Alright guys, today is the day, this week is the week, it is match week and literally less than 10 minutes I'm going to find out if I have a job as a doctor after medical school and I'm going to take you guys on a journey with me to see my reaction right after this intro. Alright guys, so for anyone that's confused, today is match day, today is match week and basically there's a whole video about this on how this process works but today I find out if I matched on Friday I find out where so in literally less than a minute I'm about to get an email that is going to say either you matched or you didn't and I'll record my reaction so I am going to be refreshing this page because it is officially 10 o'clock and okay so the email is there it says did I match so I am happy to say that I did match it says congratulations you have matched I'm gonna be a doctor guys so to avoid making this video sappy and emotional I'll share a quick story and then I'll kind of wrap this video up four years ago when I got my acceptance from medical school I woke up at 12 the day that you could first hear back and I remember looking at that email going into my parents' rooms because I lived at home at that time and I shared the news with my parents I just absolutely broke down and I wasn't sure why because I don't cry very often but that was probably one of the first goals that I accomplished that I just set for myself and this is another example I feel a lot of those emotions come up so but again I'm not going to be sappy I'm super excited my heart is like pounding out of my chest I didn't know what I would say after seeing this email but it says congratulations you have matched I don't know if you guys can see that part so I'm super excited to celebrate with you guys on Friday so on Saturday I'll probably be releasing a vlog like style of a video and you guys will be able to see where I match what the whole process looks like and again I promise I would keep this video short so if you're interested and you are not subscribed to this channel first of all subscribe if you did enjoy this video even though it's really quick and really personal give this video a like and I will see you guys on the Saturday and you can find out where my job as a doctor is but thank you guys so much for watching thank you so much for being part of my journey and hopefully I've been a little help to you on yours but I'll see you guys later take care


Today we're going to talk about how we can use our simple model to explain whether the economy is in a recession or it's in a boom period. Now everything is going to depend according to this simple model of Keynes on planned spending. That is how much consumers want to buy and how much investors want to spend on plant and equipment. Now remember that GDP total spending in the economy depends on consumption plus investment. But now we're going to distinguish between planned spending and unplanned spending. And remember that investment takes time. Business people have to forecast how strong the economy is going to be in the future when they make their decisions on how much to invest. So we want to distinguish then between planned investment and unplanned investment.  So let's say you decide to produce 100 widgets today, but let's say next year when you plan to sell these widgets, the economy crashes and you can only sell 50 of them, then you're going to have to take 50 of those and stick them in your inventories. That's 50 of unplanned inventory accumulation. So planned spending then is equal to consumption plus planned investment. Planned spending is equal to consumption plus planned investment. And GDP is equal to consumption plus unplanned investment. And it's all these extra inventories that you might have to build up if you don't forecast the future accurately. Now we're going to graph this and it's the graph that we're going to use in talking about our income expenditure model. So let's put on the vertical axis spending and on the horizontal axis we'll put GDP. And this line is planned spending, which is equal to consumption plus planned investment. And what it says is that as income or GDP goes up, people plan to spend more. Consumers will spend more because their income has gone up and businesses plan to invest more, build more factories, have more planned and equipment. Now we're going to draw in a line, which is a 45 degree line, and a 45 degree line takes any number on the horizontal axis, say one, and if you go over to the vertical axis, you get one. Up here, if you have 100, you go over to the vertical axis, you get 100. So the 45 degree line makes whatever is on the horizontal axis equal to what's on the vertical axis. And here's the key point, right here, we'll call it point B. What's true at this point? Well, the planned spending is equal to the actual spending. So at this point where the planned spending line crosses the 45 degree line, there's no unplanned spending, no unexpected events for investors. What they forecast they can sell when they invest, they can sell. So at this point, unplanned investment is equal to zero. And next time we'll talk about how this is the equilibrium point in the economy.


Welcome everybody. Good afternoon. Thank you for everybody here in person and for the millions watching at home. It's nice to see everybody. Hopefully the first day was great. My name is Jeff Strauss. I'm a technical program manager at Snapchat. Today I'm going to be talking about the interview environment and how to create a more inclusive, diverse, equitable and aware environment for the interview itself. So today's talk will be brief, but we'll go through a history of the interview as it stands today and then some strategies for creating a more inclusive environment for the interview process itself. Welcome. That's me. I saw this on LinkedIn the other day. I thought this was apt for this talk. Craig Fenton, director of strategy and operations at Google, posted this and said some of our most successful candidates had average grades, didn't go to the best schools, and had great street smarts, weren't necessarily academically skilled in the traditional sense, but had a lot of other skills. I thought that was really apt for this talk because part of this talk as we get towards the end talks about how do we assess those skills, rather than just reading bullet points on a resume and having those talking points, a very sort of traditional interview format. How do we break out of that traditional format, make it a little bit more modern, a little bit more exciting, and a better assessment of those types of skills that may not be reflected on a resume for a number of different reasons that we won't necessarily get into today, but still are within somebody, somebody has the aptitude to be able to represent those skills. So we'll talk a little bit about what's going well traditionally at companies now. There are a growing number of pre-higher inclusion, diversity, equity, and awareness initiatives at companies. We see this manifested through a couple of different ways. One starts with the question like how do I create my dream team? Where and how do I source top talent? So we have inclusive inbound and outbound recruiting efforts nowadays. We can source from more underrepresented group like sources nowadays rather than traditional networks that people who are employed currently have. Typically we see people recruiting from their own networks, which tend to be more homogeneous than diverse in a lot of cases. So we have a lot of those recruiting efforts. We see things like applicant tracking systems, making strides in terms of removing biased language in job descriptions, making the job descriptions a little bit more inclusive. I have a couple of examples. You see this in things like removing barrier words, words like dominant, words like understanding that may be more traditionally associated with males or females to a little bit more sort of gender neutral. And then you have a general narrative shift from screening people out. So we want to screen candidates out to screening candidates in and sort of that narrative shift. Although utilitarian, utilitarian, utilitarianly, the end result is maybe similar. The mindset shift is very important to screen people in and make a culture inclusive rather than exclusive. And finally we hear it with how do I build networks? How do we expand referral networks to incorporate more diverse groups? Because like we talked about before, the majority of employees refer people from their own sort of homogeneous groups. Key question being how do we assess talent? And there are a lot of those pre-hire initiatives that are doing quite well at companies right now. Companies are including those more and more. And you see a growing number of post-hire idea initiatives also. This is after a candidate has been employed at a company. They've got me offered and they've accepted. You see this with a lot of equity and inclusion training at companies, right? These equity and these diversity trainings are becoming more and more normal. They generally focus on bias awareness and elimination, battling biased systems to ensure colleagues are reflected, expected and respected. Diversifying working networks like we talked about before, allyship. You see this manifested not only in traditional training, like there's inclusive leadership training that managers might go to or bias training for employees. You see these in ERGs and groups like your chat groups, meetups that may occur inside or outside of the company. So there's a lot of those that are going on now. And it manifests in a couple of particular domains post-hire as well. One is development. How do we make sure that there's equitable access to development for people on the team or in the company? Performance management. So if somebody is performing well or not performing well, how do you make sure bias doesn't influence who you rate as a success? How do you define success equitably? How do you ensure people are managed fairly? And how do you manage exits fairly? And it manifests in promotions. So you see it like how do you make sure there's equity and equality in the promotion process? What do you look for when you want to promote somebody? And how do you ensure that there are opportunities for underrepresented groups to advance into leadership positions? So post-hire, there are a lot of great initiatives that focus on those questions. But right now when it comes to the interview itself, we have typically a standard template. It's my words. We have a hiring manager that may be part of an interview panel. We have HR that may be part of an interview panel. We have a cross-functional partner, a technical