It is now time for oral questions. I recognize the leader of His Majesty's loyal opposition. Good morning, Speaker. This question is for the Premier. Two weeks ago, this government announced a bill to remove tolls on all the highways that don't have tolls while keeping the tolls on the one highway that has them. In promoting the bill, the Transportation Minister said people are, quote, feeling the pinch in their wallets. The last thing they need to see is another unnecessary fear toll coming their way. So with this in mind, Speaker, and to the Premier, will the government support our motion this afternoon to remove tolls for truck drivers using Highway 407? The Minister of Transportation. Mr. Speaker, there are only two parties that have ever introduced tolls on the highways, and that was under the NDP government and previous Liberal government. Mr. Speaker, everything that we do as a government in this House has been to keep costs low, whether that's fighting the carbon tax, Mr. Speaker. The carbon tax can cost long-haul truck drivers $15,000 to $20,000 a year. That's money that could go to their families to feed their, put more food on their tables. That could put them through school. Mr. Speaker, this is about supporting truckers. They want us to build Highway 413, and they sent a strong message to that member and the previous Liberal government about their inaction to build infrastructure across this province. That's why we will continue to keep costs low, fight the carbon tax, and build Ontario. Mr. Speaker, I'm just going to bring it back to the issue that I asked the question about, which is Highway 407, which is completely underused, Mr. Speaker. You could land an airplane on it, and I mean literally an airplane landed on it right in the middle of the day with no problem. The highway is underused because the tolls are too high. In fact, the private operator set the tolls so high, the Ministry was going to have to charge over $1 billion in congestion penalties, but they never collected it. So my question back to the Premier is, why did the Premier let the Private 407 operator keep that $1 billion instead of using it to bring down these sky-high tolls? Mr. Speaker, when that member and the previous Liberal government had an opportunity to remove tolls on the 412-418, what did they do? Absolutely nothing. In fact, Mr. Speaker, when our government put forward in our budget the opportunity for that party and the previous Liberal government to support our move to reduce tolls and remove tolls off the 412 and 418, what did they do? They voted against that motion and against those measures, Mr. Speaker. They don't care about truck drivers. They don't care about drivers, Mr. Speaker. We want to build Highway 413. We actually even put forward measures to reduce the gas tax by close to 10 cents a liter. And what did that member do? They voted against that cost-saving measure for families about putting more money back into the pockets of hardworking families, whether it's fighting the carbon tax or reducing the gas tax, Mr. Speaker. We will continue to support families and support drivers across this province. Actually, the NDP campaigned for years to remove the tolls on the 412 and 418, and we're proud we were able to get them removed. But why stop there? Why stop there, Speaker? It can cost a trucker as much as $60 per trip. Meanwhile, Highway 401 is overused. Commuters are stuck in traffic. The NDP, truck drivers, transportation experts, environmental advocates have all called on the government to remove Highway 407 tolls for trucks. Getting some trucks off Highway 401 and onto the 407 is better for truckers, and it's better for all the drivers, too. It's a common sense change, but I'm hearing a lot of excuses from across the other side. So, Speaker, why is the Premier so afraid of taking on the private operator of Highway 407? Mr. Speaker, every step of the way we've been there for truck drivers, whether that's about supporting and building the 413, whether it's about removing tolls on the 412, 418, whether it's about reducing or fighting the carbon tax. In fact, that member could make a phone call to a federal counterpart and ask them to support this government's position to reduce costs for truckers, not only truckers, but everyday drivers, Mr. Speaker, that are punished by this carbon tax for just taking their kids to work or going to school. This side of the house will continue to support measures that put more money back in your pockets, but will also continue to support measures that will build critical infrastructure like the Highway 413 that we so desperately need. I asked that member to come visit a riding in Brampton and Mississauga so they can see firsthand that gridlock, we're seeing record population growth, we need more highways and we need a new highways, and that's why we're going to build Highway 413. The next question leads to the opposition. I'll point out that that's going to take 10 years, billions of dollars, but they could do something to provide relief tomorrow. Speaker, last week we asked the government about their decision to give a multimillion dollar contract to Pricewaterhouse Coopers to develop a digital tribunal system without allowing any other company to compete for the contract. We know that the NDP government in BC has been able to deliver results, but this government should know that we can't copy and paste a digital tribunal system from BC to Ontario, and in fact their system is far less complex than our landlord tenant board. So there was no question that this project required a made in Ontario plan, so to the Premier, why did your government let this project proceed without ensuring it would be compatible with the needs of Ontarians? Thank you Madam Speaker. I sent the letter over to the Leader of the Opposition last week, and I don't know if she read it, but it's pretty clear in there that this would be a transformative change for us built on the BC experience. It was in the 2021 budget twice, if they cared to read that. I doubt they read the budget, they voted against it. We are enhancing services for the public. We are making sure that people have access to fare and timely matters. We were left with an entirely broken system by the Liberal government. We actually had to hand bomb notices and do things manually because the system failed that we inherited from that Liberal government supported by that NDP government. Despite what the government says about where this idea came from, we have learned that Ontario was well on its way to developing our own digital system prior to giving PWC a sole sourced contract. There were already years and millions of dollars in fact invested Premier into a made-in Ontario digital platform that was planning to launch in 2019. But that project was thrown out, and the government hasn't given any reason to justify why. It seems like they use this just as another excuse to line the pockets of a private company. So back to the Premier, given the skyrocketing costs of this contract, now at least $26 million and counting, did the government and Ontario taxpayers save any money by abandoning the original project? Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I'm not going to take business acumen or advice from the NDP, Mr Speaker, about how you get things done. We are getting things done, Mr Speaker. In fact, the system that we scaled from BC from a smaller tribunal to our largest tribunal, Mr Speaker, that receives over 80,000 applications a year, Mr Speaker. It is quite a scale. Now, I'll tell you, this isn't just an idea that we're percolating, that we're moving along, that we're saying we'll be ready sometime. It's actually running, Mr Speaker. We ran it parallel with the old system, and now it's fully functioning and doing very well and doing high volume. Now, Mr Speaker, again, the opposition says, well, why didn't you do it a different way? Well, Mr Speaker, because we did it the right way. Here comes the final supplementary. Tell that, Mr Speaker, to the people who are waiting. 53,000 unresolved cases at the landlord tenant board right now and the number keeps growing. Long backlogs at tribunals mean that Ontarians are waiting months, even years to have their cases heard under this government. Under this government, the wait list has quadrupled and the tribunal is handling fewer applications every single year since this Premier formed government in 2018. The government needs to come to grips with the fact that technology is a tool, not a plan. So I want my question to go back to the Premier. Will he start investing in staff and courtroom services and stop sending good money after bad to Bay Street firms? Well, Mr Speaker, I guess did they not only not read the 2021 budget, they didn't read the 2022 or the 2023 budget, Mr Speaker. We have been investing. We have doubled the number of adjudicators. We have hired more staff. In fact, applications are up 31% over last year, Mr Speaker, and we are still driving the number down. Now, from 2014 until we took office, there was an excess of cases over those resolved every single year under the liberal government with the assistance of the NDP. So again, if facts matter, Mr Speaker, I will be taking no direction from the NDP on this. We are getting the job done. The numbers are coming down. People are getting their cases heard. Orders are going out 90% of the time within 30 days at this point, Mr Speaker. We have some excellent metrics, and we are getting in the right direction. Notwithstanding, they vote against every single investment we make in the system. The next question, the member for Nickel Belt. Thank you, Speaker. Questions to the Minister of Health. Hundreds of people in Kingston got up at 3 a.m. to go stand outside in the cold and win for a chance to gain access to primary care. How can the minister explain that? Deputy Premier and Minister of Health. As we expand access to primary care practitioners across Ontario, the member opposite of course will know that we have 78 new primary care expansions happening in the province of Ontario. So I completely understand the enthusiasm and interest in Kingston for these accessing primary care. Obviously, our preferred route would be to make sure that they can go through the Ontario portal to make sure that they get assessed and assigned to a primary care practitioner. But again, in Kingston alone, notwithstanding the primary care expansion that the member opposite references, as part of the expansion, we also have the periwinkle model, which I will quote the organiser of that response, saying if you need to see a nurse practitioner, you'll see a nurse practitioner. If you need to see a doctor, you'll see a doctor. If you need to see a primary care clinician, dietician, you will see the appropriate clinic. Thank you, Speaker. Sick, frail, elderly people standing outside for hours in February. This is happening under this minister's watch. Everyone agrees that the solution is interdisciplinary care, where physician works along, nurses, social worker, dietician help promoters. The minister has received solutions from hundreds and hundreds of community. Why are you only willing to help 78 of them? The investment for expansions across Ontario. We are making sure that people get access to primary care, multidisciplinary teams in the province of Ontario, with the greatest respect to the opposition, to suggest that you can just open up and say go ahead and hire. We need to do the work, and we have done the work with the minister of colleges and universities, expanding the number of seats available for training nurses, for training nurse practitioners. We are doing that work, and we will continue to do that work. But to suggest in any way that $110 million investment, 78 new expanded primary care is not enough, we will continue to do the work. You'll continue to vote against it. Members, to make the comments through the chair, the next question, the member for Essex. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the minister of energy. As we all know, the federal carbon tax is unnecessarily increasing the cost of everything that Ontario needs on a daily basis. Like our Premier said, the delivery of every product we have in this province is being affected by the worst tax this country has ever seen. It's a useless tax, and that's the federal carbon tax. Mr. Speaker, we continue to remain laser focused on keeping costs down for Ontario families and businesses, but the carbon tax is working against us. Mr. Speaker, can the minister please explain how the carbon tax is driving up costs for Ontarians every day life and what we need to do to keep costs down? To respond, the minister of energy. Thanks very much to the member from Essex for another great question. The cost of the carbon tax isn't just affecting the price of the pumps, it's affecting the price of everything. And the Minister of Agriculture certainly knows this, it's affecting the price of the farm gate because the farmers are putting fuel in their tractors, the farmers are using fuel to dry their grains, the transportation it takes to get those products to the food terminal, to the grocery stores driving up the cost of everything, Mr. Speaker.  We know that in three weeks' time, the federal government is going to be increasing the carbon tax by another 23%, Mr. Speaker. If members of this legislature wanted to make a difference, they'd bone their buddies, Judmeet and Justin, and they would put applause on that federal carbon tax. Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the Minister for his response. This is exactly why our government spoke up about the carbon tax and why we fought it, tooth and nail, all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada. It's ludicrous that the federal liberals intentionally disregarded the welfare of most people in Ontario by blatantly ignoring how the carbon tax is leading to increased home energy costs. Speaker, the most concerning part is that it's only going to get worse from here. The federal government and the opposition liberals and NDP want to nearly triple the tax by 2030. That is unacceptable. Speaker, can the Minister explain why Ontario families cannot afford the tax increases that the liberals and the NDP want to foist on the hardworking people of Ontario? Mr. Speaker, thanks again to the member from Essex who really cares about making sure that people in his riding and across the province can afford to eat at the end of the day. During his question, we just had a member from the NDP say, get over it.  