Ingersoll on Ernest Rennan from the works of Robert G. Ingersoll, volume 11, Ms. Salani. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org, recording by Tommy Hursant, Carlsbad, California. Lecture 12 Ernest Rennan Blessed are those whose blood and judgment are so well commingled, that they are not a pipe for Fortune's finger to sound what stops she pleas. Ernest Rennan is dead. Another source of light, another force of civilization, another charming personality, another brave soul, graceful in thought, generous indeed, a sculptor in speech, a colorist in words, clothing all in the poetry born of a delightful union of heart and brain, has passed to the realm of rest. Reared under the influences of Catholicism, educated for the priesthood, yet by reason of his natural genius, he began to think. Forces that utterly subjugate and enslave the mind of mediocrity, sometimes arouse to thought and action the superior soul. Rennan began to think, a dangerous thing for a Catholic to do. Thought leads to doubt, doubt to investigation, investigation to truth, the enemy of all superstition. He lifted the Catholic extinguisher from the light and flame of reason. He found that his mental vision was improved. He read the scriptures for himself, examined them as he did other books not claiming to be inspired. He found the same mistakes, the same prejudices, the same miraculous impossibilities in the book attributed to God, that he found in those known to have been written by men. Into the path of reason, or rather into the highway, Rennan was led by Henrietta, his sister, to whom he pays a tribute that has the perfume of a perfect flower. I was, writes Rennan, brought up by women and priests, and therein lies the whole explanation of my good qualities and of my defects. And most that he wrote is the tenderness of women, only now and then a little touch of the priest showing itself, mostly in a reluctance to spoil the ivy by tearing down some prison built by superstition. In spite of the heartless scheme of things, he still found it in his heart to say, Quote, when God shall be complete, he will be just, unquote, at the same time saying that, quote, nothing proves to us that there exists in the world a central consciousness, a soul of the universe, and nothing proves the contrary, unquote. So whatever was the verdict of his brain, his heart asked for immortality. He wanted his dream, and he was willing that others should have theirs. Such is the wish and will of all great souls. He knew the church thoroughly, and anticipated what would finally be written about him by churchmen. Quote, having some experience of ecclesiastical writers, I can sketch out in advance the way my biography will be written in Spanish in some Catholic review of Santa Fe in the year 2000. Heavens, how black I shall be! I shall be so all the more, because the church, when she feels that she is lost, will end with malice.  He anticipated such a biography because he had thought for himself, and because he had expressed his thoughts, because he had declared that, quote, our universe within the reach of our experience is not governed by any intelligent reason. God, as the common herd understand him, the living God, the acting God, the God-providence, does not show himself in the universe, unquote. Because he attacked the mythical and the miraculous in the life of Christ, and sought to rescue from the columnaries of ignorance and faith a serene and lofty soul. The time has arrived when Jesus must become a myth or a man. The idea that he was the infinite God must be abandoned by all who are not religiously insane. Those who have given up the claim that he was God insist that he was divinely appointed and illuminated, that he was a perfect man, the highest possible type of the human race, and consequently a perfect example for all the world. As time goes on, as men get wider or grander or more complex ideas of life, as the intellectual horizon broadens, the idea that Christ was perfect may be modified. The New Testament seems to describe several individuals under the same name, or at least one individual who passed through several stages or phases of religious development. Christ is described as a devout Jew, as one who endeavored to comply in all respects with the old law. Many saints are attributed to him consistent with this idea. He certainly was a Hebrew in belief in feeling when he said, Swear not by heaven, because it is God's throne, nor by earth, for it is his footstool, nor by Jerusalem, for it is his holy city. These reasons were in exact accordance with the mythology of the Jews. God was regarded simply as an enormous man, as one who walked in the garden in the cool of the evening, as one who had met man, face to face, who had conversed with Moses for forty days upon Mount Sinai, as a great king, with a throne in the heavens, using the earth to rest his feet upon, and regarding Jerusalem as his holy city. Then, we find plenty of evidence that he wished to reform the religion of the Jews, to fulfill the law, not to abrogate it. Then there is still another change. He has ceased his efforts to reform that religion, and has become a destroyer. He holds the temple in contempt, and repudiates the idea that Jerusalem is the holy city. He concludes that it is unnecessary to go to some mountain, or some building, to worship, or to find God, and insists that the heart is the true temple, that ceremonies are useless, that all pomp and pride and show are needless, and that it is enough to worship God under heaven's dome, in spirit, and in truth. It is impossible to harmonize these views unless we admit that Christ was the subject of growth and change. That in consequence of growth and change, he modified his views. That from wanting to preserve Judaism as it was, he became convinced that it ought to be reformed. That he then abandoned the idea of reformation, and made up his mind that the only reformation of which the Jewish religion was capable was destruction. If he was in fact a man, then the course he pursued was natural. But if he was God, it is perfectly absurd. If we give to him perfect knowledge, then it is impossible to account for change or growth. If on the other hand the ground is taken that he was a perfect man, then it might be asked, was he perfect when he wished to preserve, or when he wished to reform, or when he resolved to destroy the religion of the Jews? If he is to be regarded as perfect, although not divine, when did he reach perfection? It is perfectly evident that Christ, or the character that bears that name, imagined that the world was about to be destroyed, or at least purified by fire, and that on account of this curious belief he became the enemy of marriage, of all earthly ambition, and of all enterprise. With that view in his mind he said to himself, Why should we waste our energies in producing food for destruction? Why should we endeavor to beautify a world that is so soon to perish? Filled with the thought of coming change, he insisted that there was but one important thing, and that was for each man to save his soul. He should care nothing for the ties of kindred, nothing for wife or child or property, and the shadow of the coming disaster. He should take care of himself. He endeavored, as it is said, to induce men to desert all they had, to let the dead bury the dead, and follow him. He told his disciples, or those he wished to make his disciples, according to the testament that it was their duty to desert wife and child and property, and if they would so desert kindred and wealth, he would reward them here and hereafter. We now know, if we know anything, that Jesus was mistaken about the coming of the end, and we know now that he was greatly controlled in his ideas of life by that mistake. Believing that the end was near, he said, Take no thought for the morrow, what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink or wherewithal ye shall be clothed. It was in view of the destruction of the world that he called the attention of his disciples to the lily that toiled not, and yet excelled Solomon in the glory of its remit. Having made this mistake, having acted upon it, certainly we cannot now say that he was perfect in knowledge. He is regarded by many millions as the impersonation of patience, of forbearance, of meekness and mercy, and yet, according to the account, he said, Many extremely bitter words and threatened eternal pain. We also know, if the account be true, that he claimed to have supernatural power, to work miracles, to cure the blind and to raise the dead. And we know that he did nothing of the kind. So if the writers of the New Testament tell the truth as to what Christ claimed, it is absurd to say that he was a perfect man. If honest, he was deceived, and those who are deceived are not perfect. There is nothing in the New Testament so far as we know that touches on the duties of nation to nation, or of nation to its citizens. Nothing of human liberty. Not one word about education. Not the faintest hint that there is such a thing as science. Nothing calculated to stimulate industry, commerce, or invention. Not one word in favor of art, or music, or anything calculated to feed or clothe the body. Nothing to develop the brain of man. When it is assumed that the life of Christ, as described in the New Testament, is perfect, we at least take upon ourselves the burden of deciding what perfection is. People who asserted that Christ was divine, that he was actually God, reached the conclusion without any laborious course of reasoning, that all he said and did was absolute perfection. They said this because they had first been convinced that he was divine. The moment his divinity is given up, and the assertion is made that he was perfect, we are not permitted to reason in that way. They said he was God, therefore perfect, now if it is admitted that he was human, the conclusion that he was perfect does not follow. We then take the burden upon ourselves of deciding what perfection is. To decide what is perfect is beyond the powers of the human mind. Renan, in spite of his education, regarded Christ as a man, and did the best he could to account for the miracles that had been attributed to him, for the legends that had gathered about his name and the impossibilities connected with his career, and also try to account for the origin or birth of these miracles, of these legends, of these myths, including the resurrection and ascension. I am not satisfied with all the conclusions he reached, or with all the paths he traveled. The refraction of light caused by passing through a woman's tears is hardly a sufficient foundation for a belief in so miraculous a miracle as the bodily ascension of Jesus Christ. There is another thing attributed to Christ that seems to me conclusive evidence against the claim of perfection. Christ is reported to have said that all sins should be forgiven, except the sin against the Holy Ghost. This sin, however, is not defined. Although Christ died for the whole world, that through him all might be saved, there is this one terrible exception. There is no salvation for those who have sinned or who may hear after sin against the Holy Ghost. Thousands of persons are now in asylums having lost their reason because of their fear that they had committed this unknown, this undefined, this unpardonable sin. It is said that a Roman emperor went through a form of publishing his laws or proclamations, posting them so high on pillars that they could not be read, and then took the lives of those who ignorantly violated these unknown laws. He was regarded as a tyrant, as a murderer. And yet what shall we say of one who declared that the sin against the Holy Ghost was the only one that could not be forgiven, and then left an ignorant world to guess what that sin is? Undoubtedly, this horror is an interpolation. There is something like it in the Old Testament. It is asserted by Christians that the Ten Commandments are the foundation of all law and of all civilization. And