assessor, and a cultural assessor. And some of those might overlap. The HR person might be the culture person, and the hiring manager might be the technical person. But that's generally the standard template that we have for an interview panel. And they're chosen on the basis generally of two things. Subject matter expertise and availability, right? Who has the domain knowledge to assess an individual? And is that person available to actually do the assessment? And there are some problems with that standard template. Three big ones are inconsistency, fatigue, and reluctance. Inconsistency, because if a role, for example, has eight candidates that they need to interview and that subject matter expert is only available for three of those interviews, you have to find somebody else to do it. As soon as you find somebody else to do it, a lot of things about the interview change, right? The standard bar is no longer the same because you have a new person coming in that may have individual biases that are different than the other person. They may interpret responses differently. They may ask different questions if they have to be like, oh, this person didn't show up today or can't do it today. We need to find somebody to fill in. All of a sudden, the standardization changes. And that's problematic in an interview. Fatigue, I think if anybody here has been on multiple interview panels, I don't even have to go on, right? It can be tiring. It takes a lot of time out of the day. Sometimes it's a struggle to find things to talk about. Your risk running the same... I think I speak for everybody potentially when I say that you've gone into a job interview where you've been asked the same question from multiple people over and over again. What's your interest in the company? Let me repeat it. So there's that level of fatigue and there's reluctance. Fatigue leads to reluctance, right? The more you have to do it over and over again without sort of like a respite, the more you're unwilling to do it. And that manifests itself in the interview, right? We're talking about the interview were, the interview panel. Now that manifests itself in the interview. There's a lot of research. The slides and including the references to this research are on the website. But there's a lot of research that shows candidate discomfort for a lot of reasons in an interview, especially underrepresented candidate discomfort. It's uncomfortable enough being in an interview for a new job, but underrepresented groups feel it even more. This is manifested typically in increased pressure to conform to assumed or perceived interviewer expectations. We see it a lot manifested in how an underrepresented group dresses for an interview, for example, in a hairstyle that a candidate may choose to wear. You hear it in speech. A candidate may change their pattern of speaking to conform to a perceived expectation within that job interview. In-group and out-group bias can be particularly strong here. In-group and out-group bias is a subconscious reaction to seeing somebody that we identify with as part of our group versus an other. And that could be manifested pretty strongly in an interview. Favoring an in-group member tends to grant them a measure of trust and regard them more positively than an out-group member. And I'm going to talk about how we resolve this issue. But finally, there are microaggressions as well that you see manifested in interviews. A couple of examples being questions like, where are you really from?  And the more frequently, or the less you attempt to interrupt these biases, the more they'll manifest. And the interview process not only stays the same, but can get worse for the candidate. And we'll talk about that in a little bit as well. So all of these interview problems come from that standard template that just sort of ad hoc picking of, this person knows what they're doing, this person's that subject matter expert, and this person is available. So let's get them in and, okay, cool, we've created a hiring panel. So we want to do it more thoughtfully. How do you interrupt bias in the interview process? First, create an inclusive panelist pool. There are a lot of strategies to do this. I'm going to enumerate a couple right now. A couple of things that are really important to have in an interview panelist pool are buy-in from the interviewers. Interviewers have to be bought into the process. So I think if anybody has had this experience, I know I have, it's a little bit different when I'm enthusiastic about giving an interview, rather than HR reaching out to me and saying this other person is available, are you available to do an interview? Right, buy-in is really important. And there are a lot of different ways that you can solicit opt-ins from people. But that's really what you want. You want people to opt-in. You also want to set context about those opt-ins or about those interviews with those people who opt-in.  If you're a hiring manager, you're there all the time, potentially HR as well. But if you're a cross-functional partner or another domain expert and you're pulled in for an interview, there may not be an expectation that you're in that interview for the entire length of the role of that interview rather than the number of candidates for that interview. So it's detrimental to the process if, for example, there are 10 candidates for an interview and the strategy is you'll do five of them because that's five hours of your time or however many hours of your time, including prep, and then somebody else will do the other five. The expectations should be set that you're there for the role. The panel should be consistent. All right. You can reduce that fatigue that we talked about earlier by rotating per role. That's a really easy one. Although because the commitment has to be set for the role, there may be those roles that are like seven candidates, 10 candidates, and that could be a little fatiguing. But if you have buy-in from the individual, that helps a lot. That resolves a lot of that fatigue. It's also important to have a group of diverse interviewers. The interview pool should be representative of the diversity of the company, representative of the diversity of the team, and not a homogenous group. And it's really, really, really important as well that every interviewer be trained to deliver interviews. I think that's an oft-overlooked component at companies. People are just like, here's this person's resume. Go in, talk to them about their expertise. Will they be a fit for the team? Will you be able to work with them? Will you be able to communicate with them? And typically it's like, let's go through the resume. Let's look at the bullet points. Let's pick a couple of things to talk about. Tell me about your time here. Tell me about a time you had a challenge that you had to overcome. Very sort of like routine questions. But there's a lot that can be gleaned from behavioral interview training, which is really important. This training can include inclusivity and unconscious and implicit bias training. You may not be able to eliminate it, but you can at least recognize it. It includes feedback training because you'll be debriefing. There'll be a post-interview component, hopefully, where you speak with the rest of the team and discuss the candidate itself. That should be held in an inclusive method, and feedback training is really critical to be able to do that, to be able to eliminate the sort of microaggressions and biases we spoke about earlier. When referring to a candidate later on. I'll give you a little bit of example about what we do at SNAP and what I've done at other companies prior. Before an interviewer is selected, before an individual is selected as an interviewer, they go through an interview certification process. And that certification process includes several hours of training, one-on-one training, video training, group training, that sort of thing, to be able to do a lot of these things. We have inclusive leadership training, feedback training, organizational conversation training. That's also known as conversational leadership training. And I'll talk a little bit about that in a few moments when we get to the holding the actual interview and methods for actually conducting the interview. But those are all really important ways to strengthen the interview process to be more equitable and inclusive, especially for those candidates that are typically from underrepresented groups and aren't able to receive that. They don't see that elsewhere. The other really important thing to interrupt bias in the interview is to standardize your questions, your discussions, and your evaluations. In my experience, and you may have experienced this as well, different candidates might receive different questions from different people. You might pull in person X, and their conversations or tone or the direction that they take the interview may be completely different than anybody else. And it's per candidate. Let me specify per candidate. So candidate A might receive a completely different set of questions and conversation than candidate B. And it's okay to have open conversations and be extemporaneous, but questions that you ask for assessment purposes should be standardized. Otherwise, you have no standard by which to evaluate the individual. If you have different questions for everybody, some people might excel, and some people might not. So it's really important to standardize those questions, standardize the discussions as well, and standardize the evaluations afterwards. Some strategies for this include creating hiring templates or interview templates, rather, where somebody's not just going into an interview blind, here's a resume, here's a background of this person, but here's a template for this role that you're interviewing for. Here are the questions on the template. Here are the discussion points on the template. And here's a behavioral rating. So a behavioral... I won't go so far as to say analysis, but like a behavioral rating for the candidate. And what I mean by that is, you know, some people may have seen, I know I have the one to five rating, no to yes, right? Strong yes, right? I'm giving this candidate a strong yes, and that's a five for when I want to hire them. Strong no is like a one, right? And you have that sort of rating scale in between. Rather than having a strong yes or no, perhaps it might be more effective to have a behavioral scale, where, for example, a five might be yes, did exhibit this behavior, or no did not exhibit this behavior. And it gives you a little bit more insight into rather just a yes or a no, I want to go for this candidate, but did this candidate, how