There's one party in this legislature that actually cares about affordability, whether it's decreasing the cost of the gasoline tax, whether it's removing tolls from our highways or taking away the license fees on our plates. There's one party focused on driving down the cost of living and its Premier Ford and our Progressive Conservative Party. Now it's real simple. It's real simple. April 1st is coming. The federal carbon tax is set to rise again by 23% in just over three weeks time. Will the members of the NDP, will they just get over it or will they call Jagmeet and will they demand that Justin Trudeau put a pause on that federal carbon tax so people can afford to live in our country? The next question, the member for Thunder Bay, Superior Norms. Thank you, Speaker. In December, the Auditor General identified major concerns about the Ministry's decision to lower the standards to earn a driver's license. Some drivers are being trained and tested on a single route. Drivers with repeat suspensions, if not required to retrain, are responsible for six times the rate of fatal collisions. The Attorney General's report is clear. A lack of standards and oversight at drive test centres is leading to an increase in serious accidents. Minister, when will you return drive test requirements to their previous higher standards? Minister of Transportation. Mr. Speaker, our government takes the safety of all road users very seriously and Ontario has the safest roads in all of North America due to the many measures that we have put in place to ensure that our roads remain safe. In January, 2023, our government mandated the use of electronic logging for vehicles, commercial vehicles for helping improve driver safety, road safety. But, Mr. Speaker, we've also introduced legislation like the Moms Act that increases and makes drivers license suspension even longer. It increases impound impoundment periods as well for those who aren't safe on our roads, especially in the form of stunt driving as well as street racing and aggressive driving. So we will continue to focus on keeping road safety as a top priority and do whatever we can to maintain the strongest and highest forms of road safety across this province. My office received a copy of a memo from the Vice President of Circle, the private company that operates numerous drive test centres in Ontario. Information in the memo identifies fraudulent road test passes and false experience being added to driver records. Not only have the test standards been lowered by the ministry, even these lowered standards are not being met. What is the minister doing to make sure that all those receiving driver's licenses are trained to the highest standards and have legitimately completed all the requirements? Mr. Speaker, our government has maintained the strongest forms of road safety across this province and across North America. Actually, when you look at Canada and the entire country, we have the strongest and most strict measures for G licensing in this province in Ontario. That is because of our commitment to road safety and our commitment to ensuring that we have safe roads. That is why we continue to even introduce pieces of legislation like the Moms Act, which will increase suspensions and penalties on those who are not safe. If you are strunt driving or street racing, we will ensure that your vehicle is impounded and that you are also charged for those incidents. I would like to state that for the members here that those individuals, when they had an opportunity to be stronger and support measures on road safety, did not support them. They did not vote to increase and lengthen suspension periods on those driving recklessly on a road. We will continue to ensure that we support safety across all... Thank you very much. Thank you. The next question, the member for Brampton West. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Transportation. At a time when the cost of living continues to rise, the federal government is making things worse with the punitive carbon tax. Residents in Brampton West tell me life is becoming more expensive, particularly as the carbon tax pushes up the cost of fuel. Many families in my riding rely on their car to get to work every day. The experience, they experience the consequences of the federal carbon tax every time they fill up at the pumps. This carbon tax is unfair and it is hurting the hardworking families and individuals across the province. Mr. Speaker, our government must continue to provide support and relief for Ontarians, especially at a time when the federal government is turning its back on us. Speaker, can the Minister please tell the House whatever government is doing to help ease the carbon tax burden for the people of this province? Mr. Transportation. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and to the member for Brampton West on his advocacy against this carbon tax, Mr. Speaker. The federal government is about to increase this tax by 23%, so that member is absolutely right and being concerned for families across Brampton that can't afford that increase, Mr. Speaker, because people are being punished for driving their kids to school, for driving to work, for driving to take their kids to extracurricular activities, and that's not right. That's why this government has always been steadfast in our commitment to ensuring that we fight the carbon tax. Not only that, we're also decreasing the cost of the fuel tax by $0.10 a liter, Mr. Speaker. That's because we want to put more money back into the families and into their pockets so they can do what they want with that money, whether it's take their kids out for a meal, whether it's put their kids in extracurricular activity, Mr. Speaker. We'll continue to fight this carbon tax every step of the way. The supplementary question. Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the Minister of Transportation for his response. It is encouraging to see our government's continued effort in standing up for Ontarians and fighting against the federal carbon tax. This is especially important for commuters across the province who rely on their cars to travel to work or to see their family and friends. Mr. Speaker, at a time when Canadians are seeing costs go up, everywhere the federal Liberals are raising taxes. The people of Ontario should not be forced to pay more to fuel their cars. While our government demonstrated much needed leadership and reduced the gasoline tax, the federal government did not. We must continue to call on the federal government to eliminate the carbon tax completely and to help deliver true affordability for Ontario families. Speaker, can the Minister please share with this House how our government is protecting commuters across Ontario from this costly federal carbon tax? The Minister of Transportation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is clear that the federal Liberals are completely out of touch with the concerns of residents, especially in places like Brampton and Mississauga, and all across this province, Mr. Speaker. I cannot believe that they are willing to increase the carbon tax by 23 percent. This is not something the families of Brampton across this province can afford right now. But not only that, they have a federal environment minister that says he does not want to build any more roads or highways, Mr. Speaker. We are seeing record population growth. That is why we are ensuring that we are making those investments not only to fight the carbon tax but to build roads, to build highways. But on top of that, we are reducing the cost of gas by 10 cents. But on top of that, we are also making sure that we fees fees on photo cards and also on driver's licenses, Mr. Speaker. And two years ago, Mr. Speaker, we also reduced the val tags and removed that by saving a family $125 per car or truck. So we will continue to make life more affordable for families across this province and fight against the carbon tax. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Premier. Systemic anti-black racism is prevalent in our society and has negative impacts on the health of black Ontarians. Anti-black racism takes a toll on mental health despite the resilience of black communities. Black community organisations such as Taibu and Tropicana Community Services have asked Ontario to recognise the first Monday of March as Black Mental Health Day to raise awareness and highlight the impact of anti-black racism on mental health. To the Premier, there is a bill on the order paper right now to do just that, and we could pass it today. Will he commit to recognising Black Mental Health Day in Ontario? Citizenship and multiculturalism. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And thank you very much for the question, of course, following Black History Month, which we had the opportunity to celebrate across the province in ending anti-black racism and really uplifting the diversity of our communities, including Ontario's black community. And that is why, Mr. Speaker, we are doing a on a number of fronts, making critical investments to make sure that our black community and all communities here in the province of Ontario can get ahead. And we're doing that under the leadership of the Minister of Economic Development, creating strong jobs for the future. Under the Minister of Transportation, making sure that we are connecting our diverse communities to the jobs the Minister is creating right across the province and, of course, in my ministry, making those strong investments to fight anti-black racism and uplift our diverse communities is a priority for us under the leadership of the Premier. Thank you. Speaker, part of the efforts to recognise Black Mental Health Day is to address the barriers and burdens of anti-black racism on mental health. Children are waiting for two years for mental health care, and it takes longer if you're black.  It doesn't feel like this government appreciates the urgency of this issue. So back to the Premier.  Mr. Senator, the trip of multiculturalism. Well, thank you very much. Again, Mr. Speaker, under the leadership of the Premier, we have been making strong investments as a government in combating anti-black racism and raising up our black community. That is why, particularly, I'd like to reference our anti-black racism strategic plan or the anti-racism strategic plan in the province where we invested under $32 million in combating racism in all its form, but particularly around economic development, supporting children and youth specifics, anti-racism, anti-hate initiatives, as well as policy and accountability measures across 14 ministries. Mr. Speaker, making sure that all Ontarians can succeed is an all-the-government approach and we will continue to do just that. Thank you. The next question, the member for Guelph. Good morning, Speaker. My question is for the Premier. The Get It Done Wrong Act will make the affordability and the climate crisis worse. Imposing expensive sprawl on the municipalities will increase property taxes to line the pocket of land speculators. It will force young people into long, expensive commutes just to find a place to rent, let alone a home to own. That is why Greens are working so hard to legalize housing, creating more choices and more opportunities for first-time homebuyers to buy homes they can afford and the communities they love. Speaker, will the Premier stop avoiding debate on housing solutions and get it done for people, not speculators, by supporting my bill to end exclusionary zoning and legalize homes that people can afford in the communities they love? To reply, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Look, from day one we have been focused on building more homes for the people of the province of Ontario. What you hear typically from the opposition parties are more obstacles being put in the way of actually getting more homes and more shovels in the ground, Speaker, just like all around him. He is surrounded by a former Liberal caucus that did just that. They put obstacles in the way of building more homes. What we're seeing now with us, housing supply actions plans would see rental housing starts at their highest level ever in the province of Ontario. Over the last three years, we are starting to see new housing starts increase and increase. This is despite the high interest rate policies of the Federal Liberal Government, the high carbon tax policies, which are putting so many people out of the market for that new home. What we're going to do is return the dream of home ownership to the people of the province of Ontario by getting more shovels in the ground, reducing costs and removing obstacles. Supplementary question. Speaker, respectfully, people are sick and tired of waiting for this government to put forward housing solutions that work for ordinary people, not speculators. Let's look at places that are succeeding. Guelph is on track to meet its housing targets. Kitchener has exceeded their housing targets. Both have legalized foreplexes and elected greens, by the way. If just 18 percent of existing single family homes became a foreplex, that would be 2 million homes, Speaker. But that requires putting affordable homes ahead of speculators. So, Speaker, I'm going to give the Minister an opportunity today. Will the government say yes to legalizing housing, yes to foreplexes across the province? When I look at who's getting the job done, I see Conservatives across the province of Ontario who are getting the job done. I was very happy to be in Brampton, where they smashed through their housing target. I was very happy to be with the Minister of Long-Term Care when we were in Soville, because Soville not only smashed through the target, 239 percent over the target, Mr. Speaker. When you look at those municipalities that are doing what we've asked them to do, removing obstacles, reducing taxes, getting shovels in the ground faster by approving permits quicker, Mr. Speaker, those municipalities which have followed the housing supply action plans brought forward by this government are meeting their targets. Now, it should be no surprise that where liberals are in charge, those targets aren't being met. I look at Burlington. I look at Mississauga.  We're going to make sure that every municipality reaches that target for the people of the province. Next question, the member for Niagara West. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Energy. This government has always known that the carbon tax is driving up energy prices across this province, and that's why we're using every tool in our toolbox to keep costs down and ensure that Ontarians have access to affordable and reliable energy. But, Speaker, while this government is serious about making life more affordable Ontarians, we've seen liberal governments like the Trudeau Liberals in Ottawa pick and choose who gets relief from this unnecessary tax. The federal government announced an exemption, but only for home heating oil. And this has understandably led to frustration and anger from many of my residents who are trying to ensure that they're able to heat their home with other sources of energy. So, Speaker, could the Minister please tell this House how the federal carbon tax is negatively hurting Ontarians, people like my residents, with the cost of home heating? Minister of Energy. Well, thanks very much to the member from Niagara. Great member from Niagara for a great question this morning. The federal Liberals obviously have come to the realization that their carbon tax is driving up the cost of home heating for people, but only in Atlantic Canada. We need them to understand that the federal carbon tax is hurting people right