you will find lawyers insisting that the Mosaic Code was the first information that man received on the subject of law. But before that time the world was without any knowledge of justice or mercy. If this be true, the Jews had no divine laws, no real instruction on any legal subject, until the Ten Commandments were given. Consequently, before that time there had been proclaimed, or published, no law against the worship of other gods or vitals. Moses had been on Mount Sinai talking with Jehovah. At the end of the dialogue he received the tables of stone and started down the mountain for the purpose of imparting this information to his followers. When he reached the camp he heard music, he saw the people dancing, and he found that in his absence Aaron and the rest of the people had cast a molten calf, which they were then worshiping. Moses so enraged Moses that he broke the tables of stone and made preparations for the punishment of the Jews. Remember that they knew nothing about this law, and according to the modern Christian claims could not have known that it was wrong to melt gold and silver and mold it in the form of a calf. And yet, Moses killed about thirty thousand of these people for having violated a law of which they had never heard, a law known only to one man and one god. Nothing could be more unjust, more ferocious than this. And yet it can hardly be said to exceed in cruelty the announcement that a certain sin was unpardonable and then failed to define the sin, possibly to inquire what the sin is, is the sin. Ren in regards Jesus as a man, and his work gets its value from the fact that it is written from a human standpoint. Not the same time, he consciously or unconsciously, or may be for the purpose of sprinkling a little holy water on the heat of religious indignation, now and then seems to speak of him as more than human, or as having accomplished something that man could not. He asserts that, quote, the gospels are in part legendary, that they contain many things not true, that they are full of miracles and of the supernatural, unquote. At the same time, he insists that these legends, these miracles, these supernatural things do not affect the truth of the probable things contained in these writings. He sees and he sees clearly that there is no evidence that Matthew or Mark or Luke or John wrote the books attributed to them. That as a matter of fact, the mere title of According to Matthew, According to Mark, shows that they were written by others who claimed them to be in accordance with the stories that had been told by Matthew or by Mark. So Renan takes the ground that the Gospel of Luke is founded on anterior documents, and, quote, is the work of a man who selected, pruned, and combined, and that the same a man wrote the Acts of the Apostles and in the same way, unquote. The Gospels were certainly written long after the events described, and Renan finds the reason for this in the fact that the Christians believed that the world was about to end. That consequently, there was no need of composing books. It was only necessary for them to preserve in their hearts during the little margin of time that remained a lively image of him whom they soon expected to meet in the clouds. For this reason, the Gospels themselves had but little authority for 150 years. The Christians rely on oral traditions. Renan shows that there was not the slightest scruple about inserting additions in the Gospels, variously combining them and in completing some by taking parts from others. That the books passed from hand to hand, and that each one transcribed in the margin of his copy the words and parables he had found elsewhere which touched him. That it was not until human tradition became weakened that the text bearing the names of the apostles became authoritative. Renan has criticized the Gospels somewhat in the same spirit that he would criticize a modern work. He saw clearly that the metaphysics filling the discourses of John were deformities and distortions. A symbol of mysticism, having nothing to do really with the character of Jesus. He shows too that, quote, the simple idea of the kingdom of God at the time the Gospel according to Saint John was written had faded away, that the hope of the advent of Christ was growing dim, and that from belief the disciples passed into discussion, from discussion to dogma, from dogma to ceremony, on quote, and finding that the new heaven and the new earth were not coming as expected, they turned to their attention to governing the old heaven and the old earth. The disciples were willing to be humble for a few days, with the expectation of wearing crowns forever. They were satisfied with poverty, believing that the wealth of the world was to be theirs. The coming of Christ, however, being for some unaccountable reason delayed. Poverty and humility grew irksome, and human nature began to assert itself. In the Gospel of John you will find the metaphysics of the Church. There you find the second birth. There you find the doctrine of the atonement clearly set forth. There you find that God died for the whole world, and that whosoever believeth not in him is to be damned. There is nothing of the kind in Matthew. Matthew makes Christ say that if you will forgive others, God will forgive you. The Gospel according to Mark is the same. So is the Gospel according to Luke. There is nothing about salvation through belief, nothing about the atonement. In Mark, in the last chapter, the apostles are told to go into all the world and preach the Gospel with the statement that whoever believed and was baptized should be saved, and whoever failed to believe should be damned. But we know now that this is an interpolation. Consequently, Matthew, Mark, and Luke never had the faintest conception of the Christian religion. They knew nothing of the atonement, nothing of salvation by faith, nothing. So that if a man had read only Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and had strictly followed what he found, he would have found himself after death in perdition. Renin finds that certain portions of the Gospel according to John were added later, and the entire 21st chapter is an interpolation. Also that many places bear the traces of erasures and corrections. So he says that it would be, quote, impossible for anyone to compose a life of Jesus with any meaning in it from the discourses which John attributes to him, and he holds that this Gospel of John is full of preaching. Christ demonstrating himself full of argumentation, full of stage effect, divide of simplicity with long arguments after each miracle, stiff and awkward discourses, the tone of which is often false and unequal, unquote. He also insists that there are evidently artificial portions, variations like that of a musician improvising on a given theme, unquote. In spite of all this, Renin, willing to soothe the prejudice of his time, takes the ground that the four canonical Gospels are authentic, that they date from the first century, that the authors were generally speaking, those to whom they are attributed. He insists that their historic value is very diverse. This is a backhanded stroke, admitting first that they are authentic, second that they were written about the end of the first century, third that they are not of equal value, disposes so far as he is concerned of the dogma of inspiration. One is at a loss to understand why four Gospels should have been written. As a matter of fact, there can be only one true account of any occurrence, or of any number of occurrences. Now, it must be taken for granted that an inspired account is true. Why then should there be four inspired accounts? It may be answered that all were not to write the entire story. To this, the reply is that all attempted to cover substantially the same ground. Many years ago, the early fathers thought it necessary to say why there were four inspired books, and some of them said because there were four cardinal directions, and the Gospels fed the north, south, east, and west. Others said that there were four principal winds, a gospel for each wind. They might have added that some animals have four legs. Brennan admits that the narrative portions have not the same authority. Quote, that many legends proceeded from the zeal of the second Christian generation, that the narrative of Luke is historically weak, that sentences attributed to Jesus have been distorted and exaggerated, that the book was written outside of Palestine and after the siege of Jerusalem. That Luke endeavors to make the different narratives agree, changing them for that purpose, that he softens the passages which had become embarrassing, that he exaggerated the marvelous omitted errors in chronology, that he was a compiler, a man who had not been an eyewitness himself, and had not seen eyewitnesses, but who labors at texts and rests their sense to make them agree. On quote, this certainly is very far from inspiration. So quote, Luke interprets the documents according to his own idea, being a kind of anarchist opposed to property and persuaded that the triumph of the poor was approaching, that he was especially fond of the anecdotes showing the conversion of sinners, the exaltation of the humble and that he modified ancient traditions to give them this meaning. On quote, Brennan reached the conclusion that the Gospels are neither biographies after the manner of Suetonius nor fictitious legends in the style of phylostratus, but that they are legendary biographies like the legends of the saints, the lives of Plotinus and Isidore, in which historical truth and the desire to present models of a virtue are combined in various degrees, that they are inexact, that they, quote, contain numerous errors and discordances, on quote. So he takes the ground that 20 or 30 years after Christ, his reputation had greatly increased, that, quote, legends had began to gather about him like clouds, on quote, that, quote, death added to his perfection, freeing him from all defects in the eyes of those who had loved him, that his followers rested the prophecy so that they might fit him. They said, he is the Messiah. The Messiah was to do certain things, therefore Jesus did certain things. Then an account would be given of the doing, on quote, all of which, of course, shows that there can be maintained no theory of inspiration. It is admitted that where individuals are witnesses of the same transaction, and where they agree upon the vital points and disagree upon details, the disagreement may be consistent with their honesty, as tending to show that they have not agreed upon a story. But if the witnesses are inspired of God, then there is no reason for their disagreeing on anything. And if they do disagree, it is a demonstration that they were not inspired. But it is not a demonstration that they are not honest. While perfect agreement may be evidence of rehearsal, a failure to perfectly agree is not a demonstration of the truth or falsity of a story. But if the witnesses claim to be inspired, the slightest disagreement is a demonstration that they were not inspired. Renan reaches the conclusion, proving every step that he takes, that the four principal documents, that is to say the four gospels, are in, quote, flagrant contradiction, one with another, on quote. He attacks, and with perfect success, the miracles of the scriptures. And upon this subject says, quote, observation, which has never once been falsified, teaches us that miracles never happen. But in times and countries in which they are believed and before persons disposed to believe them. No miracle ever occurred in the presence of men capable of testing its miraculous character, on quote. He further takes the ground that no contemporary miracle will bear inquiry. And that consequently it is probable that the miracles of antiquity, which have been performed in popular gatherings, would be shown to be simple illusion, were it possible to criticize them in detail. In the name of universal experience, he