strongly does this candidate exhibit the behavior that I'm trying to seek out? And in the slide notes that I have, I'm not going to go too deep into it, but in the slide notes that I have, there are some examples of how to create that interview template. There's a couple acronyms in there that you can use to set something up, but it's important to standardize all of those questions without every interviewer, even if an interviewer is sort of substituted for whatever reason, you can still maintain that consistency across interviewers for the role. And finally, iterating on the conventional framework. So, so far, so far in this quick talk, we've talked about a little bit of the context, a little bit of the history. We've talked about our sort of standard interview template and a couple of ways to, you know, make it more standardized. And now we'll talk about some creative ways to maybe change up that sort of routine to evaluate, like we talked about earlier, try to evaluate those behaviors that may not come across as bullet points on a resume. So these are some of the ones that I really like. How many people in their interview processes share questions with candidates ahead of time? I'm curious to know. I haven't seen that very much. We like to share questions with candidates ahead of time. We do it for a couple of reasons. One, it allows for really thoughtful and deep answers, right? As opposed to asking somebody, what's your interest in the company or have you heard about our latest lens product or do you know what Bitmoji is or asking those sort of questions and getting an answer on the fly? It allows an individual to answer more thoughtfully. We do this with our engineers as well, like if anybody has given a take-home coding test in the past, right? And we come back and have discussions about that. It's a little bit different than the whiteboard experience in the room. So we really like that. And we get to evaluate when we have those responses. We get to evaluate a couple of things. We get to evaluate written communication style. We get to evaluate competency of answer. And we get to evaluate preparedness. Did you return these questions to us when we asked for them? The other thing that I really like to do in particular in order to help me evaluate an individual's aptitude to perhaps mentor somebody on the team or help somebody else develop is to ask a candidate to teach me something that they're an expert in. Like assume I know nothing and just teach me something that you're interested in. I want to evaluate how you communicate, how you instruct.  And finally, one which is a little bit harder to implement but is really fun if you can, are games. So this is a really huge departure from your routine. I have a resume in front of me and I'm going to ask you questions about it. One of the things that I like to do and we at SnapR Values are kind, smart and creative. So one of the ways that we like to think that we're being smart and creative and kind in this interview process is to ask candidates to play games with us. We typically choose games where an individual has to work with others towards a common goal, right?  But there are a couple of other ones as well and you can play them in person also. But this allows you to evaluate how a candidate works on a team, how they communicate with each other, if there's a little bit of pressure added, how they deal with that. It allows you to really understand much more thoroughly from behavioral standpoint how a candidate will actually function, you know, rather than just acing the interview because they interview really well, right? Because there are a lot of those candidates, I personally try to hire double A candidates is what I call them. I say they have a positive attitude and an aptitude. If you have the aptitude to learn a positive attitude, you'll go pretty far. And a lot of stuff is learned on the job. Not everything. You have to have a fundamental basis, but if you have the positive attitude and the aptitude to learn, you know, the results are very surprising. So trying to understand how to structure an interview in order to tease those things out rather than just what's on the resume and the reason being this, you know, I might be preaching to the choir, but reason being, especially regarding underrepresented groups, not everybody's at the same starting line. And there are people who have had a tremendous amount of opportunity, but there may be others who haven't had that opportunity, who are very strong or will make incredible cultural additions to the company, right? That you may not see reflected on paper. And those are the, like, that's the true, those are the true gems, right? Those are the real things that we try to tease out to create an inclusive and diverse and equitable culture. And that helps everybody. And finally, it's important to evaluate, iterate, and experiment. So after we have an interview loop like this, we ask a couple questions. We, first, we ask ourselves that the process worked. If we hire a candidate, were we able to hire the strongest candidate, right? Did we do a good job at that? Were we able to make better decisions based on this process than we may have made with a standard, like, you know, routine process? What areas of this process may have been most impactful, right? Do we glean the most information about our candidates by asking them to teach us something? By asking them to write responses for us? Or was it the whiteboard test inside the room, right? Which things actually worked? And we'll focus on those areas. Where should more time be invested in the process? If things didn't work quite right, but it shows promise, can we invest more time there and iterate on that process? And finally, two of the biggest things are, after a candidate is hired, ask them for feedback. How did you feel your interview went? And talk to the panelists for feedback as well, right? Was it more difficult for the panelists? Sometimes this can be a really difficult process for the panelists to acclimate to because it's so different than your standard, I have a resume in front of me, and I'm just going to ask sort of routine questions. Sometimes candidates can feel locked in, especially if there's that, if you know there, do you have, okay, here are my eight questions that I have to ask of everybody. It's hard to deviate from that. You can have those, this is where sort of conversational leadership training comes in very well because it trains you to have open, but not aimless conversations, right? So it makes it a little bit more conversational.  It reduces bias. It dramatically improves the candidate experience. If for not only trying to reduce bias in an interview by making it different, it's a different type of interview. It's much less stressful. It can be much less stressful, but you don't lose any of the capability to extract the information that you want to extract from an interview. In fact, it may even be more enlightening, and it's a much more positive experience for the candidate. It can improve the quality of new hires, and it creates brand ambassadors, to use that buzzword, even if a candidate doesn't get hired, they leave saying like, wow, my interview experience at this company was incredible. Unlike anything I've ever had before, I would love to work at a place like that. And for those people that are there already that made it through the interview process, it creates a deeper emotional connection to the company when you go through an interview process that's so novel and different and is really caring towards the individual, right? You're not just sort of like sitting behind a pane of glass, assessing a person like rapid-fire, but you're involved in the process with that individual. So it creates a really deep emotional connection which translates in a number of ways like into the workplace, that individual's quality of work, their partnership on the team, or in the organization, et cetera. Many thanks to you for showing up this afternoon. Hopefully this was beneficial in some way. But if you have any feedback or questions, I'm here for the next few minutes. Yes, absolutely. I'm not going to hawk myself here, but I will upload a new version of this slide deck by the end of the day today, and I'll put a link to a couple of them that will link externally to some of those templates just to give you a verbal overview of what they are every team in our company. I'll speak for SNAP specifically. Technically, I'm not here as a representative of SNAP. I'm here on my own, but I will let you know what we do at SNAP. Every single team has a standardized interview template. So every team, and that team, together, along with the hiring manager, leadership, and other people who are involved, cross-functional partners, et cetera, come up with interview questions that are pertinent to that team, and that's on the standard template for the interviews. So a new interviewer on a panel, for example, just has to go to that folder, say, okay, here's the role I'm interviewing for, and here's a whole lot of documentation about it. Here's the standard interview template. Here's, you know, behavioral conversational notes. You know, idiosyncrasies of the team, for example, things to look for. On every one of those templates, there's that behavioral assessment I mentioned. So as opposed to like a one-to-five yes or no, they did like a four. They did a pretty good job, but who knows really what that means.  Some of those might be, for example, did this person step up to the plate, right, or did they shy away from challenge, right, or did, you know, were they going at it gung-ho? Those are the sorts of things that we want to like evaluate specifically. And when we look at, when it's a very methodical process as opposed to more ad hoc, which it typically can be in an interview, there's a lot that can be gleaned from that. And so we use that data a lot. We're also careful not to lean too heavily to like represent an individual as a number, right. These are individuals that are coming in and everybody has their own unique skills and talents and ideas. But we do leverage that sort of behavioral model to give us a good middle ground about somebody's skills and to be able to evaluate, to assess them, but also to allow them to enable them to express themselves authentically through the interview. Does that answer your question? Yeah. Okay, you're welcome. You're welcome. My pleasure. Yeah, and so I leave back to LA tonight, but before I land, if you all want to check on the website here, I'll have like a version two of my slideshow up and it'll have a couple links in there. All right. If nothing else, thank you so much. Appreciate the time.


