All right. Okay, well, hi, welcome. Thank you for tuning in to this. So I'm Geoffrey Bonning and I am a PhD candidate at the Australian National University or at the Research School of Earth Sciences at ANU. And this is part of Mount Stromlo's, which is the Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics at ANU, part of their celebration of International Asteroid Day, which is on the 30th of June. So I'm recording this on the 29th of June. So that's tomorrow, which is very exciting. So we're gonna be talking about asteroids, of course. Now, as I go through this, we're gonna be asking a few questions about asteroids, like one, what are they? Where are they from? How do they get here? We have things like meteorites, they're on the ground, they end up here. How do they get here? And how do they get into near-Earth space in the first place? So we've got these things whizzing past the Earth, you hear about near-misses all the time. How do they get there? Where are they coming from? So we're gonna be looking at those kinds of questions. Now to start off with, what is an asteroid? Well, this is a bit more the history, actually. It started out when astronomers were looking in the space kind of between the planets, between Mars and Jupiter in the 19th century. And they were looking for a planet, they didn't find one, but they saw these very small dim objects moving across the background of stars. And they called them asteroids, which means star-like. So they looked kind of like stars, but they're a bit smaller. And now obviously we know that they aren't little stars, they are little pieces of worlds, really. Fragments of broken planets or primordial building blocks of planets in some cases. So when we talk about asteroids, we're often talking about something that's mostly rocky. It doesn't have to be, it could be metallic as well, and we'll look at that later. But we're talking about anything that's bigger than a meter, but smaller than a planet. And planet has a bit of an interesting definition because you have to have cleared the orbit. So you don't want asteroids. If there's other asteroids that are in your orbit and you're sharing with them, but not because of you, then you're not really a planet. So asteroids are anything that's smaller than that. They haven't cleared their orbits yet. And when they're this small, it often means that they're irregular shapes. They aren't nice and spherical. Like the big planets are all round. And that's another category of a planet or another rule to be a planet is that it has to be spherical. And the asteroids are too small to do that. They haven't rounded themselves out yet. So they are often like this. So these are potato and ginger shaped in some cases. So this is Eros. This one is about 30 kilometers long. And this is Itakawa. And this is a near Earth Asteroid that was visited by a Japanese spacecraft in 2006, I think it landed in 2011, or maybe it launched in 2006. It came back in 2010. I got those dates all mixed up. But yeah, so that one comes by the Earth all the time. And it's about 500 meters across. So it's quite large. And this one, so they can also be this kind of a shape. This is a spinning top kind of shape. And these ones are kind of thought to be, and this one could be as well, rubble piles. So whereas some of them might be monolith, single big rocks, some of them are just piles of rocks. And these kind of spinning top shapes that are common. This is Ryugu and Bennu. And they are also on the scale of, I think Ryugu is about a kilometer across Bennu, I think as well as about 500 meters. And they are, yeah, they don't really have, they don't necessarily have a single rock inside them.  As you get bigger, they often get a little bit rounder. And you have Vesta here, which is a bit more of a potato shape again. You can see Eros down there, that other one that we looked at, which is 30 kilometers across. And then we have Ceres, which is a dwarf planet, because it has a lot of the other features in terms of it's fully rounded out. It's a, in a lot of ways, it's a fully realized world. It just hasn't all the clear, it's orbit of the other asteroids because it's right in the middle of the asteroid belt. So it's the biggest of the asteroids or the smallest of the planets. If you want to think of it that way. And then Ceres, again, is actually much smaller than the moon, than the Earth's moon.  So this is, yeah, if it was on its way to destroy Paris, it would be a lot more gas and it'd be glowing hot as it kind of came down, but it would look a little bit something like this compared to it. And that would be very bad for Paris. Now we call the pieces of them that actually fall to the Earth meteorites. So meteorites and asteroids, we're talking about the same kinds of things most of the time. One problem is that we don't always actually know the connection between a meteorite type and what this rock looks like and which asteroid type that belongs to. We're not actually sure all the time, but we know that they're the same object. And the meteorites are just pieces of these asteroids that have fallen down. So the name itself yet means sky rock. And when they fall to the ground, they look a lot of times something