banishes miracles from history. These were brave things to do, things that will bear good fruit. As long as men believe in miracles, past or present, they remain the prey of superstition. The Catholic is taught that miracles were performed anciently, not only, but that they are still being performed. This is consistent in consistency. Protestants teach a double doctrine that miracles used to be performed, that the laws of nature used to be violated, but that no miracle is performed now. No Protestant will admit that any miracle was performed by the Catholic church. Otherwise, Protestants could not be justified in leaving a church with whom the God of miracles dwelt. So, every Protestant has to adopt two kinds of reasoning, that the laws of nature used to be violated and that miracles used to be performed, but that since the apostolic age, nature has had her way, and the Lord has allowed facts to exist and to hold the field. A supernatural account, according to Renan, always implies credulity or imposture, probably both. It does not seem possible to me that Christ claimed for himself what the Testament claims for him. These claims were made by admirers, by followers, by missionaries. When the early Christians went to Rome, they found plenty of demigods. It was hard to set aside the religion of a demigod by telling the story of a man from Nazareth. These missionaries, not to be outdone in ancestry, insisted, and this was after the Gospel according to St. John had been written, that Christ was the Son of God. Matthew believed that he was the Son of David and the Messiah, and gave the genealogy of Joseph his father to support that claim. In the time of Christ, no one imagined that he was of divine origin. This was an after-growth. In order to place themselves on an equality with pagans, they started the claim of divinity, and also took the second step requisite in that country, first a God for his father, and second a Virgin for his mother. This was the pagan combination of greatness, and the Christians added to this that Christ was God. It is hard to agree with the conclusion reached by Renan that Christ formed and intended to form a church. Such evidence, it seems to me, is hard to find in the Testament. Christ seemed to satisfy himself, according to the Testament, with a few statements, some of them exceedingly wise and tender, some utterly impracticable, and some intolerant. If we accept the conclusions reached by Renan, we will throw away the legends without foundation, the miraculous legends, and everything inconsistent with what we know of nature. Very little will be left. A few sayings to be found among those attributed to Confucius, to Buddha, to Krishna, to Epictetus, to Zeno, and to many others.  One struck on one cheek to turn the other is really joining a conspiracy to secure the triumph of brutality. To agree not to resist evil is to become an accomplice of all injustice. We must not take from industry, from patriotism, from virtue, the right of self-defense. Undoubtedly, Renan gave the honest transcript of his mind. The road his thought had followed, the reasons in their order that had occurred to him, the criticisms born of thought, and the qualifications, softening phrases, children of old sentiments, and emotions that had not entirely passed away. He started, one might say, from the altar and, during a considerable part of the journey, carried the incense with him. The farther he got away, the greater was his clearness of vision, and the more thoroughly he was convinced that Christ was merely a man, an idealist. But remembering the altar, he excused exaggeration in inspired books not because it was from heaven, not because it was in harmony with our ideas of a veracity, but because the writers of the gospel were imbued with the oriental spirit of exaggeration, a spirit perfectly understood by the people who first read the gospels, because the readers knew the habits of the writers. It had been contended for many years that no one could pass judgment on the veracity of the scriptures who did not understand Hebrew. This position was perfectly absurd. No man needs to be a student of Hebrew to know that the shadow on the dial did not go back several degrees to convince a petty king that a boil was not to be fatal. Renin, however, filled the requirement. He was an excellent Hebrew scholar. This was a fortunate circumstance because it answered a very old objection. The founder of Christianity was, for his own sake, taken from the divine pedestal and allowed to stand like other men on the earth, to be judged by what he said and did, by his theories, by his philosophy, by his spirit. No matter whether Renin came to a correct conclusion or not, his work did a vast deal of good. He convinced many that implicit reliance could not be placed upon the gospels, that the gospels themselves are of unequal worth, that they were deformed by ignorance and falsehood, or at least by mistake, that if they wished to save the reputation of Christ, they must not rely wholly on the gospels or on what is found in the New Testament, but they must go farther and examine all legends touching him. Not only so, but they must throw away the miraculous, the impossible, and the absurd. He also has shown that the early followers of Christ endeavored to add to the reputation of their master by attributing to him the miraculous and the foolish, and while these stories added to his reputation at that time, since the world has advanced, they must be cast aside, or the reputation of the master must suffer. It will not do now to say that Christ himself pretended to do miracles. This would establish the fact at least that he was mistaken, but we are compelled to say that his disciples insisted that he was a worker of miracles. This shows either that they were mistaken or untruthful. We all know that a sleight of hand performer could gain a greater reputation among savages than Darwin or Humboldt, and we know that the world in the time of Christ was filled with barbarians, with people who demanded the miraculous, who expected it, with people in fact who had a stronger belief in the supernatural than in the natural, people who never thought it worthwhile to record facts. The hero of such people, the Christ of such people, with his miracles, cannot be the Christ of the thoughtful and scientific. Renan was a man of most excellent temper, candid, not striving for victory, but for truth, conquering as far as he could the old superstitions, not entirely free, it may be, but believing himself to be so. He did great good. He has helped to destroy the fictions of faith. He has helped to rescue man from the prison of superstition, and this is the greatest benefit that man can bestow on man. He did another great service, not only to Jews, but to Christendom, by writing the history of the people of Israel. Christians for many centuries have persecuted the Jews. They have charged them with the greatest conceivable crime, with having crucified an infinite God. This absurdity has hardened the hearts of men and poisoned the minds of children. The persecution of the Jews is the meanest, the most senseless, and cruel page in history. Every civilized Christian should feel on his cheeks the red spots of shame as he reads the wretched and infamous story. The flame of this prejudice is fanned and fed in the Sunday schools of our day, and the Orthodox minister points proudly to the atrocities perpetrated against the Jews by the barbarians of Russia as evidences of the truth of the inspired scriptures. In every wound God puts a tongue to proclaim the truth of his book. If the charge that the Jews killed God were true, it is hardly reasonable to hold those who are now living responsible for what their ancestors did nearly 19 centuries ago. But there is another point in connection with this matter. If Christ was God, then the Jews could not have killed him without his consent, and according to the Orthodox Creed, if he had not been sacrificed, the whole world would have suffered eternal pain. Nothing can exceed the meanness of the prejudice of Christians against the Jewish people. They should not be held responsible for their savage ancestors, or for their belief that Jehovah was an intelligent and merciful God superior to all other gods. Even Christians do not wish to be held responsible for the Inquisition, for the Turkomotus and the John Calvin's, for the witch burners and the Quaker whippers, for the slave traders and child stealers, the most of whom were believers in our glorious gospel and many of whom had been born the second time. Renan did much to civilize the Christians by telling the truth in a charming and convincing way about the people of Israel. Both sides are greatly indebted to him, one he has ably defended and the other greatly enlightened. Having done what good he could in giving what he believed was light to his fellow man, he had no fear of becoming a victim of God's wrath, and so he laughingly said, quote, for my part I imagine that if the eternal in his severity were to send me to hell, I should succeed in escaping from it. I would send up to my Creator a supplication that would make him smile. The course of reasoning by which I would prove to him that it was through his fault that I was damned would be so subtle that he would find some difficulty in replying. The fate which would suit me best is precatory, a charming place where many delightful romances begun on earth must be continued, unquote. Such cheerfulness, such good philosophy, with cap and bells, such banter and blasphemy, such sound and solid sense, drive to madness the priest who thinks the curse of Rome can fright the world. How the snake of superstition rides when he finds that his fangs have lost their poison. He was one of the gentlest of men, one of the fairest in discussion, dissenting from the views of others with modesty, presenting his own with clearness and candor. His mental manners were excellent. He was not positive as to the unknowable. He said, perhaps. He knew that knowledge is good if it increases the happiness of man, and he felt that superstition is the assassin of liberty and civilization. He lived a life of cheerfulness, of industry, devoted to the welfare of mankind. He was a seeker of happiness by the highway of the natural, a destroyer of the dogmas of mental deformity, a worshipper of liberty and the ideal. As he lived, he died, hopeful and serene. And now, standing in imagination by his grave, we ask, will the night be eternal? The brain says, perhaps, while the heart hopes for the dawn. North American Review, November, 1892