It is now time for oral questions, and I recognize the leader of Her Majesty's loyal opposition. Thanks very much, Speaker. Speaker, we know that the AstraZeneca vaccine is arriving any moment now, and as far as we know, the government's plan, the Premier's plan, is to vaccinate healthy 60-year-olds before at-risk 70-year-olds. The clock is ticking on AstraZeneca, as we all know, because it has a restricted shelf life. Does the government plan to vaccinate the most at-risk people in our province, or not? To reply, the Deputy Premier and Minister for Health. Thank you, Speaker, and yes, I can assure the leader of the official opposition that we do have a plan. The plan is available for anyone who wishes to see it at ontario.ca.covidvaccines. It sets out the three priorities that we have in terms of the phasing, I should say, of the rollout of the campaign. First, of course, we want to make sure that our most vulnerable residents of long-term care homes received at least the first dose of the vaccine, and we're working on the second doses. Next, we are prioritizing in terms of age, starting with 80-year-olds and then working with other priority communities, people with disabilities and other health concerns. But the decision that we've received now from NASSI indicating that we can now delay the Pfizer and Moderna second shots for four months is truly a game-changer, and with AstraZeneca coming online next week, this is going to allow us to get more needles into more arms faster, which is what we need to do to provide everyone in Ontario with a layer of protection against COVID-19. Any supplementary questions? Well, Speaker, still on vaccines, CTV broke this morning that 1,500 vaccines have been wasted here in Ontario while people wait for a vaccination. That is equivalent of six retirement homes, Speaker. We asked the government for a directive around preventing wastage of the virus, but they are wastage of the vaccine rather. But the government refused to provide that directive. How can it be that 1,500 vaccines have been wasted in our province? Minister of Health? Well, in fact, we have an amazing group of people that are doing the vaccinations in the province of Ontario across the entire province are doing everything possible. We know now that we can get six doses of the Pfizer, and every effort is being made to do that. However, it's also known in any vaccination campaign, including in our flu vaccination campaign, that there is going to be some degree of waste as much as we're working hard to prevent that there is no waste whatsoever. What we're talking about is 0.1% waste out of 784,000 shots that have already been given. That means, Speaker, that 99.9% of the people are getting the shots that they need. 0.1% is a very, very, very small percent of waste. But this happens in any vaccine campaign, and it has already been provided for our plan. The final supplementary. Well, Speaker, vaccines are now beginning to arrive regularly, but the government doesn't have a plan to make sure that the most at-risk populations, particularly our COVID heroes, are getting their vaccinations quickly. They have no booking system in place. The vaccines are going to waste. So my question is, why does it always feel like we're in a scramble, like this government is scrambling instead of having a well thought out and executed plan? To you, Mr. Speaker, it's amazing how the party of doom and gloom. We have no vaccines. We're leading the country. We're leading the country.  We have 784,000 people that have been vaccinated, and 268,000 have had the double dose. So I'm just not too sure where the leader of the opposition is coming from, but obviously there's a little number mix-up that they have. But again, we've vaccinated more than anyone in the entire country. We're going to continue doing that. Again, as I said yesterday, Mr. Speaker, let's get more vaccines from the federal government. That's where the blockage is.  Oh, by the way, Mr. Speaker, we set another record across Canada. We vaccinated over 30,000 people yesterday. The next question, once again, the leader of the opposition. My next question is to the Premier. Yesterday, the Premier said it's up to public health units to vaccinate folks in the most at-risk neighbourhoods. So my question is, why is the Premier abandoning our COVID heroes? Premier? Actually, there's multiple people that are vaccinating out there. It's the hospitals. It's the PHUs. It's the private sector. It's all the pharmacies. And there's going to be a pilot with 500 pharmacies. And we're just going to build on that. There's 4,900 pharmacies within that group, and a lot of independent pharmacies. So it's all hands on deck, Mr. Speaker. Again, I'll repeat what I just said. We need vaccines from the federal government. We don't need these dribs and drabs of 180,000 here. We need millions of vaccines. And once we have them, I'm going to assure you we're going to get them out the door. And by the way, the vaccines we just received, I had an update yesterday. We're going to be out right across the province this weekend. So hopefully they're going to ship more vaccines. Any supplementary questions? Well, Speaker, the science advisory table clearly has told the government that the best plan is to get those vaccines into the arms of our COVID heroes in the highest-risk neighbourhoods in our province. That would prevent almost 4,000 new cases of COVID-19, and it would save 168 lives. In fact, Dr. Michael Warner said this. He recommended, and I quote, vaccinating higher-risk populations sooner, which will reduce strain on hospitals, open up non-COVID care sooner, and save more lives. Why? Once again, is this Premier ignoring the expert advice? Premier? I'm just wondering, is the description of long-term care not vulnerable? Because we've basically immunised every single long-term care patient and the frontline healthcare workers. We're going to continue doing that, Mr. Speaker. There is something called Parallel Systems that you can actually vaccinate people with the AstraZeneca and you can vaccinate people with Moderna and Pfizer. And by all means, if the leader of the opposition wants to sit down and get a little schooling on that, it would be more than happy to do that for it. Speaker, here's the Premier's plan. Healthy 60-year-olds are going to get the vaccine before at-risk 70-year-olds and 50-year-old COVID heroes in high-risk neighbourhoods are waiting who knows how long. My question is, this government is responsible for the distribution of vaccines in our province. Why are they not providing the public health units enough vaccines to ensure that the at-risk COVID heroes that live in those high-risk neighbourhoods get their vaccines soon? Premier? Why aren't we getting the vaccines? I just mentioned, Mr. Speaker, we don't have the vaccines but I'll pass that message on to the PM when I speak to him that we need more vaccines until we can take care of everyone. No matter if they live in Toronto and our priority will always be the most vulnerable in congregate living, we're going to do that. And we're going to make sure we get the over-80s plus and we're going to work our way down but we're also going to work on making sure we take care of people the most vulnerable within our society. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The next question, the member for Brampton Centre. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Premier. Ontarians heard this week that the Minister of Health didn't have answers for the long-term care commission and she passed the buck over to the Premier who refuses to appear before the commission to give families in this province the answers they need about the decisions that he made. Ontarians also heard that the long-term care minister had her own worries about COVID-19 spreading in long-term care homes but she did nothing to put in place real substantive measures of precaution that would have protected seniors in long-term care. The Premier said that there would have been an iron ring in long-term care yet, Speaker, it's clear that it was never built. Can the Premier help families and seniors understand why your government failed to build the iron ring in long-term care and protect vulnerable seniors in this province? Government House Leader. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the question from the Honourable Member. Look, we set out very, very quickly to ensure even prior to the pandemic, Mr. Speaker, to be honest, we inherited, as I've said on a number of occasions, a long-term care system that really was in crisis. That's why we moved so quickly after taking over government. The Premier made a commitment to the people of the province of Ontario to build new long-term care facilities right away. We did that. There was a staffing strategy that was being considered, Mr. Speaker. We've moved MSDOs, which they're against, to ensure that we could build out long-term care homes very, very quickly, Mr. Speaker. It is no secret that we inherited a government that had only built 600 new long-term care homes by the previous government. And we moved very, very quickly during this pandemic to ensure that our long-term care homes had all the resources they needed, including PPE, IPAC support, support from our hospitals, Mr. Speaker. There is more work to do. That's why the commission is so important. That's why we've moved on the recommendations, Mr. Speaker. I hope the members opposite will support us as we continue this important work. And the supplementary question. Speaker, the testimony from the Minister of Health and the Minister of Long-term Care make a few things clear. That the buck really stops with the Premier and he should be the one testifying and clarifying the response to Ontarians. Today, we also learned from this testimony that the Ontario Hospital Association said the Premier's own Chief of Staff actually seems to be the one running the command table. Instead of leaving the operations up to the Chief Medical Officer of Health or other scientists, it seems that the Premier has apparently put his own political appointee in charge. The Ontario Hospital Association told the commission that they would have preferred that an expert be in charge of leading the pandemic response. Why did the Premier put his own Chief of Staff in charge and will he and his Chief of Staff be appearing before the commission to explain to Ontarians their actions? It's ironic that the member is saying that the Chief of Staff doesn't even sit on the table. So I'm not too sure where she got that information but but again Mr. Speaker from day one no matter if it's the Minister of Long-term Care Minister of Health, all the ministers here, we've worked tirelessly every single day around the clock, sleepless nights making sure we turn the long-term care system around that we inherited. Our government has approved $1.38 billion in surge funding for the sector. We have accelerated four accelerated projects to make sure Miss Saga, Ajax and a couple in Toronto have brand new long-term care systems. We ended up hiring 8,200 PSWs where the only jurisdiction in Canada that's going to have four hours of care. We're improving the broken system we inherited the system that was broken for 30 years. The next question the member for Perth Wellington. Thank you Speaker. My question for the Minister of Infrastructure. The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on the daily lives of Ontarians. Throughout the pandemic I've heard from many constituents in Perth Wellington about the poor and unreliable broadband service. It has become abundantly clear that too many people in our province lack reliable internet or in some cases don't have any connectivity at all. I know our government has stepped up and made historic investments to improve broadband and cellular connectivity for the people and businesses in our province. I'm excited about the possibilities our government is making. Yet despite the promise that comes from these investments we often hear the Minister of Infrastructure say that you know this funding isn't enough and that there's more work to do. Will the Minister please tell us exactly what it will take to close the digital divide? Minister of Infrastructure. Well I'd like to thank the member from Perth Wellington for the question and for his representation to his constituent. As he indicated our government has taken decisive action to help bridge the digital divide. In fact it was in the fall four short months ago that I had the pleasure of hosting the premier and two of my cabinet colleagues in Minden, Ontario to announce our government's historic investments in broadband infrastructure. But as members of the House know broadband is a federally regulated sector. Its agency the CRTC is responsible for establishing country-wide standards and rates for internet and cellular connectivity. But despite that Mr. Speaker our government is not waiting to take action to bridge that digital divide and while we continue to call on the federal government to do its part and properly fund broadband we are making historic investments to improve and expand broadband and cellular connectivity to communities across the province because as the member rightly points out the pandemic has highlighted this need. Frankly, Ontario can't wait for federal action. The digital divide is widening. The supplementary. Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, I received an email from Kim in Mount Forest who shared her concerns about reliable broadband. Her email reads, I'm sure you've received many emails in regards to this issue. But something just has to be done. I live in Mount Forest, Ontario and I have what can be best be described as the world's most horrible internet. For example, I was trying to download something from a website that took more than 8 minutes. My download speed is 0.54 megabits per second with an upload speed of 0.01 megabits per second and if that weren't enough, we're paying $179 a month for this subpar service. It's difficult with two of us trying to work from home and staying connected with family members has been a challenge. It's very frustrating not being able to have this service with a lot of people rely on it. My question for the minister when might people like Kim in Mount Forest be able to have reliable high speed internet connectivity? Let's give them the question. Well, I'd like to thank you for sharing Kim's story with us and I want to say to Kim I understand where you're coming from I live in a rural area and experience many of the same difficulties she does I understand that for many people across Ontario there is no infrastructure project that is more important to them and to their local economies than broadband and that's why we have a plan and that's why last November our government announced we are making historic investments to improve internet connectivity to communities right across the province our investments are just one of the steps we're taking to help deliver broadband to more people across Ontario and while I'm proud that our government has stepped up with historic levels of funding we know that it's simply not enough to bring everyone in Ontario up to speed and that's why this afternoon I will be introducing legislation in this house that if passed will help us bridge the digital divide I've said before that we will continue to do what we can to get Ontarians connected and while we continue to call on the federal government to give Ontario its fair share I can say to the constituents in Ontario we are going to close that digital divide The next question The member for Toronto said this week families of children in 26 youth justice centres mainly in northern Ontario learned that their facilities were being immediately closed without any notice children many of them indigenous some of them as young as 12 were put onto planes and buses in the middle of the night and moved out of their communities Speaker this government hid this decision from those families local officials were quoted as saying we weren't allowed to tell them they were moving we weren't allowed to tell the families we weren't allowed to tell them where they were going my question to the Premier is why does this government care so little about these families why did they not think that they were worth telling that their children were being removed into another part of the province The Minister of Children, Community and Social Services Thank you very much Mr Speaker there are a number of different processes that we followed as we closed these youth justice facilities to make sure that the children were transferred seamlessly to another location in northern Ontario a focus on prevention and education programs Mr Speaker has led to an 81% reduction of youth admitted to youth justice facilities in the province of Ontario and that's good news Mr Speaker that means there are now 8500 fewer kids in custody than there were in 2004-2005 Speaker as a result of these youth justice facilities being underutilized and there were five of them that had zero kids in them there were 13 that had one child in them last year Mr Speaker this is really really important and it shows the success that we're having in keeping families together and returning youth to the right track where they become positive members of society Speaker the decision to close these facilities will end up saving 40 million dollars annually each year but at the same time these children will be getting the services in those communities Mr Speaker thank you Mr Speaker thank you Speaker and back to the Premier in response to the Premier's decision to secretly remove children from their communities in the dead of night Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler said Ontario should be ashamed and I agree and what I just heard from the minister was that he has put a dollar amount a bottom line on the trauma that he is causing to indigenous children in the province of Ontario Speaker the provincial child and youth advocate also said the way in which these young people were treated like pieces of furniture with no rights with no sense that they've already been through trauma without their families knowing where they were going to do that in that way is unconscionable this decision will have a devastating effect on these families Premier in what world is it acceptable to ignore the history of child removal in the province of Ontario to ignore the history of residential schools to ignore the history of the 60's scoop and the millennial scoop and the continued removal of children through the justice system and through CAS how do you ignore that and not stop and think about the trauma that you are causing these children so did you not think about thank you again the Minister of Children Community and Social Services to respond there were 10 children that were moved across northwestern Ontario yesterday or earlier this week I should say Mr. Speaker and there are 8 facilities that remain open across northern Ontario many of them providing the culturally appropriate type of service that are required Speaker but in the example of Justice Derrick Holderhaus and Sue St. Marie had had a utilization rate of 2% there were zero youth in that facility for the majority of the year another northern example there were four youth justice facilities with zero kids for the majority of the year there were five that had one youth Mr. Speaker it just didn't make sense to keep these facilities open and these are all recommendations that came from an auditor general's report back in 2012 Mr. Speaker that required the modernization of the system to ensure that the kids were getting the services they need but the bottom line 8500 fewer kids are in custody now and getting service in the community Mr. Speaker and that's good news the next question the member for Ottawa thank you very much Mr. Speaker my question is for the Premier and I was glad to hear the Premier say this morning that they were going to prioritize the most vulnerable in the vaccine rollout adults with developmental disabilities people who work for them are concerned about when they're going to get their vaccine as we all know many people living with developmental disabilities have comorbidities a higher likelihood of hospitalization and death there's a lot of risk for them and I know that the science table has put forward their recommendations to cabinet that the minister and the solicitor general have both said that that information is coming it's creating a lot of anxiety for these families and that recommendation came 10 days ago and they're afraid that they'll get forgotten again because it's happened throughout the history in this province and it's something this legislature we have to be very aware of so minister when will you be able to provide the information to these families about where they are in priority for vaccinations for their children Minister of Health to reply thank you Speaker and thank you to the member for this question it is a very important issue and the one that we are paying attention to with the task force on immunization it is something that we have built into our plan we have one plan that is being delivered by 34 different public health units but as we move into phase 2 of the plan we are going to be focusing on two things essentially one is age one is risk age we've already talked about in detail starting with people who are over 80 and then moving down in 5 year increments based on risk and the risk comes from several areas one area is going to be people they're living in in congregate settings that would account for some of the people that you're speaking about people with developmental disabilities who may be living in group homes but it also will be based on their health risks and their personal situation that will account for many people who are very vulnerable who do have developmental services issues or physical issues health issues that require them to be moved up further in the list so this information will thank you very much supplementary question speaker I appreciate the answer but I can underscore the level of anxiety with families as you know a 30 year old with Down syndrome might be a 50 year old who doesn't have Down syndrome and they may have comorbidities that complicate that and dealing with them specifically as opposed or in a general sense of that population like we're dealing with the populations here I think is really important to do because if we try to pick them up they have a comorbidity or this old or they live in this setting I don't think it's going to work and I've raised this when we had the one briefing that we had about vaccines and I thought I was heard but I haven't seen confirmation of that and I think the approach that the government needs to take is we need to look and I don't know if that's what the advice is we need to look at them as a group because once we pick off try to pick them off specifically on things it's going to create some problems for families and we're going to miss people so I'd ask the minister again thank you Minister of Health thank you and this is a group of people that are I know have been lost and forgotten in the past I recall several years ago working on a select committee on developmental services this is