like this, a dark rock. A lot of them are found in places with light-colored backgrounds. So that can be places like the Sahara or Antarctica because it makes them a lot easier to identify. They're very flat terrains, places where they stand out. If they fall in a dark place or places with dark rocks and stuff, they're a bit harder to spot. And that dark is the fusion crust and that's a layer of glass that was, so as this fragment of an asteroid into the earth atmosphere, it heated up and melted in that outer layer and made a kind of glassy layer and that's our dark fusion crust there. So if you're ever looking for a meteorite, yeah, you're looking for something that's often a bit rounded and dark as well. Now what are they made of? Now as I was saying before, they are often made of rock, but that's not always the case. Asteroids aren't always made of rock. They can be metal. We have a lot of metallic iron meteorites. In the earth's impact record, there are also things that are a mixture of metal and rock. So some of these are, you know, the fragments of cores of planets. Some of these are from where the core and the mantle of a planet meet together. And some of them are, yeah, just all rock. In some cases that's because they're the crust of a proto-planet that was destroyed, a baby planet that was broken apart or because they are, we'll talk about them later but a primitive aggregate of what was floating around before the planets formed. They can also have ice as well. Ice is another component. So one group of meteorites called the carbonaceous chondrites, they often have a lot of water in them. So they can have up to about like 10 or 11% water bound up in their minerals, often in clays and things like that. So they're kind of from, so their parent asteroids would have been something like a mud ball, especially when they were warmer and initially formed and hotter. Yeah, they would have been like a mud ball world, some of these things. And series that biggest of the asteroids and smallest of the dwarf planets is a little bit like that itself. So it's got a rocky interior with an icy layer on the outside, potentially with water in there sometimes, especially if you're after an impact, you might melt a layer of that and some dust and rock on the outside of that again. So these kind of mud ball worlds are something that happens when you start to add that rock and ice together. When you add enough ice, then you start to get a comet. And so there isn't really a sharp line between an asteroid and a comet. A comet just has more ice in it. And often what makes it a comet is that it's on a very elliptical or oval-shaped orbit. So it might be coming from the outer solar system, the outer solar system originally, falling close to the sun, heating up, evaporating lots of gas as that ice heats up. And that leaves a big tail behind it and that's the tail of our comet. But like I was saying, there's a sharp distinction between asteroids and comets. Because sometimes asteroids actually do this themselves. So Bennu, where there's a NASA space probe right now, Osiris-Rex, observed this mission, sorry, observed this E-mission coming off of Bennu. Antiquities were kind of a jet of rock, a spray of rock coming out of it. And so it's what we call an active asteroid and it's something that's kind of between being a comet and a regular rocky asteroid. And that might be, we were not actually entirely sure of what caused it, but that might be because of there's some ice beneath it in the surface. And as it gets closer to the sun, it heats up, that ice heats up and evaporates and blasts off some of that rock. So how did they form? Where do asteroids actually originally come from? Well, like actually almost all the solid material in the solar system, well, all of it, it was originally star dust and dust in nebulae. And nebulae are these clouds that you see. If you ever go up to the country and you look up at the night sky and you see the Milky Way, and you can see this dark band through the middle of it. And that dark band is clouds of nebulae. And a lot of the actual darkest from it is the dust absorbing the light or scattering the light from stars. So this is one looking a little bit close. So this is the Orion nebula. There's a star forming region actually relatively close to us in terms of the galactic scale. And so it's a huge cloud where stars and, yeah, baby stars and planets are forming actually right now. And the dust from this will eventually form planets and asteroids. And so some of these asteroids that we have, we call them chondrites, are basically just, if you were to squish down the dust in this kind of thing, you were to squish that in these kind of nebulae and squish them down into a rock, you'd get something like a chondrite. You get this everything like the rock and the metal are all finely mixed together. You have those ices as well, they're sometimes in there. So you have all the building blocks for a planet kind of compressed into this rock. And then if you get to get enough of that together, it starts to heat up inside.  