Thank you. It is now time for Question Period, the leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opinion. Thank you, Speaker. I just want to begin by welcoming everyone back to the legislature and the exception of the tribute to Joseph Ning. It feels like deja vu all over again, Mr. Speaker. They're there and we're here. Premier? I teed that up for you. Premier Ed Clark made it clear that his report had only the conclusions that you wanted when he stated, and I quote, you can only do it by sitting down with the Premier and saying, if you're going to ask me to do something, why don't you have me do something that you actually want. Now, Premier, because you didn't allow Mr. Clark to have all of the options on the table right from the get-go, number of people, including myself, think that what you really wanted was an excuse, a report that would allow you to bring in new revenue tools that will raise the cost of alcohol, beer and hydro, just to name a few. With the added threat of people losing their jobs as you squeeze these assets. So I ask you today, are people going to lose their jobs? How many people are going to lose their jobs? Is the price of beer going to go up? Is alcohol going to go up? Or hydro? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And I want to join my voice with the leader of the opposition to welcome everyone back. I know that everyone has worked very hard in their constituencies over the period of time that the legislature wasn't sitting. And so welcome back here. There is a lot of work to do and I'm very pleased that we are all back here to do it. And as the leader of the opposition knows, we ran on a plan to build the province up. We ran on a plan to make investments in the people, in the infrastructure, in the businesses of this province. And that's what we're going to do. And part of that was, we said we were going to ask Ed Clark and his group, the council that included Janet Ecker and Francis Lankin, ask him to give us some advice on assets. And that's exactly what we've done, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Well, Mr. Speaker, back to the premier. It's clear that Ed Clark's recommendations won't solve the significant financial problems brought to this province, $11 billion deficit, which is more than all the other provinces and the federal government combined. My colleague from Wellington-Halton Hills said it right when he said, it's clear that you've learned nothing from previous debacles. You couldn't run a hot dog stand. Premier, will you do what we have asked and to make sure you get it right this time, because your track record with orange and the gas plants is abysmal and scandalous, and ask the auditor general to review every public asset sale before you move forward and to ensure the taxpayers are getting the best deal. Order. So, Mr. Speaker, I actually believe that what we have asked Ed Clark and his council to do is a perfect example of learning from the past. Because if we think about the way the member opposites party, when they were in office, dealt with the 407, Mr. Speaker, that would be a more blatant example of a thought less unplanned and absolutely bad deal for the people of Ontario, Mr. Speaker. So, we have learned that this review of assets has to be done in a thoughtful way, Mr. Speaker. It has to be done in a way that maximizes and optimizes the assets that we have in this province and then allows us, Mr. Speaker, to make the investments that we know we need in assets for the future, like transportation infrastructure. I'm going to make this comment once and then move on to a more aggressive way to bring civility here. When the Premier is answering, or anyone on that side is answering, if I hear heckling from that side, I'm going to cut the answer short. And the same goes on this side. And now I'll move into individuals. Final supplementary, please. Premier, since you've taken office, you've talked a lot about transparency and accountability. Your actions don't match up with the rhetoric. Your new Liberal member from Trinity Spadina told us recently in committee that he believes in supporting openness and transparency, but only, quote, at the right time. That's pretty consistent with what we've seen from you thus far. However, you have stated that had various precautions being taken in the past, the gas plant scandal would never have happened. So we're asking you to take those precautions today and let the auditor general do her job and look into every public asset sale before you close the deal. Why won't you agree with that? We all agree with the auditor general and the impartiality there and the expertise there. It's the right way to go. Just say yes. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, well, you know, I know that the auditor general will choose that she wants to look at Mr. Speaker and I'm confident that as we move forward, as I say, on a review of and action on optimizing the assets that belong to the people of Ontario, we are going to be able to realize real new benefit from those assets, Mr. Speaker. And in fact, the council was asked to look at maximizing the value of Hydro One, OPG and LCBO to generate a better return, Mr. Speaker, to provide a benefit to customers and to provide the opportunity for us to invest in transit and transportation infrastructure. So Ed Clark, who has led that review, made a speech last week, Mr. Speaker. We will be looking forward to his interim report and all of that information will be available to the people of Ontario, including the auditor general, Mr. Speaker. Back to the Premier Speaker. Clearly, Premier, you don't want to be accountable and transparent on that file. So let me try another one. We strongly believe that it's the duty of those of us that are fortunate to be elected to this place on behalf of the public to maintain transparency and accountability and openness. You've talked about it a lot. But how can you reconcile that promise that you make so often creamier to be open and accountable when you've instructed your government committee members to hide financial information about your $309 million Mars bailout? Why won't you be open and transparent and provide the documents we're asking for? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. So let me just go over a little bit of background because I know that the member opposite wants, he wants, as we do, for there to be the best innovation and research in Ontario possible. He wants, as we do, Mr. Speaker, that start-up companies have the support that they need. So we know, Mr. Speaker, that Mars is a world-renowned centre of research and innovation, Mr. Speaker. It's an organisation that has generated economic activity of about $3 billion, has helped or advised 1,400 companies, Mr. Speaker, to get started and to be able to expand. Our priority has been, and it will continue to be, to protect Ontario's investment in that building, Mr. Speaker. We fully expect that the $224 million loan will be paid back in full. And so, Mr. Speaker, we are operating on that assumption and supporting Mars in their innovation and research. Premier, we all know what Mars is intended to do. It's a great objective. Our government was involved in starting phase one, which, by the way, we built knowing that we could fill the building. You went on, you knew fully, there were lots of media reports, you knew fully when you went on to phase two, that that building may very well be empty. Then you involved a private developer, Alexander Real Estate, and then you changed the rules at Infrastructure Ontario. All of this without any transparency, without any light shining in at all from the auditor general, without reporting to this house. So you owe us, you owe the taxpayers an explanation of what you're up to, and the best explanation is to show us the documents we want. We want the agreement between your government and Alexander Real Estate, and we want the details around the infrastructure Ontario loan, which at the very least should be public. Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows that this building has been repeatedly valued at or above the amount that we've invested, Mr. Speaker. I think that the member opposite also knows that it would be reckless, Mr. Speaker, and it would jeopardize a conditional agreement, Mr. Speaker, to make certain confidential documents public before that deal, that arrangement had been completed. So I'm not going to, we're not going to undermine an arrangement that would be in the best interest of the people of Ontario by providing information publicly that needs to be confidential for a period of time. We are committed to being open and transparent, and I want information to be available to the public, and obviously to the members of the opposition as they ask for it. But not at the risk to the benefit of the people of Ontario, Mr. Speaker. We're not going to undermine those commercially sensitive transactions. You know, it clearly is to the Premier again. It clearly is Deja Vu all over again. You obviously haven't learned anything from orange or e-health or gas plants. You don't know, you're continuing your propensity as liberals to just throw more money after bad, and saying no one pays too, which it was clear around here that you shouldn't have gone ahead and developed. You went ahead using the taxpayer's money, because you don't care about the taxpayer's money. Same thing you did in orange. Same thing you did with gas plants. Same thing you did at e-health. Just throw hundreds of millions out the door, and you refuse to be accountable and transparent for that. Don't repeat the mistakes of the past. You've got two police probes going on now, because of those mistakes in the past. Let's not have to call for another one. Give us the documents we want. Thank you. Premier. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Minister responsible for infrastructure is reviewing the documents. We will release those documents responsibly, Mr. Speaker. But as I said, we will not undermine the best interests of the people of Ontario by releasing commercially sensitive documents when there is a process underway, Mr. Speaker. We will not do that, because we know that Mars is and is going to continue to be a success. And I would say to the member opposite that he should be careful as he undermines the record. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, because he knows full well that there is expertise, there is innovation potential in this province. He knows full well that Mars has been successful and will continue to be successful. And part of that is making sure that that building is functioning at the highest, highest capacity. Thank you. You have a question? The Leader of the Third Party. Thank you very much, Speaker. My question is for the Premier. Why does the Premier think it's better to have Ontario's local hydro companies in the hands of private for-profit speculators rather than in the hands of Ontarians themselves? Well, and again, Mr. Speaker, I welcome the members of the Third Party back. I know that they've been working hard in their constituencies. And what the Leader of the Third Party is asking about, Mr. Speaker, is the practical and sensible plan that we are moving forward with to make sure that the assets of this province that are owned by the people of Ontario, Mr. Speaker, that they work to the very best advantage of the people of Ontario. That's the work that Ed Clark is doing with his council, Mr. Speaker, and he has said quite clearly he doesn't believe that selling those assets is the right answer. He has said that. So I believe that the Leader of the Third Party is probably having a bit of a hard time framing the question, because in fact, Ed Clark has said that he agrees that selling those assets is not the right thing to do, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, supplementary. Well, Speaker, last week, Ed Clark released his interim plan for our shared public assets at a private business luncheon. He released a plan for alcohol sales that he knew would get a lot of ink and tried to bury a plan to privatize hydro utilities. Now, if this was this Premier's intention, why did she not campaign on Harris-style hydro privatization? Interesting. Well, Mr. Speaker... That's a good one. The assumptions about optimizing the value of Ontario's assets was part of our plan, Mr. Speaker. We campaigned on it, and so did she, Mr. Speaker. The Leader of the Third Party campaigned on exactly the same fiscal assumptions that we campaigned on, Mr. Speaker. And she knows full well that having asked Ed Clark to do his work, he is going to deliver an interim report, Mr. Speaker. She also knows full well that he has said he agrees that selling off those assets is not the right thing to do. He's also said that there are changes that can be made that will benefit the customers, Mr. Speaker, will benefit the ratepayers, Mr. Speaker, and will also provide the best benefit to the people of Ontario because we will be able to then invest in transportation infrastructure that is much needed across this province. Thank you. Well, Mr. Speaker, on Friday, Ed Clark told Ontarians that he wanted public hydro companies to, quote, bring in private capital, so, quote, Ontario could sell down some of its interest. The Premier wants to bring private speculators into local hydro utilities. Then she wants to sell them off. Ontarians are going to be left paying for the cost of hydro and the profits of private energy speculators. Now, when you privatize a public company, I call that privatizing. And when you sell off public ownership, I call that a sell-off. What does the Premier call it, Speaker, and why didn't she call it like it is during the election campaign? Mr. Speaker, I was quite clear. We were quite clear during the election, Mr. Speaker, that we were going to look at the assets of the people of this province, Mr. Speaker, and we were going to make sure that they were working at optimal capacity to provide for the opportunity for us to invest in new assets that are needed by the people of Ontario transportation infrastructure. What the leader of the third party is saying, Mr. Speaker, is that she would never change anything, ever. That she would not take a responsible and sensible look at assets that were purchased many years ago, Mr. Speaker, and find a way to make sure that they could work better. She would never do that. She would never take that responsible step. I believe that that does not serve the people of Ontario, would not serve the people of Ontario. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that there is a way to make change that actually benefits the future of the province. New question, leader of the third party. My second question is for the Premier. The Premier is starting to behave as though Ontario's hydro system belongs to the Liberal Party of Ontario. Our public hydro companies belong to Ontarians, Speaker. The Premier is plunging headlong into a Mike Harris hydro privatization scheme. She hid this plan from Ontarians during the election. Will she now come forward and commit to stopping and asking Ontarians first for their approval before she sells off their assets? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Minister of Education, come to order. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I'm laughing because the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change is replaying the attacks that were coming at us from the third party before the election, Mr. Speaker, because we were talking about doing this very thing that we were going to look at the assets. If I read you from the text of the 2014 budget that was introduced in May, the government will look at maximizing and unlocking value from assets it currently holds, including real estate holdings as well as crown corporations such as Ontario Power Generation, Hydro One, and the Lyca Control Board of Ontario. It was right there, Mr. Speaker. That's what we ran on. That's what we brought to the people of Ontario and in fact, the assumptions in the budget were what she ran on as well, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. One of the things I think is clear is that was part of the Trojan horse budget that new Democrats did not support, Mr. Speaker. The member for will come to order. Minister of the Environment, come to order. Receive, please. Manitoba and Saskatchewan are two provinces that actually have protections built in for their public assets. Will the Premier support New Democrats' call for a referendum on the sale of any of our crown jewels? Or will she keep tight-lipped as she was during the election campaign regarding these schemes? We'll just refer the leader of the third party to the text of our plan that we ran on. Our Moving Ontario Forward Plan includes a balanced and responsible approach to paying for the investments so that those are the investments in transportation infrastructure. The funds will be from dedicated sources of revenue including asset optimization of $3.15 billion or 10.9%. That there are assets in the province of Ontario that need to be reviewed. That we need to make sure are working in the best interests of the people of Ontario including the opportunities to find a better rate for the people of Ontario when it comes to hyper, Mr. Speaker to find ways to bring cost down to the people of Ontario. And to make sure that we have the funds necessary to invest in transportation infrastructure including transit. Which the leader of the third party says she supports, Mr. Speaker. Final supplementary. The public hydro system belongs to Ontarians. But the Premier's advisor is calling for bringing in private capital so that the province can sell down its interest. Ed Clark wants to dilute the government interest and wants public hydro utilities to seek out their own new partners, public or private. Now is the Premier going to privatize and sell off public assets without the approval of the Ontarians who actually own these assets? Or will she do the right thing by the people of this province and give them their say on these schemes? Thank you, Premier. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, you know, I believe that there is a role for the private sector while the leader of the third party might want to ask her predecessors when the NDP government signed nine private power generating contracts whether that was consistent with what she's saying now. Mr. Speaker, we will be responsible. We have said that we believe that these assets need to be in the hands of the people of Ontario. Ed Clark has agreed with that, Mr. Speaker. We are responsible to make sure that these assets work for the people of Ontario because we believe that we can recycle, Mr. Speaker, some of those funds and invest them in transportation infrastructure that that is the responsible and sensible thing to do. Thank you. Welcome back, Premier. My question is for you. Premier, you're proposing to eliminate 140,000 childcare spaces in the entire province of Ontario. My question is why do you want to make it more difficult for Ontario parents like me who are trying to find affordable and accessible childcare and that is close to their homes? Can you answer that question for us? Minister of Education. Yes, I am a little bit confused by the nature of the question because I have absolutely no plan to eliminate childcare spaces. Now, the only way I can figure out that the member office might have reached this conclusion is if we eliminate illegal childcare spaces because what we're certainly doing, Speaker, is we have created a dedicated enforcement unit to look at unlicensed home childcare spaces. When we receive a complaint we respond to that complaint very quickly. We have actually got a new bill before the House which, of course, died on the order paper about which we reintroduced and I'll be very pleased in the supplementary to talk about some of the steps that we're taking in that childcare organization. Thank you. It doesn't surprise me that the minister is confused by the question and I can tell you, certainly having spoken with other parents across this province, this is a very real issue for them across this province.  As a parent, I ask you why do you think you are better suited than me to make a childcare decision for my child and every other child in this province? If you actually look at the Child Care Modernization Act what you will find is that for those people who are licensed home childcare providers they will actually be able to increase the number of children that they serve. They will be allowed under the new legislation which we hope we will have cooperation in passing but we will find in the new legislation that we are able to use. However, we also believe that to ensure the safety of children that we should be asking unlicensed providers to follow the same rules that licensed home care providers already include which is to count their own children in the count of the children being cared for. But what we have also done in the legislature is put new measures to ensure that people break the law. Thank you. Thank you, Speaker. My question this morning is for the Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure. Good morning, Minister. Thank you for reaching out to the friends of the Duff Bobby match when you are in Windsor. Thank you to the caucus for being in Windsor of Windsor West and spending a lot of money on this growing Mars scandal. Is this government's unwillingness to disclose crucial information that would shed some light on this $400 million fiasco. For example, Speaker, it refuses to tell us why in 2010 it had to write a new regulation specifically to allow Mars to be eligible for an infrastructure Ontario loan agreement. Minister, will this government finally release this crucial information? Be transparent. Will you shed some light on or fill up the blinds, if you will, on this shady deal? Thank you. Mr. Speaker, let me begin by saying that all of my colleagues had a fantastic time in Windsor. Our meeting there went fantastic. Our party is really super charged. We'll be back here today. And the good people of Windsor, we have every confidence that we will continue to work hard with them to build a strong economy in Windsor and certainly we look forward to the members' advice going forward. It's a great part of our province. We are really proud to have been there on the weekend. Secondly, the member knows we've spent 10 hours together over the last two weeks in Estimates and we'll share all documents and information, Mr. Speaker, and we have been doing that. But Mr. Speaker, I think the member knows full well that I have to take advice from my deputy in terms of documents that may be commercially sensitive. If I were not to do that, I'd be advocating my responsibility as a minister, Mr. Speaker. And surely the member wouldn't want me to do that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to allow Mars to qualify for a $224 million loan sets off alarm bells. I mean, this wasn't the regulation to expand eligibility of the I.O. loan program to a broader range of nonprofits and charities. This was a secondary regulation that was designed to allow Mars to pocket a $224 million loan that they were in no position to repay. I can't admit that for the past four years, it has covered up the fact that it passed a regulation in secret that allowed Mars to qualify for a $224 million loan that this government knew Mars was in no position to repay to the taxpayers of Ontario. Mr. Speaker, it's ridiculous, Mr. Speaker. It is impossible for this government to pass a regulation in secret. All regulations are very public, Mr. Speaker. They're posted in public. They're circulated in public for a period of time even before they're passed. So Mr. Speaker, that suggestion is beyond ridiculous. But Mr. Speaker, let me say this. I will continue to release whatever information that we have, Mr. Speaker, on this and other issues. This government will continue to be open and transparent. But Mr. Speaker, if the members asking us to release something that would be sensitive, Mr. Speaker, that would be advocating my responsibility as a minister to go against the advice of my deputy minister to do that. That would also be advocating our responsibility to the public, Mr. Speaker, and the commercial reputation of this province which would do us great damage. That would simply not be a responsible thing to do. We will be open and transparent. We have been, will continue to be, will release whatever documents we can, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure. From canvassing door to door during the spring election to receiving calls coming into my constituency office, the economy is top of mind to residents of Davenport. Over the summer, I have seen many reports that are saying Ontario's economy is on the right track and that our economic plan is working. To quote CIBC's report released in September, Ontario has been a notable resurgence. Last week, BMO released a very similar report predicting strong growth in Ontario. This is great news for my writing of Davenport and the rest of the province. Would the minister please inform the House about last month's job numbers and how our province has grown since the last global recession? Minister? That's a terrific question. I'm delighted to do that. We have to be careful as we use our resources. They