something that is I think very important to both of us personally and this is a group that I do we do not intend to dismiss we intend to make sure that they do receive that level of priority because you're right they often don't reach the same ages as other people in terms of their length of life so I know that people are very anxious about knowing where they are on the list and we're very anxious to provide them with that certainty that will be coming imminently but I would also say that with the information that we've received from NASA just last night about the fact that we can delay the intervals between the Pfizer and Moderna doses by four months is a game changer for us in terms of being able to proceed faster with the immunizations and have more needles in more arms more quickly and we do just that they're going to be going into arms as quickly as possible so thank you thank you the next question, the member for Perth Wellington thank you speaker last week I was proud to join colleagues on this side of the legislature in speaking up for the hard working people of Sarnia-Lampton and the tens of thousands of people across Ontario who would suffer because of Michigan Governor's the Michigan Governor's decision to shut down the line five pipeline was sad to see only two members opposite take part in this important take note debate could the associate minister of energy please tell this house why it's so important that this house stand united in the fight to ensure the continued safe operation of line five to apply the associate minister of energy thank you very much Mr. Speaker and thank you to my friend and the member from Perth Wellington for this important question and all of his great work Mr. Speaker as the member mentioned last week we had an excellent take note debate in this legislature on line five we heard from colleagues from across the province who shared the grim realities that the people of our province will face if this ill considered decision stands we heard quotes from some of the people and businesses in southern Ontario who would lose their livelihoods as a result of the line five shutdown earlier that day I invited opposition colleagues to join us in speaking up for these hard working internals including many unionized workers unfortunately I was sad to see that only two members Mr. Speaker one from the official opposition the independence rose to speak to this important issue later today this legislature will have an opportunity to demonstrate its support for internal jobs and for our provinces energy sector and most importantly the people we represent I sincerely hope that the opposition and all members will join us in supporting the government's motion on line five thank you Speaker supplementary question again to the minister and I want to thank him for that answer I hope I too hope that the opposition will take the opportunity to stand with us in the fight to prevent line five from shutting down last week the leader of the official opposition and this is quite sad speaker quote and I quote said that there is no role really for the provincial government on this issue and that this is a federal matter can the associate minister please tell us how the provincial government is playing an important role in raising awareness of this issue and why this advocacy is so important the associate minister of energy Mr. Speaker thanks again to the member from Perth Wellington for that question and unlike the leader of the official opposition there is absolutely a role for the provincial government in standing up for the hardworking people of interior for our businesses and for our energy sector and our families Mr. Speaker this premier has been leading that charge as I mentioned last week our government continues to engage with our federal partners with legislators in Michigan commerce industry leaders and many many others Mr. Speaker colleagues on this side of the house are taking a team candidate approach Mr. Speaker and are calling on our federal MPs to help advocate for this issue and are helping them understand the potential negative impacts on our constituents we held an important take note debate and called on the opposition to join us in this effort Mr. Speaker we count on our federal government to help protect interior jobs and our provinces energy security and we hope by working together with this support we will find a way and a solution to achieve these goals and support the great people of interior Thank you Mr. Speaker Thank you very much Mr. Speaker my question is for the premier Daryl owns the stage diner a small business in my riding he has invested his savings into opening the stage diner last spring then the pandemic hit Daryl applied for the interior small business support grant but he has been denied because his new diner business couldn't demonstrate a loss in revenue and there is no consideration to his previous business small businesses in my riding have done the right thing throughout the pandemic they have scaled back their operations and followed provincial public health rules why has the government failed Daryl and the many other small businesses that still can't access this support the Parliamentary Assistant I should say and Member for Willowville thank you very much thank you to the member for bringing up Daryl's situation I did receive the letter from you yesterday we are examining this particular case and going through the details now but the reality of this grant program is that it has reached the hands of many small businesses throughout this province in fact the latest statistics we see are 80,000 almost 80,000 small businesses have received $1.1 billion in hand and the average wait time to receive those monies is 12 days incredible support systems for small businesses of course there are the case files which are more complex or perhaps errors are made and that's why we encourage the members opposite if you have businesses that are unable to reach those supports feel free to contact us and we will look into those details for you thank you if Daryl doesn't get access to the interior small business support grant he will have to shut his doors he is already scaling back his hours he needs the government to reconsider his application and he is not the only business that is reaching out for help yesterday my office heard from two hair salon owners that applied for the grant months ago and have yet to hear back from them so these are applications sitting on the shelf that nobody has responded to these businesses have either been closed or at a reduced capacity for almost a year the ones that have survived are barely holding on can the premier ensure that every small business that needs the Ontario business support grant will receive it thank you very much speaker and as we look into Daryl's case happy to look into the hair salon's cases as well speaker but we are helping small businesses outside of the small grant programs as well whether that is help with PPE grants whether that is help with broadband infrastructure investments whether that is help in permanently reducing property tax for up to 30% whether that is help for eliminating the tax on jobs for the smallest of small businesses in this province speaker a long list of support measures from the very beginning of this pandemic and what do they have in common? Two things speaker number one we are hearing from small businesses that this is helping them whether the storm that is COVID-19 and number two the opposition has voted against every single one of those support measures thus far I hope that changes moving forward as we table our next budget this month thank you the next question the member for Scarborough Guildwood thank you speaker the premier today the FAO released its report on housing and homeless programs in Ontario the FAO concludes that the province will likely not reach the 2025 goal of ending chronic homelessness nobody should go without a roof over their head or a warm place to keep them safe especially during times of COVID unfortunately there is a significant gap between such ideals and the harsh reality by too many Ontarians today the FAO estimates that 16,000 Ontarians are homeless on any given night of which between 40 and 60% are experiencing chronic homelessness but we really don't know because this government stopped the count in 2018 over the past year the pandemic has put 355,000 Ontarians out of work the largest decline on record the eviction moratoriums have expired or just about to expire at the end of this month speaker will this government commit to recommit to reaching their goal of ending homelessness by 2025 and providing the funding to do it and will you restart the count so we know how many people are sleeping on our streets Minister of municipal affairs and housing thanks speaker first of all speaker I want to thank the financial accountability officer for his work our government takes this file very seriously after years of inaction through you to this member and her previous government we were saddled with a situation where we had to act the previous government had a lot of platitudes but they did not have a plan and since being elected in June of 2018 we have made this a top priority for our government speaker I haven't had the chance to ask through you to this member if she will join us however it's been clear under the national housing strategy that we are being shortchanged by the federal government by some 490 million dollars I've written to the federal minister about that issue I know Ontario's 444 municipalities support me on that ask and I would like to make sure through you speaker that this member support us in asking for Ontario's support and the supplementary question Speaker housing advocates expect the province to play its role in leadership when it comes to housing and homelessness in this province and there is much work for you to do from 2009 19 to 20 to 2027 to 2028 annual spending on the province's housing programs will average 696 million dollars this is significantly lower than the spending between 2014 to 15 and 2018 to 19 at 856 million dollars so the investments are going in the wrong direction speaker only half of the 55300 additional households that will receive support under the province's housing program in 2027 2028 are expected to be removed from the core housing need the FAO estimates that by 2025 there will be an estimated 159 800 high housing need households those who are paying more than 50% of income on housing speaker will the minister reverse his cuts to housing programs and restore the funding to at least 2019 levels in thank you thank you minister missful affairs in housing through you to the honourable member she needs to get her numbers straight you know it was clear in the financial accountability officers report that some of the federal programs the cost-shared programs with the province were decreasing over time where other new programs were starting and then the trends would then increase upwardly but I want to go back to you know a statement that the member made regarding the homelessness council speaker the Liberals made a commitment to end homelessness by 2025 the one thing they forgot they didn't have a plan to do that this year we will be implementing a by name list across the province which is more effective than the previous haphazard methods that the previous government put forward we are going to move forward with the by name count this year but don't take my word for it speaker contact the Canadian alliance to end homelessness they have worked with many of Ontario's many municipalities of members opposite and realize that the by name