The heat inside that world can't actually escape and it starts to melt inside. And when you melt it, that metal, that fine-grained metal starts to clump together and sink to the core and form the core of the planet, like on the earth, whereas the relatively light rock floats to the outside of it and that forms a mantle and crust of the world that we're building. And if there's any ice or volatiles on it, like water, then that might form an ocean or an atmosphere like it did on the earth. So outside of the rock again. Now some asteroids are, they're not that primitive type of object. They were actually part of a body that was on its way to becoming a planet. They were half-built. When they were smashed apart in a giant impact early in the solar system. So they might actually be the piece of a core of a planet. So when you're looking at those iron meteorites, that was a lot of the time from, yeah, a planet that could have been in the solar system but wasn't, or the crust of one of those planets. So a lot of them, yeah, are these fragments of smashed apart, half-built planets. Now where are they today? So you might have heard about the asteroid belt. And it's between Mars and Jupiter. So you've got Mars's orbit here and Jupiter a little bit further out. And the asteroid belt is this cluster of them around there. And it's kind of like a cosmic rubble pile. They're there because the other planets aren't. Everywhere else, the planets have kind of swept out their orbits and kind of either thrown things out or brought them in and incorporated them into building that planet. But there isn't a major planet here. So these things have been free to keep orbiting the sun. And if you look at that from above and you can actually see them all, yeah, it looks like this giant swarm of them. And that makes it look like there's this huge, well, there are enormous amounts of them, especially in numbers. But if you would actually go in there, you wouldn't really see much. It doesn't really look like this. These dots are way bigger than the asteroids themselves. So it does not look like when you're in Star Wars and you're racing between the asteroids to escape the federation, the empire. To escape the empire. Yeah, it's not quite like this. The asteroids are actually way further apart in the asteroid belt. The typical distance between asteroids in the main asteroid belt is twice as far as the Earth and Moon are from one another. So it's like 600,000 kilometers. It's an enormous distance between them on average. You run very little risk of actually running into an asteroid. Now, how do they actually get here? How do they get to the Earth? So in this plot, what we're looking at is you've got the distance from the Sun. We call that AU and that just means Earth is one astronomical unit from the Sun. Jupiter is out at five. And then you go up here, you kind of on that axis, you've got kind of the inclination. So how most of the planets are in a nice flat plane that some asteroids are, a lot of the asteroids are often inclined to that. So they're going like this, whereas the planets are going more like, I don't know if that's clear in the video, but like that, and they're going like that. And what you can see is, so in these clusters of in that main belt, there's brighter patches and there's brighter patches to where there's a lot more asteroids. And you can also see gaps, these lines in the asteroid belt. And those lines are caused, these ones in particular are caused by Jupiter. And Saturn also has a big influence, but just know it just doesn't look like these lines. But that is where there are something called residences where Jupiter and Saturn, their gravity, cugs and pulls on the asteroids in these regions and throws them out. It flings them out or stretches their orbit into long ovals until they start intersecting with Earth and Mars in the interior. So it's Jupiter and Saturn's gravity that actually throws them out of the asteroid belt and into the Inno-Solar system and into paths that intersect with the Earth. So that's how we get these near-Earth asteroids. And ones that actually impact. So either coming past very close to us or impacting us like it did when they went one wipe down the dinosaur 65 million years ago. Now, if that's happening regularly, which it is, then it's a fair question to ask, well, what's the likelihood of that happening tomorrow? And there's a hundred percent chance in fact that we will be hit by meteors tomorrow. It's just that most of them are tiny, tiny, tiny things called micrometeorites. So we actually get tons and tons of this material raining down on the Earth every single day. Raining down at some of it pretty regularly as well. We get these more like fist-sized kind of clumps, meteors, meteorites raining down. And those big ones are much more rare. And we are actually trying to track the big ones that do have potential impact risks. So tomorrow, unlikely to have a big one. But within the next century or so, in the next two centuries, there is not a, it's still unlikely, but it's still not great odds when you look at the outcome of it. So Bennu here is one in, has a one in 2,700 chance of hitting the Earth between 2,185 and 2,199. And that would be very bad. Bennu would destroy whatever region of a continent that it hit and kick up a lot of dust. It would be a very bad