do fluctuate, but what they do is they indicate a trend. I'm really happy to be able to get up on my feet today in this legislature and say for the first time since the global recession, we are now up over half a million net new jobs for coverage in the sector. Up half a million jobs, 514,300 to be exact since June 2009. If you compare us to the U.S., 90% in jobs since the global recession, in the U.S. there are about 120%, Mr. Speaker, just a little bit above that. What that tells me, Mr. Speaker, is that our plan to invest in our people, our plan to invest in infrastructure, our plan to build a good healthy environment, a good healthy business climate is working, Mr. Speaker. We've come a long way, we still have further to go and we're going to keep creating jobs in the sector. Mr. Speaker, this is great news for my constituents in all Ontarians. Our government should be very proud of this growth. As many of us must hear, people in Davenport are concerned about youth unemployment. I know that our government has introduced many programs and initiatives to help youth enter and succeed in our province's job market. The youth job strategy that was introduced with the minister, please update the house on our success to combat youth employment. Thank you, minister. First and foremost, we all believe and understand that youth unemployment is still too high. It's almost double the unemployment rate for the rest of us. That's unacceptable and that's why the premier moved forward with our youth job strategy some time ago now. It's been about a year that it's been in place and already, over 20,000 jobs have been created. The opportunities, Mr. Speaker, have been created for young people across this province. That's really important, Mr. Speaker. Last month alone 12,600 young people found employment in Ontario. Mr. Speaker, that was a fantastic month for youth, but we have a lot of work to keep doing. We're going to keep investing, Mr. Speaker, in creating job opportunities for our young people. We're going to keep investing in our youth job strategy, Mr. Speaker, which is providing opportunities for young people to find employment. We've made great gains today. We've got more work to do and we're looking forward to continuing that good work. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my question is to the premier. Premier, I'd like to share with you a few headlines that I thought you might enjoy. The Globe and Mail September 22nd, Premier win to reveal cabinet plans in bid to boost transparency. CBC News September 25th. Ontario Premier promises more transparency. Releases mandate letter from ministers. Premier, those headlines were less than a month ago, but so much has changed. Here's a few newer headlines. Toronto Star October 14th. Liberal MPP's blocked release of Mars financial details. CBC News October 15th. Liberals won't release details of Mars office tower deal. Premier, your member from Trinity Spadina told the committee quite clearly that he believes in openness and transparency at the right time. So, Premier, I ask you, do you agree with Mr. Dong's statement? Thank you. And if so, thank you. I remind this member and all members, when I stand, you sit. Premier. Mr. Economic Development. I'm really proud to be part of a government with a career. But the Premier, Mr. Speaker, who is absolutely committed to ensuring that as we do business in this province, we do it in a very straightforward, transparent way, Mr. Speaker, and that's very, very important to each and every one of our ministers. But Mr. Speaker, if the members asking this that our Deputy Minister and our legal folks in the ministry are telling us is commercially sensitive, does he really think it would be responsible for us to do that? Because, Mr. Speaker, that frankly would be abdicating my responsibility as a minister if I were to supersede that advice and release those documents. What I will do, Mr. Speaker, is what we've committed to do a number of times in the last couple of weeks, and that's to release all documents, Mr. Speaker, because the documents that may be commercially sensitive will ask our ministry, and I have asked our ministry to release what they can of those documents. I think that's pretty fair. Back to the Premier, your minister was less than forthright. Our requesting committee were very simple and very straightforward. We asked for the original loan agreement between the government and Mars, as well as the original business plan Mars used to justify the loan. Our final request was for the contract between ARE and Mars, which the government has bailed out for $65 million. We offered that the committee would to go in camera to protect any commercially sensitive information. Premier, we went, we offered to go in camera to protect those, that information. Premier, members of your government and committee voted against each and every motion. Each vote was a clear vote against openness and transparency. Premier, when will you state two to your words and will you table these documents to the estimates committee? Thank you, minister. Mr. Speaker, the members inaccurate misinformed over the top silly rhetoric aside. Yes, Mr. Speaker, we will table documents to the estimates committee. What we will have to do, Mr. Speaker, is make sure those documents and the information that we provide is not commercially sensitive, Mr. Speaker. That's our responsibility as my responsibility as a minister it's our responsibility as a government to ensure that we're serving the public interest. I know, Mr. Speaker, the member understands that. I know as an opposition member what he's trying to do here but, Mr. Speaker, I will not advocate my responsibility as a minister to serve the public interest. I simply will not do that. I don't think that's an appropriate thing to do. I don't even think that's an appropriate request but we will provide whatever information the committee's requested provided it's not commercially sensitive. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Your question? The member from Nicobel. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the minister of health and long-term care. I believe that all low paid PSW should receive the promise raise increase for all of the hours that they work but under the Liberal President horse budget the PSW who bates clients gets the raise but those who feed them don't. Those who work in community mental health don't and most PSW don't see the wage applies to their travel time from clients to clients. For all of these PSW this liberal promise is a broken promise. Why did the minister choose to leave so many of those low paid PSW behind? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's great to be back and I appreciate the question as well because it gives me the opportunity to well first of all acknowledge the tremendous critical work that our PSWs are doing right across this province and a number of venues and certainly no more important than in our home care setting and I know that many Ontarians particularly our seniors but those with complex needs rely on our PSWs for their support that's why I am so proud Mr. Speaker to be part of a government that has made a commitment to our PSWs who quite frankly are not adequately compensated where we've committed to increasing their wages by four dollars an hour Mr. Speaker over the next the party opposite the third party did not support the measures that we took and I'm happy to talk about other measures beyond the wage increase that we're committed to as a government in the supplementary Thank you, Mr. Speaker Well New Democrat will continue to push for good living wages for all of the PSW because right now there are so many of them that are falling through the big holes left behind in this liberal promise the minister has the opportunity to fix our home care system but today it is as broken as ever and getting even more fragmented now PSWs still don't know how many hours they have if they will work next week they're still being paid different wages for work of equal value and many PSW do not get their wage increases for the time span traveling we're talking home care they all have to travel why doesn't the minister take this opportunity to fix rather than continue with this broken model for low paid but vital healthcare workers Well Mr. Speaker and I have great respect for the member opposite but on this issue I have to say that the NDP party has no authority to speak and that's because it wasn't in your platform it wasn't our budget a budget that you voted against Mr. Speaker we're increasing the wages by $4 we're also taking a number of important measures to increase and guarantee the sustainability of this important aspect of our healthcare system Mr. Speaker we've added 3 million additional PSW hours in this province we've added Mr. Speaker 2,500 new PSWs in our long term care homes alone in the last five years so Mr. Speaker I'm glad this gave me the opportunity to raise the important measures that we're taking but I'm not going to take lessons from the NDP party when it comes to our PSWs we're working hard we're seeing that progress Thank you No question and then Mr. Speaker Well thank you Speaker Speaker my question through you is to the Minister of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs Minister the people of this province are interested and excited about the government's local food strategy more consumption of local food is better for our health and support of our local agricultural community and economy in my writing in North America we are fortunate to have so many opportunities to shop locally for example the Coburg farmers market offers a great opportunity to support the local producers Thank you Finish please I know my constituents and people across the province are interested in what our government is doing to support local food Speaker could the Minister of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs please update this House on the government's local food strategy Thank you Well thank you very much Mr. Speaker and it's great to have the positive voice of the member for Northumberland Quinty West and I do know Mr. Speaker that the member for Northumberland Quinty West is the owner of the Coburg Farmers Market I also know over the last couple weeks that the member has been spending a lot of time with his farmers as they cob-buy both corn and soybeans and buying locally Mr. Speaker we know it invigorates our local communities we know that it keeps the dollars circulating locally and you know Mr. Speaker the agri-food sector in Ontario generates 34 billion dollars in GDP 40,000 Ontarians each and every day and we will continue our government through the efforts of all of us here to continue to support local farmers markets and people buying local food and in fact Mr. Speaker on Friday Domino's Pizza announced that 100% of their cheese will now be made of 100% Canadian milk Thank you Mr. Speaker and thank you to the Minister for that answer My constituents will be pleased to hear that the commitment to local food remains strong as the local food movement is strong in my community Minister, over the past few months people have taken an interest in the part of the legislation that deals with farmers donating food to food banks The tax credit for farmers was proclaimed on August 2nd and I know the farmers and community food organizations that are interested to know more details about this important amendment Speaker, can the Minister of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs please provide more details on this tax credit Minister? Well thank you Mr. Speaker and I hope I provide a full answer so the member doesn't want a late show As part of the local food act farmers will now be able to get a tax credit for donations of agricultural products to community food organization the first of its kind to get it and I want to pay tribute to the sporting Mr. Speaker to the member from Sardia Laptan who brought forward the private members bill and