across the country. Now, we know where the Liberals stand on this. They're heckling me right now. And we know their leader, Bonnie Cromby, is in full support of the federal carbon tax. And some members of their caucus are in full support of this carbon tax because they stood up in this legislature and said the people of Ontario are better off with the federal carbon tax than they would be otherwise, Mr. Speaker. It's unbelievable that the Liberals in Ontario who drove people into energy poverty for 15 years are letting their friends do it again in Ottawa and making life unaffordable, not just for the folks in Ontario, but for the folks right across this country. That's a question. People in Niagara West and people across Ontario deserve to be treated fairly and the federal government must move quickly to cut the pause to all forms of home heating in Ontario or better yet, get rid of this terrible tax altogether. And, Speaker, when I speak with families and businesses in my writing, they speak about one issue consistently and that issue is affordability. They tell me they already can't afford the impact of the carbon tax on their energy bills and yet they're looking at a tax that's only going to rise in a few weeks. So our government, I know, is going to continue to take action, to ensure that we're taking action to lower energy costs so that people can put more money in their pockets, unlike the liberal traditions that we've seen in this House and now we see in Ottawa. So, Speaker, could the minister explain to this House what the government is doing to ensure that families in the Niagara West and every corner of this province have access to lower emissions home heating like natural gas? Minister of Energy. Speaker, we are in the midst of an affordability crisis, not in this province, but in this country. And a large portion of that is the fact that the federal government has introduced their carbon tax, a carbon tax that is expected to go up again on April Fool's Day. It's no joke, but on April 1st, it's expected to go up by another 23%, Mr. Speaker. Who in their right mind would add a huge tax like that while we're in the midst of an affordability crisis? I can tell you. I can tell you who would. It's liberals. It's liberals in Ontario. It's liberals in Canada supported by the NDP, Mr. Speaker. Now, they stand in the House from time to time and say they're on the side of the people of Ontario, but when it really matters how do they vote, Mr. Speaker, they should be picking up the phone today, calling Jagmeet, calling Justin and saying, hit a pause on the carbon tax. It's only going to make life in Ontario. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions to the Minister of Health. When we tabled a universal contraception motion, you deemed extending coverage to women over 25 as not resource worthy. Yet now with the federal commitment, the landscape has changed. Research underscores that universal access is pivotal for reproductive justice and economic efficiencies within health care. As we near international women's day, will this government back this transformative policy, championing gender equality, by endorsing universal contraception for a fairer, healthier Ontario? Thank you, Speaker. So as the member opposite knows, of course, Ontario has a very robust system in place with OHIP+. But I'm going to speak specifically to the federal pharmacare announcement, because, frankly, it is very, very thin on details. When I spoke to the federal minister on Wednesday evening, I asked very specific questions because we all need to understand how this impacts an existing program that is happening in the province of Ontario, as the member knows. We have made some announcements specifically related to diabetes and our youth. So I want to make sure that the program that is coming in from the federal government, if it is ultimately approved and passed, is in fact not going to negatively impact the people of Ontario who have a very robust system right now. Thank you, Speaker. Back to the minister. Wait and see? Wait and see from this government means ignoring Ontario's needs. Last year we championed free contraception, highlighting what it means for so many women in Ontario. In health, in gender equality, in affordability, despite the initial nods, the minister, wait and see, turned into outright rejection. With national pharmacare on the table, this wait and see stance signals a dismissal of reproductive justice for women's rights. Will this conservative government finally prioritize Ontario's well-being by committing to universal health care, including contraception, today? You know, Speaker, that question underlies exactly why the people of Ontario do not entrust their fate in the opposition. The government is not going to make decisions based on headlines leaked by Jagmeet Singh. We are going to get the details. We are going to make an assessment based on what is already existing in the province of Ontario. And I don't know if the member understands, but we have individual bilateral discussions that have to take place in order for this program to proceed. And we will do that with all of the facts and all of the details, because Speaker, on this side of the house, facts matter. The next question, the member for Don Valley East. For the Premier, Mr. Speaker, in Ontario we have three branches of government, legislative, executive and judicial. The legislative branch is, of course, all of us. The executive branch includes the King, represented by the Lieutenant Governor, the Premier and the Executive Council. And the judicial branch is an independent system of courts that interprets the law and applies laws while protecting the rights of citizens. Mr. Speaker, the Premier can't seem to grasp a concept that even grade five social studies students have mastered by the time they come here for their tours at Burns Park. He calls his appointment of two former senior staffers to the Judicial Appointments Advisory Committee, democracy. But this is a power grab and nothing more. It's the Premier tightening his grip, a shameless move that strong arms the judicial branch for political gain and rewards friends. What else to do? Mr. Speaker, without quintupling down, will the Premier tell us the real reason that he thinks two former staffers are more qualified to choose our judges than non-partisan legal experts? The Attorney General. Mr. Speaker, and you know that is the quintessential liberal arrogance, Mr. Speaker. Condescension telling us how the system works. Well, you know, Mr. Speaker, yeah, it is man's pleaning. Thank you. Now, Mr. Speaker, look, Mr. Speaker, the way that it works is the people vote for who they want to have governed, Mr. Speaker. And that's what they did. And that's why our government is sitting here and they are sitting there, Mr. Speaker. They want us to put people in positions to make decisions, to keep their communities safe, to make sure that we are representing their interests, to make sure that we are making good and solid decisions. Mr. Speaker, they would have us go to one of their ideologues, Mr. Speaker, to sit and give us advice, Mr. Speaker. And I know this for a fact, and I'll address it in the second in the second answer, Mr. Speaker. That's a question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As we just heard, this is about controlling people in high places. We saw it with the former staffer who was charged with orchestrating the historic green belt giveaway. And now we have, now we have a registered gun lobbyist, friendly to the Premier, in charge of selecting our judges amidst the wave of gun violence. Mr. Speaker, life really is stranger than fiction. The judicial branch administers justice by applying our laws, not by bending them to a political party's will, because anyone could find themselves in criminal court someday. Even the Premier, wouldn't he want to know that those judges were chosen for their fairness and not their political leanings? I'm just saying. Mr. Speaker, it sure pays to be a friend of the Premier. Whether you're a developer drooling over the green belt, a private company like Staples, Shoppers Drug Martyr Law Laws, a buddy in need of an MZO, a compadre connected to full-profit health care, the Premier always has a friend in mind. Mr. Speaker, will the Premier ever stop working for his friends and start working for Ontarians? The Attorney General. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.  They receive applications and they go through the applications and they make recommendations to the Attorney General, who then makes recommendations to the cabinet, Mr. Speaker. That's how it works. And once the person is appointed, then they get their judicial independence. If we want a full civics lesson, Mr. Speaker, judicial independence starts at the moment of appointment, not at the selection process, Mr. Speaker. So I'll take no lessons from the Liberals, who had donors on the committee for decades and appointed 40% of the 47 judges appointed in 2017 for donors to the Liberals in the NGP, Mr. Speaker. As a question, the member for a new market, Aurora. Question is for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. The carbon tax is punishing the hardworking individuals, businesses and farmers who produce quality food for families across Ontario. Since its introduction, production costs for farmers, greenhouse growers and food processors have increased significantly. The delivery of every single consumer good in our province, particularly fresh and processed food, is being impacted by this punitive tax. It is driving up the cost of transporting inputs like seed, fertilizer and packaging to the cost of transporting fruits and vegetables to market. Speaker, can the Minister please explain what impact this harmful and regressive tax is having on our agricultural sector? That's a great question. Mr. Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Thank you very much to the member from New Market Aurora for that question. It shows she's caring and I need a voice. Don't take my time on me right now because I have much to say. Okay, very good. The member from New Market Aurora is absolutely spot on. It shows she's connected and she cares about what's happening in her riding. Speaker, in short, the liberal carbon tax is eroding Ontario farmers and food industries' ability to compete at a global level because of the regressive carbon tax that's causing the cost of production to go sky high. Speaker, I was speaking to a farmer who grows fresh produce peppers and his carbon bill on his monthly energy bill is 30%. 30% of his energy bill goes to the carbon tax. I spoke to a grain company in my riding of urine fruits and for the month of November, wait for this speaker, his costs were almost $200,000. The carbon tax cost that one business. Thank you. Thank you. Supplementary question. Speaker, and thank you to the minister for that response. And it is clear that the federal carbon tax is hurting farmers in our province. Many of them are being forced to pay thousands of dollars more in natural gas bills. Speaker, Ontario's hardworking farmers deserve better. Liberals, our government recognizes the adverse effects this harmful tax is having on communities across Ontario. We need all members of the legislator to join us and call on the federal government to act on so many families in our province. Minister of agriculture, food and rural affairs. It's home to 2.5 million people and economists are saying as the carbon price rises, so will the cost of food. And ladies and gentlemen, not only the cost of food, but the cost of energy. You know, the fact of the matter is on our farm, in our house specifically, the carbon tax has caused our home heating bill to go up 17%. And furthermore, the minister of energy said April 1st, it goes up again. Well, get this. As of April 1st, home heating is going to go up 15 cents per metric ton of heat. And I'm going to repeat that so I get my numbers right. As of April 1st, there's going to be an additional 15 cents per cubic meter for natural gas. And the gas at the fuel pump is going up 17 cents per litre. That's going to affect all of Ontario. And I dare that member officer from the NDP who said get over it, come out to a farm. Thank you very much. Next question, the member for Samuskin in Cochrane. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Health. Northerners often have to travel to get access to a specialist. We get that. There's lots of big hospitals down here. We get that. To make healthcare equitable, something called the Northern Health Travel Grant exists. So we often have to travel hours. And we get reimbursed for a hotel room if we have to travel too far. The reimbursement is $100 per night. I would ask the Minister of Health could she give me a list or any of her colleagues of hotels in the GT or actually around here around the where you can rent a room for $100 per night. Deputy Premier and Minister of Health. Thank you, Speaker. So the member opposite knows that the Northern Ontario travel grant is part of a suite of programs that we ensure people have access to healthcare when they need in particular specialists. But we are also building additional primary care in Northern Ontario, in Eastern Ontario, in Southwestern Ontario, in the Niagara region. We want to make sure that people have that access. And the other piece that we are working on to ensure that the primary care piece is absolutely critical is making sure that we are expanding programs like the Orange Air Ambulance. Not only are we replacing our fixed wing fleet, but we are adding an additional four. Why? Because we want to make sure that people in Northern Ontario and Southern Ontario have access. Another piece that the member, of course, would be familiar with is an expansion in our MRI programs, ensuring that hospitals that have never had an MRI finally have that program in their facility so that they can Thank you, Speaker. In the Minister's own words, facts matter. And the fact is it's impossible to rent a hotel room anywhere close to a major hospital for $100 a night. So right off the bat, Northerners don't have equal access. Furthermore, the travel costs do not, which are subsized by the grant, nowhere come close to what the actual costs are. Yet this government refuses to change the Northern Health Travel Grant. My question is why? Why don't Northerners deserve equitable access to specialists in the province? In fact, we have made some changes to the Northern Travel Grant. One, of course, is making it easier for people to receive those remunerations and expenses covered by allowing online access. There's more to do. We absolutely acknowledge that. But would the member office have also agreed that expanding access to primary care, expanding access to MRIs, expanding access to CT scanners in community is an important piece to ensure that people do not have to do the traveling that historically they have had to do because previous governments did not make those investments in community. Thank you. Thank you. The next question member for Chatham Kent Leamington. Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry. The federal carbon tax is not working to reduce emissions. Instead, it's driving up the costs of goods, services and essential items for the people of Ontario. Speaker, in the natural resources sector, the federally imposed carbon tax has an impact on the cost of products such as sand, stone, lumber and other building materials. Not only does it make raw materials more expensive, but it also affects the entire supply chain, resulting in higher costs for everyone and everything. Speaker, can the Minister please explain how the carbon tax is negatively impacting industries in the natural resources sector and consumers across Ontario? Thank you very much, Speaker. Thanks to the member from Chatham Kent Leamington for the question. I've had the opportunity to speak about this before, but let's focus on the aggregate sector today. Let's focus on every load of gravel that is needed to build Ontario, to build hospitals, to build schools, to build communities. We absolutely have to have that aggregate, and every load that comes out of every pit, every quarry is subjected to carbon tax, and it's driving up the cost, Mr. Speaker. Here's a quote from Ontario, sand, stone and gravel. Politicians can't have it both ways. If they support affordable housing, they must support sand and gravel. If they support new schools, hospitals and roads, they need to support sand and gravel. Speaker, we urge the federal government to end this tax. Another doomsday is coming on April 1st, and it's going to make everything more expensive when we ask the members opposite. Do the same. Do the same. Make the ask, do what's right for Ontario so we can build Ontario. Supplementary question. Thank you, Speaker, and thank you, the Minister, for that response. Aggregate businesses like Erie, Sand and Grauvel and Lemington are adversely impacted by the federal carbon tax. I hear it. I see it. The carbon tax is contributing to higher fuel prices and higher shipping prices. Speaker, industries in the national resources sector are vital to sustaining and contributing to Ontario's economic prosperity. They need our support now. While the independent, liberal and opposition NDP members continue to support this punishing tax, our government will keep working to make life more affordable for everyone. Speaker, can the Minister please expand on how the carbon tax is negatively impacting local businesses around our province? The Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry. Again, Speaker, thank you to my colleague for the question. You know, our government's supporting job creators and building the stronger Ontario every day, but those job creators, they need help to do that. They need the independent liberals and all the independents and all the opposition to pick up the phone and call Ottawa and say this carbon tax does not work for Ontario. The job creators want us to continue to advocate for Ontarians. They want us to make sure that the message is clear, that if we want to build Ontario, the things that we need to do it with are subject to carbon tax and the price is getting driven up every day. Again, I'll quote my friends at Osgo. Aggregate is a clean industry. The most significant long-term environmental impact of aggregate extraction is trucking. That's why aggregate must be located as close to where it is needed as possible. Mr. Speaker, we again want to build Ontario. We can't do it with a carbon tax on her back that's wrestling this to the ground every day. Thank you very much, Speaker. My question is to the Premier. After a question period this morning, the government can vote for the Gender Firming Healthcare Act. They can choose to take action. They can choose to save lives. I've never spoken to a single trans-Ontarian who believes that Ontario's system for delivering gender-firming health care is actually working. But during the debate on Thursday, members of this government gave indication that they would not be supporting the bill. Speaker, I hope members of this government all know that by voting against this bill, it means that they're voting against members in their own community. It means that they're voting against constituents. They're probably even voting against members of their own family. Trans and gender diverse constituents who are struggling to access health care Ontario need to be treated with the same level of respect as every other Ontarian Speaker. Speaker, yes or no? Will this government state on the public record whether or not they believe that gender-firming health care is life-saving health care? Speaker, there's no doubt that all Ontarians deserve and need to be able to have confidence in their health care system which is why we believe that the expansion of family health teams including specific teams that have programs as part of their LGBTQ plus services and offer specific clinics for trans populations which provide interdisciplinary primary care services. You know, Speaker, we're talking about the member opposite forming a committee. We're actually investing in communities. We're investing in those primary care teams that are providing the services on the ground and that is critically important to our government to make sure that all individuals in Ontario, regardless of how they identify, get the health care they deserve. Thank you Speaker. I'm disappointed by the minister's answer but I am not surprised. By refusing to acknowledge that gender-affirming health care is life-saving health care, this government is sending a very clear message to trans Ontarians. They don't matter. They don't count. Their lives are not important. Advocates have been asking for years to expand OHIP coverage, to reduce the barriers to accessing gender-firming care and to make sure that Ontarians don't have to leave the province to get the life-saving care that they need and deserve. Too many people in this province are clearly paying out of pocket and they're waiting for years to access gender-firming care. A message that they need to deliver to this government is that they need to be seen, heard and respected when they go see a health care professional and that is not happening right now Speaker. We need to ensure that everyone in Ontario can access health care that's free of discrimination and have equal treatment. Speaker, my question to the Premier, to the Minister of Health, is that during the last term they voted for gender-affirming health care. This is now the same bill. Why has this government reversed course? Why are they not supporting trans rights and their right to gender-firming health care? Speaker. The member opposite is talking about forming a committee. We are talking about real action that is making an impact in communities across Ontario. Is the member opposite suggesting that the expansions of CHCs, the expansion of community health centres of family health teams that provide specific service for the LGBTQ plus community is not an appropriate investment. I don't want to keep talking about it. I want to act and that's what our government is doing. Thank you Speaker. Thank you very much. That concludes our question period this morning. The member