thing to have happen. So part of the reason, so part of the reason that NASA sent the OSIRICS-REx mission to Bennu was, one, to understand it because it's one of these carbonaceous chondrites. There's ones with a lot of water on them. So it's kind of interesting for that reason, but also because it's an impact risk. What can we do about it? Is there like studying its structure? If it's a rubble pile, we can't really push on it because it means that it'll just kind of break it apart and it'll have a lot of impactors. So what do you do about it? One idea is that we could use things like lasers and you shine a bright laser at it and it evaporates either the ice or even the rocket's stealth and that then evaporates and acts like a thruster, like a rocket thruster on the asteroid that deflects it away from the Earth. Yeah, that's quite an extreme example. There could be simpler ways simply by painting it on one side. That would take a long time to take effect but it would be much less dangerous than having a giant laser in space. And by painting it, you kind of change. It's in a similar way, but when you have the, if you imagine like hot tarmac at the end of a summer day, it gets really hot, it's absorbed a lot of radiation. So if you were to paint one side white, one side black, for example, and then that dark side will be emitting radiation afterwards and that glowing of radiation will slowly deflect its orbit and change its orbit in the same way that this thruster was, this thruster of like a plume of gas and dust caused by the laser just over a much longer period of time. And impacts aren't necessarily all bad in a lot of ways. So life on Earth may actually owe a debt of gratitude to those carbonaceous contracts, those wet mud bowl kind of asteroids because they are also really rich in organic compounds and organic compounds are the things that life is built out of. We find amino acids, which are the building blocks of proteins and recently actually a protein was discovered in one of these. That doesn't mean that life is on these, it's just that the complex organic things that build life are inside them. So one idea is that these range down on the Earth later in its formation after it cooled down. Once it wasn't a magma ocean anymore, you know, you haven't got just lava everywhere it's cooled down enough to have a liquid water ocean and solid rock and then these organic chemicals rain down with these meteorites and slowly begin to complexify into what we call life today. So impacts may actually have a really important role in the creation of life on Earth. I've got a question slide here, but unfortunately this is a prerecorded version. But if you check out the video there were some questions asked at the end with Eloise and we answered those. So yeah, thanks for checking, thanks for tuning in. See you later.


It is now time for Question Period, the leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier. The government's 2014 budget made a spending commitment for infrastructure of $130 billion. In that budget, the spending commitment was fully costed with no mention of the Hydro-1 fire sale. The 2015 budget made the same spending commitment of $130 billion, but included the proceeds from the Hydro-1 fire sale. So Mr. Speaker, what happened? How does this Premier justify the fire sale of Hydro-1, saying it's for infrastructure, when there's not one IO to have a difference between what they're spending in 2014 and what they're spending now? Mr. Speaker, well, go Blue Jays. Let me just begin by saying to the Leader of the Opposition that we've always been clear that we needed to look at our assets, to leverage current assets in order to be able to invest in the assets that we need for now and for the future. If we don't invest in the roads and the bridges and the transit systems and the water systems and the schools and the hospitals around this province that we know are needed by communities, we're not going to be able to compete. We're not going to be as productive as we should be. Communities are not going to be able to thrive and businesses are not going to be able to expand. Infrastructure is fundamental to our economic growth. Mr. Speaker, it always has been. It has been neglected in the past. We are making the investment necessary in order to be able to go forward. Mr. Speaker, again for the Premier, no one believes the spin that the Hydro-1 fire sale is going for infrastructure. In 2014, the Premier said she would spend $130 billion in her budget and they laid out how they're going to pay for it. Now the Liberals claim the $4 billion from the Hydro-1 fire sale is going to pay for infrastructure. An editorial in Ottawa Citizen reads, A reasonable person might wonder why we need to sell most of a significant public asset just to keep doing what we've been doing before. The real answer, I suspect, is that it will enable the government to quietly shift existing money to help reduce their deficit or pay for their spending programs. Mr. Speaker, when will the Premier admit the fire sale of Hydro-1 is just and entirely to pay for their own mismanagement? Mr. Speaker, the assumption in that in fact explicitly stated in that question is that we are doing