who joined with me at the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing in Hamilton a few short weeks ago to make this announcement Mr. Speaker not only will this tax credit benefit farmers who generously donated provide healthier nutritious local food for those that need it most the tax credit will forward because of this work this government has invested in stakeholders to develop this policy in fact Mr. Speaker Hamilton one of the local farmers is donating 1,000 pounds of hamburger to the local food bank in Hamilton to make this happen thank you Mr. Speaker Another question? Minister my first question to you so I hope you'll be kind to me in your response Minister will you require school boards including the Toronto District School Board to post their expenses trustees online their expenses their trustees and school boards wish to have a policy that requires them to post their expenses online we're quite happy to support that what the current state of the law is is that school boards are required to have an expense policy which complies with the broader public sector of the state of Toronto with the broader public sector expense policy and in the case of a Toronto District School Board which is what brought all this up when the audit committee came to us and said amongst other things that they didn't have a policy and they were concerned about expenses we actually appointed a third party auditor to go in and look at them and directed them and come in line with that VPS directive and create a policy Thank you supplementary Minister I thought your government believed in transparency and accountability following a string of disasters like the power plant cancellations orange e-health now Mars the list was on and on I think parents and taxpayers have the right to know the expenses their elected officials receive including their trustees especially when we know the funding shortfalls student transportation and special needs and the fact that we are going to debt in the products material at about a billion dollars a month right now the media outlets like the Toronto Star should not have to pay tens of thousands of dollars for FOI requests so when will this house be assured that all elected officials will have their expenses posted online as I say we're quite willing to look at that as an option in our accountability legislation and going forward but right now I have a legal authority to order that to happen when a board has not used the authority which it does has not complied with the law then we have then we have directed them to come in line with the law but quite frankly I think this is why people all over the province need to be thinking very carefully over the next week about trustee elections because the board is required to set an open and transparent policy that complies with the broader public service directive around expenses. If their local board has not followed that direction then they should be looking very carefully at the trustees that they elect because it's ultimately up to the public. New question to the member from Melbourne Manitou. Thank you Mr. Speaker and good morning to you. My question is to the Premier. Premier Justice Paul Bellange's report on the Elliott Lake Mall collapse was detailed, conscientious and included excellent advice for the government. But Justice Bellange also expressed deep frustration that a crucial government report on deteriorating parking structures was not disclosed to the commission until long after the hearings and policy roundtables were over. Even though some inquiry participants had helped prepare that report. Justice Bellange said that had he known of this government report his mandate would have certainly have been affected. How is it possible that the government officials failed to disclose this document? Attorney General Mr. Speaker. Attorney General. Yes, sir. Mr. Speaker the Minister of Community Safety and Correction and I were in Elliott Lake last week when Justice Bellange issue his report and I would like to thank the commissioner and his team for this very thorough study of the Algoma Centre Mall Strategy and I wanted to offer my deepest sympathy again to both families. It was an unfortunate event that happened and I was there for the when this happened and I was there for the funeral of one of the of the victim and I was there again with them receiving with the with the population of of Elliott Lake receiving the report. The commissioner has a very important recommendation in his report and I want to thank everyone who was involved with the commissioner of the individual and organization that contributed to his finding and recommendation. Thank you very much Mr. Speaker. Supplementary. Thank you Mr. Speaker again to the Premier. Commissioner Bellange said there remains a big question his report is unable to answer why didn't the government implement the policy recommendations of this missing report. Justice Bellange wrote if those reasons did in fact exist they should have been known to me but they weren't and this resulted in what he called missed opportunities. Will the government investigate and explain to Ontarians why this document was not disclosed to the community and collection? Thank you very much Speaker and let me first echo my sympathies and condolences with the Parizolo and Alvin family who lost their two loved ones in that tragedy at Elliott Lake two years ago. I want to thank the member from Algoma for his hard work along with this community on this important issue as well and he was present when the Attorney General and I were in Elliott Lake last week to receive the report from the commissioner and while we were there speaker we assured the community that we will be engaging in a very thorough analysis of the report the work that Mr. Justice Bellange has done and has undertaken to get back as he has advised us with specific steps as to how we will implement his recommendations Thank you very good New question? The member from Kingston and the Isles Mr. Speaker my question is for the minister of Aboriginal Affairs Mr. Speaker our government has demonstrated its commitment to invest in people so that everyone has an opportunity to succeed and fully participate in the economy I know that this house is keen to hear how this government will continue to help Aboriginal populations across Ontario Mr. Speaker there are over 9000 entrepreneurs in Ontario that identify as Aboriginal while there is positive growth for Aboriginal businesses and entrepreneurs in Ontario we know that Aboriginal businesses and communities also face challenges this includes difficulty in accessing capital and a lack of community level capacity to leverage economic development opportunities Mr. Speaker through you to the minister as a former business owner I am most interested to know what is our government going to do to ensure that Aboriginal people can get support for business employment and training opportunities Thank you Thank you I want to thank the member for Kingston and the Isles for that question my ministry and our government has been working across government with all our Aboriginal partners to truly advance Aboriginal economic development there are many things that an entrepreneur needs to think about research and undertake earlier this month I announced the Aboriginal Economic Development Fund is now open for business it is a three year $25 million initiative the important part of the plan is to provide jobs and prosperity fund and our overall plan of working to improve the socio-economic outcomes for Aboriginal people through the three funding streams the Aboriginal Economic Development Fund will help Aboriginal businesses communities and organizations create diversify and collaborate in their business activities I can tell this house that improving the socio-economic outcomes for Aboriginal people is an important part of our government's economic plan it's an investment in the future prosperity of Aboriginal people Thank you I stand you sit supplementary Thank you Mr. Speaker The constituents in my riding will be very interested to hear about the opportunities we are creating for Aboriginal people I'm very glad to see that the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs is continuing its work on economic development for Aboriginal communities it is vital for communities to engage and collaborate with each other and that is what the Aboriginal Economic Development Fund is promoting the fund is not only providing support to expand Aboriginal businesses but it is also continuing to invest in new development projects Mr. Speaker, can the Minister provide additional information to the House about the three different funding streams and how the Aboriginal Economic Development Fund will assist Aboriginal communities reach their full potential Thank you Mr. Speaker The elements of the fund consist of diversification and collaboration the first funding stream the business community fund will help create economic opportunities by financing projects that will expand economic capacity in individual Aboriginal communities the second funding stream the economic diversification grants will help Aboriginal communities identify new high potential opportunities in emerging sectors and lastly the third funding stream the partnership grants will help focus on helping communities collaborate to create skills training and employment opportunities across the various regions of Ontario I look forward to working in partnership with Aboriginal communities through this development fund as I said earlier together we can help develop Aboriginal communities to help construct and to add to the infrastructure and the business opportunities of Ontario Thank you Mr. Speaker My questions to the Minister of Transportation Minister of the secrets out your government has been asleep at the wheel for more than a decade while lax standards for trucking licensing have jeopardized the safety of Ontario motorists Make no mistake allowing unregulated trucking schools to turn out unprepared truckers is a clear threat to public safety on Ontario roads and it's your responsibility to act when the safety is compromised Recently a Toronto Star report revealed four unregulated schools identified for enforcement action still being allowed to operate and you've done nothing to stop them Why would anybody believe you will finally get this right after years of your government spinning its wheels Thank you Mr. Transportation Thanks very much Mr. Speaker and I thank the member opposite for that question of course I am aware of the Toronto Star or stories on this particular topic the member opposite will know that here in Ontario thanks to many years of hard work on the part of not only this government but specifically the Ministry of Transportation and all of our road user safety partners speaker that Ontario enjoys having amongst the safest roads in all of North America and the member opposite would also know I suspect speaker if he'd read to the end of all of the stories that I had the opportunity to speak to the Toronto Star make it very clear that our government accepts safety for the people of Ontario and that's why I've undertaken to work very closely with the Minister of Training and Colleges Universities and with industry representatives to make sure that we can come up with a system that allows us to have mandatory energy training for truck drivers in the province of Ontario Thanks very much Mr. Speaker Minister we need action now your dithering and delay only further damages the reputation of reputable schools and drivers while continuing to compromise our safety the Star report indicated that further to the incompetency of allowing unregulated schools to turn out untrained drivers some of your own test centres are not even testing properly it found during a dozen road tests at your Woodbridge Centre not one learner was taken on a 400 series expressway this despite a ministry policy requiring them to do so Minister do you agree