list is the only way to end homelessness the next question thank you speaker my next question to the minister of government and consumer services speaker the birth of a new baby is one of the biggest milestones in a parent's life among all the new challenges that new parents face they also are required to fill out a flurry of documents and that process is not uncommon for a spelling or auto correct mistake to occur resulting in the wrong name registered on a newborn's birth certificate in 2018-19 the Ombudsman annual report highlighted this concern and it is my understanding that the ministry of government and consumer services has acted to make the process for correcting those errors easier can the minister of government and consumer services explain how recent regulatory changes are making it simpler and more affordable to correct an error in the name of their newborn child on a birth registration minister of government and consumer services thank you very much Mr. Speaker I'd like to thank the member from Perth Wellington for his question I know that as proud grandparents he and his wife Jade celebrate the milestone when a new baby enters the pet apiece family as well and I'm pleased to share with everyone that we have taken action because you know when that bundle of joy arrives parents are excited and they go to register the birth of their newborn on their phones and their tablets and sometimes autocorrect can make small errors and that unintended consequence can be costly and become a bigger problem for years speaker a strict legislative requirement has made it onerous for parents to correct minor errors for example they have been required to submit both a statutory declaration and additional evidence if certain criteria are met and to compound this issue correct minor errors parents have had to spend $90 so I'm pleased to share with this house that I recently signed regulations to make it easier to correct an error on a vital event registration like a birth certificate thank you speaker again to the minister it's great to hear that the government is making life simpler for new parents at one of the most joyful and hectic times of their lives this changes yet another step for parents speaker ensuring that Ontarians are able to continue to access critical government services during the pandemic is of utmost importance this includes of course the 5-in-1 newborn bundle can the minister of government and consumer services explain the steps her ministry is taking to improve the bundle for new parents and ensure that Ontarians continue to access such critical services from service Ontario minister absolutely I'd be pleased to share with everyone in the house today and people watching at home that the 5-in-1 newborn bundle is one of 40 services available online through serviceontario.ca from the comfort of your own home the bundle allows new parents to apply for birth certificate a social insurance number Canada child benefits including the Ontario child benefit and education savings referral service speaker my ministry has recently made updates to the bundle to ensure that when parents are completing their child's birth registration they will see their child's proposed legal name multiple times and are able to make corrections along the way when they're certifying the name and the birth of their baby this is another safeguard that will streamline the process of getting documents for newborns this bundle is one of the many easy to use online service Ontario services that are available 247 users can print proof of completion and confirmation of when the products will be mailed directly to them we are embracing the digital age thank you very much next question thank you speaker my question is to the minister for municipal affairs and housing today the financial accountability officer reported that Ontario's housing crisis will continue to get worse between 2011 and 2018 under the previous liberal government the number of families in core housing need grew by nearly 20% the FAO says this number will keep growing to more than 815,000 families which is an increase of more than 80,000 people over the next eight years despite this this government plans to reduce annual spending on housing programs by an average of $160 million a year minister we're in the middle of an affordable housing crisis so why is this government cutting annual spending to affordable housing thanks speaker and again I want to thank the financial accountability officer for his report I want to congratulate the member opposite on being the new housing critic for the official opposition and I was actually quite encouraged by her opening comments on the fact that Ontario's core housing need is going up that's exactly why we've called on the federal government to give us our fair share of the national housing strategy based on our core housing need if we're going to use our core housing need as the metric that I believe the member opposite and I both want to use then it will be imperative that members from all sides of this house support our call for additional $490 million from the federal government but I want to remind the member that over the next three years the FAO projects that the province's base homelessness program spending will continue to grow as it has since we've taken office but again speaker there were some federal provincial cost share programs that were thank you very much thank you speaker Ontario was in a homelessness crisis before the pandemic and now in the middle of the worst social and economic crisis since the depression which has especially hit racialized immigrant and disabled Ontarians and pushed so many into housing precarity or hidden homelessness the FAO estimates that the government spending on housing programs and its spending on base homelessness programs is actually decreasing from a growth rate over the past seven years to only 3.4% going forward Ontario set a goal of ending homelessness by 2025 but the FAO says the government will not meet this goal its poverty reduction strategy doesn't even mention or commit any additional funding to homelessness or address its commitment to ending homelessness all of this in the middle of a pandemic that sees so many on the verge of eviction why won't the premier government recognize the emergency we're in an act to end it Mr. Minister of Health and Housing we inherited a system that was largely ignored by the previous government for 15 years we've decided with listening to experts the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness that we will move away from the patchwork of programs that the previous government move forward on and we were going to start a by-name list this year that type of data will be imperative for our government to move forward to end homelessness and again speaker I want to remind this member as I've done almost every time she's asked me a question we've committed 1.5 billion dollars to help sustain repair and grow Ontario's community housing system and in the middle of the pandemic our government has committed an additional $110 million over half a billion dollars in additional funds to help our municipal partners join with us and the federal government to help end homelessness we've made that commitment we will continue with that commitment and we will ask the members opposite to join us and work with us thank you the next question the member for York Centre thank you speaker my question is to the premier one of the greatest catastrophes resulting from a Doug Ford lockdown as a tall and small business the premier of the public health agency of Canada he boasts about talking to the CEO and learning about Walmart supply chains but despite claiming to stand up for the little guy he's completely tone-dead to the reality of small business what's more logical is that it's clear that small business does not cause for concern I refer the premier to the last published weekly epidemiology report from the public health agency of Canada at page 12 lists cases and deaths by outbreak settings are attributable to outbreaks in food drinks retail and personal care settings in Canada compare that to 12,000 deaths in long-term care 734 deaths in health care my question for the premier how does he justify the annihilation of small business and the ruining of millions of lives when there are not a cause for COVID concern the parliamentary assistant member for Willowdale thank you speaker and thank you to the member for highlighting the importance of supporting small businesses and that's exactly what this government has done from the beginning of the pandemic of course the number one priority is the health and safety of the people we serve understanding that small businesses are going through a very difficult time we've introduced a series of measures for the smallest of small businesses whether that was a PPE grant for $60 million a digital main street program to help small businesses retool for the new reality that under COVID-19 whether that was a tax cut in terms of property tax saving small businesses up to 30% a permanent measure speaker as well as eliminating the EHT for those small businesses with payroll up to a million dollars annually that is also a permanent change speaker and the member must have seen Meredith because he has voted in favor of every single one of those measures I have just mentioned to support small businesses and I look forward I hope the member continues to support small businesses when we table our budget later this morning the supplementary question speaker no response from the member from Willowdale why target small business when it isn't the problem whatever peanuts this government is offering whatever program these conservatives boast about does not come close to saving these families and their employees I'm holding yesterday's letter to the premier from Regan Irvine owner of the Irv Gastropub a few blocks away from your speaker Regan writes in part I quote over the last year my mother and I have depleted our life savings to try and keep the restaurant afloat we have cashed in RSPs during savings account max credit cards, maxed our lines of credit because the government programs simply aren't enough I don't believe you truly understand the hardships mental health stress and daily challenges we face mental illness, suicide, divorce, domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse are never at the forefront your half-assed lockdowns are causing people to lose everything while all of you are still I'm going to ask the member to withdraw can I ask the member to withdraw I withdraw the quote from the letter until any of you experience the financial setbacks and struggles that our small business owners have suffered you will never know the impact of your decisions close quote so with the member from Willowdale please stop with the talking points and give these businesses a chance to survive by letting them open member from Willowdale well thank you speaker I was 12 years old when I walked to the bank with my dad when he had to second mortgage our house to make payroll speaker to keep the doors open to pay for the livelihoods to put food on the families the tables of his employees I know how difficult it is for small businesses even during the best of times sorry I apologize the member for York center will come to order the member for Cambridge will come to order and allow the member for Willowdale to respond thank you speaker and that is why this government from the beginning has outlined a series of supports, blanketed measures in conjunction with all levels of government to make sure these small businesses can weather the storm it's