exactly what has been done by previous governments. That's not true, Mr. Speaker. Previous governments didn't invest in infrastructure. And in fact, Mr. Speaker, when we came into office in 2003, what the previous government... I'm not getting things quiet for somebody to throw their jobs at. We came into office in 2003, Mr. Speaker. The fact is that there was a lag. There was a neglect in the investment in infrastructure that had been a hallmark of the previous government, including, Mr. Speaker, filling in the hole along Edmonton Avenue where there would have been a subway. We would have had a subway along Edmonton by now if that government hadn't built... Thank you. The member from Penn's Everett Eastings will come to order. Final supplementary. Mr. Speaker, again for the Premier, the $130 billion commitment in 2015 wasn't new. It was fully costed in 2014. The only difference between the 2014 infrastructure commitment and the one in 2015 is a surprise fire sale of Hydro-1. The Liberal Budget is simply a shell game. Everyone in Ontario knows it's a shell game. President and Treasury Board comes to order. Mr. Speaker, my question is what is the money really going for? Is it going for e-health? Is it going to make up for orange? Is it going for the gas plants? Mr. Speaker, are you doing this fire sale to pay for your own scandals and incompetence? Every time the Leader of the Opposition says the word fire sale, I think he's talking about the 407, Mr. Speaker. That's Mr. Speaker, and that's why we asked Ed Clark to look at our current assets and to give us advice on how to leverage them to invest in new infrastructure, Mr. Speaker. That was always part of our plan, Mr. Speaker. We were very clear about it and that is what we're doing. The fact... Member from Nipissing and the member from Renfrew come to order. Carry on. Mr. Speaker, we have talked about the assets and the need to leverage assets from the time we put our plan in place. Mr. Speaker, it was in our budget. It was in our election platform. We're moving forward so we can make the investments that are needed in this province, Mr. Speaker. Any questions? The Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. This week the Minister stood in the House and spoke of the importance of agriculture in the province and I commend the Minister for recognizing that during Ontario Agriculture Week. In his capacity, the Minister should be fighting for rural Ontario at the Cabinet table, making rural voices heard. Instead, the Minister has ignored the plea from 166 municipalities. The vast majority in rural Ontario who have said unequivocally the fire sale of Hydro One is a bad deal for rural Ontario. The Minister knows this fire sale is a bad deal for rural Ontario. Mr. Speaker, when will the Minister stand up for the people of rural Ontario and tell his Premier why this is a bad deal for rural Ontario? Well, thanks. I'm still standing. No, I'm still standing. Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. The question from the Leader of the Opposition is like a fastball down the middle of the plate. And let me tell you why. I was a city councillor in Peterborough, 1998-99 where the government... Mr. Speaker, I went through what was called the Who Does What exercise, but anybody that served a municipal council during that period of time knows exactly what it was. It was the Who Got Done In exercise. That party over there in eastern Ontario downloaded 43% of all the roads of bridges east of right there. Shame on them for not funding that and dumping it down. Order. Supplementary. Mr. Speaker, again to the Minister of Agriculture. First, the Minister kept quiet on the Neonic pesticide issue. And now he sits silent on the Hydro One fire sale while rural municipalities are pleading for him to stand up for rural Ontario. Interesting, Mr. Speaker, that among the 166 municipalities that say this is a bad deal for Ontario is Peterborough and Peterborough County. In the past, the Minister is on the record saying he would keep Hydro One in public hands. The Minister knows that his own constituents and over 70% of residents in Ontario are in this bad deal. So, Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister is will he finally stand up for his constituents in Peterborough, listen to his city council, and say this is a bad deal for rural Ontario? Minister, the Leader of the Opposition just pitched another fastball down the middle of the plate. And I'd like to report, Mr. Speaker, too. I'd like to speak with the Leader of the Opposition said May 5th, 2015. I generally believe that the private sector can do a better job than the public sector. I generally think market conditions should be helpful for a lot of government agencies. And then on May 15th, I obviously like market conditions. I know how the private sector runs a business, runs like a business. Mr. Speaker, he should ask me another question and third ball down the middle of the plate. Thank you. Final supplementary. Mr. Speaker, I get it for the Minister, buddy. We know the... I'm... I'm actually trying to get the... the member from Niagara was Glenbrook. I'm trying to get the attention of them and you're not helping. Ah, no, no, no, don't