with your test centres issuing truckers licenses without ever taking them on the highway Question, thank you Thanks very much Mr. Speaker I think it's important to note as I said in my opening answer about the fact that Ontario continues to have amongst the safest roads in all of North America I think it's important to note that we introduced a training standard for class AZ drivers license training programs back in 2010 and since that time this is where the facts take over this part of the story since that time we have seen the number of fatal conditions involving large trucks on Ontario's roads has reached a five year low having said that we know that more work is required to be done it's why Ministry of Transportation officials will continue to monitor and audit all of our truck driving testing centres and it's why I've also undertaken to work closely with the Ontario Trucking Association Ministry and Minister of Training colleges and universities so that we can work towards implementing a mandatory training program for truck drivers in Ontario, thanks Speaker Thank you Speaker my question is to the Minister responsible for poverty reduction six years ago the Minister wrote and I quote poverty is a problem we cannot afford she said the time for action is now and she said what was called an achievable target to reduce 25% in five years a target new democrats and any poverty people strongly supported clear targets and timelines are the only way to hold the government accountable for promises they make to the most vulnerable her new poverty reduction strategy has no timelines to cut child poverty no target for reducing homelessness why does the Minister have no idea when or even if this government will deliver on its promises once again Thank you for the question because it does give me an opportunity to talk about a very very important initiative that is core to our values as a government and that is the reduction of poverty Speaker we did release our poverty reduction our first poverty reduction strategy which did set a very ambitious goal of reducing child poverty actually look at that report and I urge you to read it you will see we laid out the conditions under which we could have achieved 25% reduction in five years we were very clear about what the province could and should do and we have done all of the things we said we would do the federal government however did not step up the way they would have had to if we were to achieve that goal we continue to call on the federal government to reduce child poverty a priority for them speaker because we are all better off when the least of us are better off so speaker I would thank the member opposite for the interest and continue to work to reduce child poverty Good votes this House stands recessed from till 1pm this afternoon


So here the people booth here at the China sourcing fair. Yes So what's the latest you have? I would like to introduce my smart pen. The smart pen is made a That's a regular pen. You can write on the regular like a Regular paper the hand feeling the head user experience is like a normal writing This is with a camera sensor here The camera sensor can detect there are some small dots So this is special paper special paper actually, but you can bring the old copy by yourself I can give you the fire you can copy as standard every piece of paper is the same Yeah, you can just print. I can also give you the fire to print out Okay, and you can write here for example And then it just goes there for you can synchronize So right The best application is for education for example student can make a note that you can get a teach Stop copy on your phone or tablet and For the teachers they can print out the test the print and the student then can just write answer ABCD And then this can connect to the tablet and can connect and go to the cloud a teacher can know the answer immediately So there's a business. Yeah, how long is the battery life in a pen? And then by you can use three days the writing time you can use it for three hours four hours. No problem. So there's a There's a micro USB for charge. Yeah, and the pen you can change And there's a what kind of sensor does it do is it's just a camera or something special secret technology in there It's a camera. It's cool. It's camera, but and a smart smart solution Make it work through this app right here. Yes That you load on any any Bluetooth device enter it. I was currently is a I'll enjoy only we are making iOS every lunch very soon. Cool. Okay. Can we check this scooter? Scooter this is a This portable scooter Yeah, you can Just keep it here like this You can try No accidents Stand up like this. Yeah And then it folds right is a special foldable scooter. It's foldable Very easy to fold It has front lights also You can just fold the piece and Take this away take an image of All right, you just use it as a hand luggage. Yeah, just move it around You can buy with the seat all without a seat without a seat is a very light just 13 kilometer you can put in a trunk And for example when if you park far and if you go to your office far away You can write this or you can write this a forest student can write this in the in the campus How much batteries inside battery can run after full charge can run around 30 kilometer 30 kilometers This is 25 25 kilo So this is this is very very very important because a lot of people live Few kilometers five three four five kilometer from subway. Yeah. Yeah, and instead of taking a car I can just have this yeah, and also maybe the workplace also one two three kilometer from the subway Yes, this is the solution for the last five kilometer so you can when you drive the car into To the office you can use this connect to your office And also this because it's very light that you can take this in into the elevator and go to bring to your office even No driver's license needed. No, like bicycle. Yes. All right. Let's check some of the other products you have right here But you also do other scooters, right? Currently more folks on this on this one. Yeah, this is 360 camera All right, that's it with a two camera sensor So can you call it 360 you have there the image Three touch the motion they can see here and 360 So it's condensed by Wi-Fi to your phone All right, and what is this This is the bigger tablet With a it's all like an olden one. Oh, you can it's more. It's like all in one PC, but this is with Android system 15.5 inch display enjoy so you can watch video With there's also connection you can make a keyboard. So it's like also like this is a special keyboard for it Yes, 15.5 inch. Yes, and especially that's good for to watch video. What's the CPU? CPU is a I'm based at MTK MTK 64 bit Yes, yes. All right. So this is gonna be a good price Yes affordable affordable price. I think that I use a price is Around like 199 109. This is perfect for the kitchen. Yes living us extra computer. You have some Yes, nice 15.5 inch because people use a lot of internet you can watch internet a streaming video How long battery? Actually, this is not a portable concept. It's basically we don't put a very big battery So it's mainly to keep it connected. Yeah, okay, but there is a battery Okay, and how about all the all in one VR you have VR with we have a VR from entry level to To the high level and G level is like this. You need a phone. Yeah We have this one we support the gyro sensor you have you can connect the phone. This is gyro sensor This is a gyro sensor. Does it work with Android? With Android. Yeah, only Android because I always not support. Don't have micro as micro USB How much like is this how entry how much the retail price in that one? Maybe 10 price I think 29 dollars 29 dollars and then you have something as good as a gear VR Yeah, yeah, because gear has gyro. Yes. Yes, this concept is like a gear as good. Yeah. Yeah, all right And the entry level. This is for example 388 rock chip. Yeah, and then we have the newest is a rock chip This one is the 3399 3399 with super high GPU. Yes Hi a CPU X a core 64 bit. Yes. This is All in one what kind of retail price we talking about those two maybe This one I think that the retail price will be 199 dollars 109 and the cheaper one Chipper one only one this one. Yeah 3288. I think the baby one 169 169 all right. I'll have a cheaper chip as to eat this one Yeah This one well, I think the player price all in all in one solution will be like 129 3128 129. Yes. All right. Does it do? Everything people wanted it does it do accelerometer, but this is just more like a 3d player Yeah, no no no general sensor So not so much for gaming and stuff like that just for if you want to use for gaming I think you have to better use a 3399 So how's your How is the Experience that you have so far. I mean are people going crazy for the olden one or is it picking up the market going fast? You think it's gonna be huge only one before they are not they are not too many contents But with the 3d camera 360 camera, I think that you can get more content you can record a video photo yourself and you can put the content into this and Then I think that you have more content Secondly, there are more and more 3d contents or VR contents video or game available now So I think the market is I mean everybody is great for this. I think that's also where be the very good Gift for a Christmas. You're ready for Christmas. Yes. It will be busy Christmas for you Yes, I think so. So which other product you will have for Christmas? Be very successful. This I think already that's my Kobe answer. It's very it's very Just different design for your reference Right. This is a co-ed Core M. Yeah, so how about this one core M. Can we look here? This is a 1920 by 1080 Very thin still. This is a 13.3 inch 233 yeah small bezel. What's the retail price on that one? Is it is a mic type C? I think that this is a It's type C And what is this just a normal fingerprint only one type C. That's it. Yeah, yeah, very thin this could be a Very popular I think so and this is a yoga style with a metal and a very nice finish You're right. All right And this is like a service style and which Intel do you use and all these ones? This is a chair chair chair trails z8 3 5 0 All right, and these are more like a cloud book. It's a notebook. It's very slim All right, this is more affordable than this one oh Big gap, but very very light like this also Just like crowd book Don't post what's the latest with your tablets, and these are the two-in-one design With a hot keep up So you can get more USB here All right with a hot keyboard the user experience is a just learn exactly like a notebook User experience Intel is going Intel push you a lot make a lot of effort to promote this kind of idea. All right, and You have a rocket MediaTek and a tablet Regular And then we can go over here. You have some some of the latest p.o.s How's it going with us? Those are for the How much I use you have a lot of customers already on the p.o.s All of the world people need smart p.o.s, right? Yeah. Yeah, that's the trend I make it approach it podiums for customers. All right, cool, and there was over here The keyboard you see All right, cool, and they're more different designs right here And in 2017 what's gonna happen at people you have some ideas Firstly, I think we keep doing more and more debate more and more for commercial use tablet because I feel commercial tablet For a consumer Table is going down, but for the commercial user still going up people use this for business can make more money This is a good business. Yeah productivity is a future. Yeah. Yeah, and this kind This is also one of important product education is important I will make more application and make is more value for education And the trend we are going to make of course the VI is a very big important part 360 camera As well as we are make a different media player with different size to catch different market And of course that's Intel we will keep doing Intel products. Cool. So this is this is latest that people here