unfortunate that that member refers to all of these programs a blanketed measure as peanuts because speaker the thousands of businesses are saying this is helping them during this difficult time nobody asked for this globally uncertain situation to come upon this government will stay in step with the small businesses support them until COVID-19 is but a distant memory the next question the member for Windsor west thank you speaker my questions to the premier two weeks ago a memo was sent by the minister of education to Windsor Essex school boards outlining asymptomatic targeted testing in our schools the memo stated that 5% of elementary and secondary schools and 2% of the student population within the greater Essex county district school board would be tested each week beginning Monday February 22nd yet here we are two weeks later without any concrete plan to roll out testing and no testing being done in our Windsor Essex schools not a one speaker why hasn't the conservative government prioritized and begun asymptomatic testing in Windsor Essex schools to ensure that every student and education worker is safe minister of education well thank you speaker and thank you member opposite for the question I can assure the member that in this government we have been providing asymptomatic and symptomatic testing in the province well before students return to school this year in fact in Windsor in the members community we actually expanded asymptomatic testing was provided to the Bengli school when an outbreak occurred well before the expansion province wide that capacity existed before the ministry of education gone to the game of providing testing because the minister of health to her credit 17,000 young people last week alone were tested in this province we lead the nation in testing in every measurement and that underscores one truth we will make it accessible and convenient and local which is why in our capacities the minister of education we have provided capacity to every public health unit every school board up to 50,000 we're encouraging families to continue to get tested to keep our schools safe and our staff safe in this province the supplementary question the minister of education is the master of illusion maybe Penn and Teller will take him on tour with them I have a copy of the letter from the minister of education I'd love to send it over so he could reacquaint himself with what he put in it in fact speaker this conservative government has had a year to properly implement a safe school environment that would protect our students and education workers from COVID-19 despite the calls from experts to ensure smaller safer class sizes and COVID testing in schools time and time again this conservative government chooses to not invest in our children or education workers speaker we are a year into the pandemic there's no reasonable excuse for this dangerous lack of action when will the premier and his conservative government stop delaying the public health measures that will ensure the safety of our students education workers and by extension our entire community in Windsor Essex and actually implement broad asymptomatic testing in schools and the minister of education well thank you speaker I think what I'm hearing from the member opposite is she would impose a requirement on teachers and students and on families for testing and that actually is quite alarming in the province of Ontario we believe in ensuring it remains voluntary the choice of parents we think is important for their child what we can do is make sure it's less invasive which we have through saliva based testing what we can do is make sure it's in every single school born in the province of Ontario hitting a 5% target weekly basis we are doing that in partnership of public health units the fact is speaker contrary to the continued efforts for a year as the member said of trying to create fear in the hearts and minds of parents in Ontario 99.46% of schools remain open 85% of schools are not active case at all now that can change speaker we have to remain on guard we have to keep our guard up and our vigilance up which is why we've enhanced the screen it's why we've mandated mask response we've improved the quality the 3-ply mask it's why this government has continued to invest to keep our schools safe next question the member for Cambridge good morning my question is for the premier we are two weeks shy of a year since this premier and government have imposed arbitrary emergency orders we've had examples of those in government breaking their own emergency orders over the last 12 months the premier visiting his cottage visiting a mayor to give happy birthday greetings attending a wedding seemingly without masks being worn the then finance minister going on a sunny vacation the parliamentary assistant for education not wearing a mask in a large gathering can the premier let us know what finds if any were applied in any of these examples to reply for the government government host leader thank you very much Mr. Speaker look we did bring a number of measures to keep the people of the province of Ontario safe I know the member opposite both the member for I believe York center and the member for Cambridge were enthusiastic supporters voting for all of those measures Mr. Speaker I do congratulate the member for Cambridge she did stand on a point of a privilege and she voted against a motion that she did not feel appropriate unlike the member for York center who enthusiastically voted time and time again for all of those measures look the measures that we put in place have helped to ensure that the province is safe I can appreciate that the member opposite is not favourable to some of these that is her right it's her job to stand up for the people of her riding ultimately the people in her riding will pass judgment on the decisions that she's made response quite proud of York center come to order and what we have accomplished together there is more work to do Mr. Speaker and we'll get on with that job and the supplementary question once again member for Cambridge Mr. Speaker it appears that no fines were applied in any of these instances of government members deliberately breaking their own emergency orders why then was it appropriate for the government to go after $46,000 in legal fees plus almost $40,000 in fines from the Trinity Bible Chapel of Waterloo Region all because its congregants deemed it essential and an obligation to congregate for prayer surely the government didn't need the money after finding over $5 million in taxpayer money to fund the Ontario PC Party as proposed in its most recent legislation Bill 254 Government House Leader Thank you very much Mr. Speaker The Honourable Member of course will know that part of that bill is a continuation of what this government has done in helping independent members find their voice in this place Mr. Speaker which includes allowing independent members to raise funds as well so look we're quite proud of the work that we've done to help independent members find their voice we've provided them additional questions in this House for a question period we've guaranteed them seats on committees we've given them expanded opportunity to respond to bills and legislation before this House so I'm actually very proud of what we have done to democratize this place and allow the member independent members to speak Having said that Mr. Speaker the measures that we have brought in to protect the people of the province of Ontario are very important are what have helped us keep the rate of infection to the lowest almost in North America Mr. Speaker I'm quite proud of those and like the member opposite I will be judged by those decisions at the next election and I'm quite confident that Thank you very much Thank you Speaker How is it possible that in a province as critical as Ontario in the fight against COVID-19 that this concert of government has managed the vaccine rollout so poorly as of today Ontario ranks seventh in per capita vaccinations amongst Canadian provinces that means we are behind Prince Edward Island Quebec Manitoba in territories we're at tenth in per capita vaccinations in Canada we are so close to the light at the end of the tunnel for this COVID-19 pandemic why at this critical moment and how has the concert of government prepared so poorly for the rollout of vaccines Mr. Pell Well in fact the reality of the situation is we've already administered over 784,000 vaccines in a very short period of time with an amazing group of people across the province we have one plan but it's being delivered by 34 different public health units many of them are already well into vaccinating people who are over 80 years old the plan is rolling forward as we have planned for it but the reality is we need more vaccines we can triple the number of people that are receiving vaccines but we need to receive the vaccines we expect that the Pfizer and Moderna will still I apologize to the Minister of Health I have to ask the member for Essex the member for Hamilton Mountain and the government house leader to come to order supplementary question Back to the Premier Branton is a city full of essential workers who don't have the luxury to work from home they work in factories and trucking and other essential services that move our economy they risk their lives every single day so others can work from home and it breaks my heart to know that every single morning there are workers in Brampton and Ontario who wake up and force themselves to go to work sick because they cannot afford to lose a day of pay and lose the funds that they'll need to put groceries on the table or pay for the rent or pay for their mortgage working people in Brampton working people in Ontario deserve permanent paid sick days yet this Premier voted no to bringing in paid sick days for Ontarians this Premier actually called paid sick days a waste of taxpayer money why does this Premier think it's okay to thank and congratulate frontline essential workers at his press conferences only to stab them in the back here at this legislature The Minister of Labour Training and Skills Development to reply to a very much Mr Speaker and I'm really glad that the member opposite asked this question Mr Speaker the Ontario Liberal Party in Ontario supported two paid sick days the NDP Party in Ontario which you're a member of supported and let me quote your leader what we want to see in Ontario is paid sick days ten paid sick days seven and yes that would be the responsibility of employers Mr Speaker I'm proud to say that Premier Doug Ford the Ontario Progressive Conservative Government delivered one month of paid sick days for every worker in the province of Ontario the question period has expired I'll ask and remind all members to make their comments through the chair Pursuant to Standing Order 36A the member for Toronto Centre has given notice of her dissatisfaction with the answer to her question given by the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services concerning child removal from youth justice centres this matter will be debated on Tuesday March 9th, 2021 following private members public business we now have a deferred vote on Mr Calander's amendment to the amendment to Government Notice of Motion 103 a resolution respecting pipelines Mr Calander moved that the amendment be amended by deleting the last period and adding at the end recognizing that pipelines are the safest way of transporting energy resources a recorded vote being required the bells will now ring for 30 minutes during which time members may cast their votes I will ask the clerks to prepare the lobbies