And I'm going to call the meeting to order. My name is Peter Nowland and I am the moderator of the Orange Southwest Unified School District. This is the annual meeting of the Orange Southwest School District. And this year it is being presented both physically in the auditorium and virtually. I will begin the meeting with asking people to join with me in a pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Under Robert's rules, I should read the full warning before we start the meeting, but I'm going to ask for consent of the meeting to just simply read each article as I come to it rather than reading the whole warning first. This is the annual meeting of the school district. However, we will only take up articles one through six at this meeting. Articles seven, eight and nine and 10 will be voted by Australian ballot tomorrow at the repulse for the respective town in which you reside. The polls for the town of Randolph will be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. at the Randolph Town Hall. The polls for the town of Brookfield will be open from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. at the Brookfield Old Town Hall and the polls for the town of Braintree will be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. at the Braintree Town Hall. Are you ready for the meeting? We will proceed with article one. Article one is to elect a moderator for a term of one year beginning July 1, 2021. What is the pleasure of the meeting? I nominate Peter Nolland. Second that nomination. Peter Nolland has been nominated and seconded. Any other nominations? Bearing none, I'll declare nominations closed. All in favor of Peter Nolland, as moderator for a term beginning July 1, 2021, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Contrary say no. The ayes appear to have it, the ayes do have it and Peter Nolland is elected. To elect a clerk for a term of one year beginning July 1, 2021, your current clerk is Linda Lubow. What is the pleasure of the meeting? I nominate Linda Lubow to maintain in that position. I second. There's a nomination and a second for Linda Lubow. Any other nominations? Bearing none, I declare the nominations closed. All in favor of electing Linda Lubow for a clerk of the district for the term beginning July 1, 2021, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any contrary say nay. Congratulations, Linda, you are elected. You have a really well-oiled political machine. Article three, to elect a school district treasurer for a term of one year beginning July 1, 2021. Current treasurer is Teresa Godfrey. I nominate Teresa Godfrey. Is there a second? Any other nominations? Bearing none, I declare nominations closed. All in favor of electing Linda Godfrey as treasurer for the school district for a term beginning July 1, 2021, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed, state nay. The ayes appear to have it, the ayes do have it and Teresa Godfrey has been elected. Article four, to fill any vacancies existing or occurring on March 1, 2021 on this date. I am not aware of any vacancies to the elected officers of the union. There are no vacancies. Article five, to hear and act upon the reports of the officers of the school district. The reports of the officers of the school district are published. If those of you who are in the auditorium can pick them up here, we will start with the report of the school board. Are there any questions or comments with respect to the report of the school board? Oh, come on, this is going way too fast. It's your chance to put the school board on the hot seat. Hearing no comments, I'll entertain a motion to accept the report is published. I move to accept the report is published. Second. Second. Discussion. All in favor, please signify it by saying aye. Aye. Any contrary, state nay. The ayes have it, the school board has accepted. Next, the report of the superintendent published in the booklet. Any comments or questions of the superintendent? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to accept the report of the superintendent as published. It's been moved. Seconded. Discussion. All in favor of accepting the report of the superintendent, please signify it by saying aye. Aye. Opposed nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it. The report is accepted. I have next the report relating to the OSSD elementary schools which is published in the booklet at page six and seven. Any comments or just questions regarding that report? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to accept the report as published. Is that a motion made? Second. Seconded. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed, state nay. The report is accepted as published. Next, the report of the Randolph Union High School published on pages eight and nine of the booklet. Are there any questions or comments with regard to the report of the Randolph Union High School? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to accept the report as published. Motion's been made. Seconded. Discussion on the motion. Hearing none, all in favor of accepting the report as published, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed, state nay. The report is accepted as published. On page 10 and 11 is the report of the Randolph Technical Career Center. Are there any questions or comments with regard to the RTTC report? RTTC report. Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to accept it as published. It's been moved. Any seconds? I got a second. Are you ready for the motion? All in favor of accepting the motion, accepting the report of the Randolph Technical Career Center as published, please signify by saying aye. Any opposed? The report is accepted. Are there any other reports to be taken up? Article six, to see whether the school district authorized the school board to borrow money pending receipt of payments from member towns by the issuance of notes or orders payable not later than one date from the year they're up. One year from the date they're up. What is the pleasure of the meeting? It has been moved to authorize the school district to so borrow, is there a second? A second. Moved and seconded, is there any discussion on the motion? Just so folks are aware, this is the arbitrage because school districts fiscal year start July 1st and we don't get tax money until generally October. This allows us to pay our bills during that time and then we pay it back when the money comes in from Texas. Thank you. Any other comments? Hearing none, I will ask for a vote to see whether the school district is authorized to borrow money pending receipt of payments from the member towns by the issuance of notes or orders payable not later than one year from the date they're up. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed, state nay? The ayes appear to have it, the ayes do have it and the motion carries. Is there any other business to come before the meeting? I remind you that there is voting by Australian ballot on the budget items on articles 7, 8, 9 and 10 to morrow at your respective town offices. Again, voting at the Braintree town will be at the Braintree town hall from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Voting for Brookfield will be at the Brookfield old town hall from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. And voting for the town of Randolph will be at the Randolph town hall from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. I thank all of you very much. This is the first time I've attempted to moderate a meeting both virtually and in person. And my big fear was somebody would ask for a paper ballot. Are we ready for adjournment? I'm sorry, somebody just joined but we have concluded the meeting. Any further questions? Is there a motion to adjourn? Move to adjourn. Is there a motion to adjourn? It's non-debatable, all in favor of adjournment. Of adjournment, please signify by saying aye. The meeting is now adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.