabled, you are not allowed to pool your resources with somebody else. That just shouldn’t be. So that’s fair warning that things happen in regulations that don’t come under scrutiny but have a very, very serious impact on people’s lives.

I’m quite interested and, frankly, very happy to see changes to time-share contracts. I’m of an age when people were really excited about time-shares. It seemed like this great deal, and you were going to be able to go and visit these places. Of course, much later, in the fine print, it said you’re obliged to keep them for 50 years and your children will inherit the debt—you’re going to have to keep paying and paying forever.

I see that there are some ways of ending those contracts, but I also see that there’s a termination fee and other requirements, and I’m just hoping that when this gets to committee, that could be looked at more closely, to look at the specifics. I have been looking at time-share contracts, and it seems to me that, first of all, they’re hard to get out of, but that the termination fees could be very, very high and disproportionate to what actually should be there. So it’s my hope that that comes up in committee.

The thing—and it has been mentioned before—that does worry me is that there are no provisions in here for price gouging, where collusion is taking place in industries. We know that in the grocery industry there are very few players, and they have made a practice of colluding with each other, and they’ve been caught once or twice. I remember when we got these little $25 gift certificates to make up for everything that we’d overpaid in bread. I also remember when people on ODSP and people in food banks were saying, “Would you mind donating those $25 vouchers, because people really need help.” It’s another reminder of how many people are struggling—that was quite a few years ago, as well—but it’s also a reminder of how common it is for collusion to take place when there’s really minimal competition amongst those industries.

Finally, the concern about new homes and the lack of proper oversight by Tarion—and I think we’ve been hearing these concerns for quite a few years. We’ve all been hearing horror stories about people losing buckets and buckets of money and never actually getting the home that they’d been promised—or they get the home and it’s so poorly built that they can’t live in it. So I do think that Tarion needs to be looked at vary critically, to make sure that it’s not industry insiders who are populating that organization. It needs to be people who don’t have any kind of vested interest—they’re not friends here, friends there. It needs to be a group of people who can think like consumers, who can think like first-time homebuyers, and can protect people from some pretty awful things that we’ve seen going on over the last few years.

I want to thank everyone for the opportunity to speak to this bill. I’m happy to take any questions.

My question is to the Premier. I am very concerned about this government’s plan to further privatize home and community care services. In Thunder Bay and across the province we have seen the devastating consequences of turning over critical services to private corporations: missed appointments, staffing shortages and, ultimately, worse outcomes for Ontarians.

To the Premier: Will you ensure there is publicly available home and community care for all Ontarians?

To the Premier: Will you listen to home and community care workers and clients and stop the privatization of essential services for seniors and people with disabilities?

This question is to the Minister of Community and Social Services. The Galbraiths have been waiting for an assisted living space for their son since 2014. Imagine, day after day, year after year, writing letters and emails, making phone calls and hearing nothing but crickets.

Can the minister tell this family when they will be offered an assisted living space for their son?

Can the government tell us, really, when people can expect to have the services delivered? Eight years is far too long for a family to be waiting to receive supports.

In my riding of Thunder Bay–Superior North, parents of children with autism face years of uncertainty because they can’t access a diagnosis. Then they wait many more years because they can’t access treatment dollars—and that’s if they can find a service provider remotely close to where they live.

With not even a mention of the word “autism” in the budget, Minister, what will your government do to make diagnostic and clinical services available to parents in northwestern Ontario now, so that their children are not missing out on crucial early years of support?

When providers are not available locally, therapy dollars go to travel, leaving less money for treatment.

Adrianna had to quit her job in Manitouwadge and live with her son in Thunder Bay for months so that he could access essential therapy. Once completed, and Adrianna and her son moved back home, they had to travel back and forth, four hours each way, to continue receiving therapy in Thunder Bay.

Will the government provide incentives to bring practitioners to our region and, whenever distance is a factor, provide travel grants so that all autistic children can access timely diagnoses and treatments?

To the Premier: At the recent Association of Municipalities of Ontario meeting, I heard the Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association delegation raise concerns about the proposal to cut Ontario’s health units from 35 to 10 and paramedic services from 55 to 10. The plan is to merge the Kenora, Rainy River and Thunder Bay districts under one health unit covering at least 220,000 square kilometres, and over 500,000 square kilometres if Kiiwetinoong is included.

In the Ontario northwest, we already face enormous geographical challenges to access health care. The proposed mega health unit would serve an absurdly large geographical area with distinctly different communities and distinctly different needs that no single health or paramedic unit could possibly manage without putting people’s lives at risk.

Why is this government looking to make our health care challenges in the north greater by reducing available services?

So my question is: Will this government listen to community members, health professionals and local mayors, stop the amalgamation of health units, return the monthly mobile health units, and strengthen rather than weaken access to health care in northern Ontario?