engage. Don't engage. Please ask your question. Mr. Speaker, again to the Minister of Agriculture, we know the Minister won't stand up for rural Ontario on the Neo-Nikban. We know the Minister will not stand up for his own constituents in Peterborough by virtue of the motion passed by Peterborough City Council. But maybe he can support agriculture on Ontario. The member from Agington, Lawrence, second time. Mr. Speaker, I'm asking the Minister of Agriculture if he will support the incredible work by the member for Huron Bruce, who is putting forward a motion to recognize the importance of agriculture and food literacy and introduce it into the high schools. Mr. Speaker, will the Minister support this great motion today? Thank you, Minister. Mr. Speaker, I think the Leader of the Opposition just walked in the winning run this afternoon against the Texas Rangers with that question. No? And the answer is simple. Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. No question, the Leader of the Third Party. Thank you, Speaker, and I'm proud to be bearing my blue and white today to support the Blue Jays. Speaker, my question is to the Premier. The people of Ontario don't want this Premier to sell off our hydro system, our public hydro system. They have been writing. They have been signing petitions. They have been demonstrating, Speaker. But this Premier has ignored them and has ignored their legitimate concerns. She promised to consult, but so far she's only consulting with wealthy investors. She promised to listen, but so far she's only listening to her embedded banker, Speaker. This Premier doesn't care what the people of Ontario think. Why is she ignoring Ontarians and plowing ahead with the sell-off of Hydro-1 against the public's wishes? Thank you. Mr Speaker, as the Leader of the Third Party knows full well, what we have said is we are going to broaden the ownership in Hydro-1, and I'm sure when she's talking to folks in communities, she makes it clear that that is a portion of the electricity system in Ontario, Mr Speaker, that it's part of the distribution system, Mr Speaker, and the transmission system, and that it is a system that is already mixed in terms of private and public delivers. I'm sure she makes that clear, Mr Speaker. I'm sure she also makes it clear that we said we were going to leverage existing assets, Mr Speaker, in order to invest in the infrastructure assets that we know we need into the future, Mr Speaker, because that's what this is about. It's about the roads and the bridges, the water systems around the province, the transit that we know we need in order to be able to compete globally. Thank you. Supplementary? Well, what I can tell you for sure, Speaker, in Ontario, do darn well know what Hydro One is, and they don't want it sold off. The previous thing she wrote post-Untarians oppose the sell-off of Hydro One. Meanwhile, a significant majority of Ontarians also favour modest increases to the taxes of our largest corporation, Speaker. The government's own report showed that by raising corporate tax rates by 1%, $700 million a year. That's almost double the annual expenditure that they expect to make through their sell-off of Hydro One, Speaker. Why is this premier plowing ahead with this unnecessary sell-off against the will of Ontarians? Thank you. Thank you, Mr Speaker. So, again, as the leader of the third party knows, every municipal leader in this province, Mr Speaker, is looking to the provincial government and also the federal government, quite frankly, for investments in infrastructure, Mr Speaker. They know that they need to be able to make those investments. They can't do it on their own, Mr Speaker. They know they need a partner in the provincial government to invest in provincial infrastructure that links our communities and to work with municipalities to make those investments, Mr Speaker. The leader of the third party talks about who did increase taxes, Mr Speaker. She also knows that when she talks about a corporate tax hike, she's not talking about it in the context of a competitive business environment because that doesn't seem to be a concern of hers, Mr Speaker. She also knows that she has spent that corporate tax hike 50 times. She's spent it on education. She's spent it on social services. She's spent it on infrastructure, Mr Speaker. Thank you. Mr Speaker, this premier knows that over 170 municipal leaders have said no to the sell-off of highway lines. And this premier knows, Mr Speaker, that our tax rate, our combined corporate tax rate here in the province of Ontario is lower than that of Alabama and she should be ashamed to talk with a false choice because the fact is that she had a choice, Mr Speaker. She could have chosen to ask the most profitable corporations to pay just a little bit more. This would allow us to build the infrastructure that this province so desperately needs. But instead, she is cynically insisting on selling off Hydro One. When will the premier do the right thing? Put a stop to this wrong-headed privatization. Just stop this direction and make a better choice for the people of Ontario and the generations to come. Thank you. Mr Speaker, please. Mr Speaker, please. Premier? The NDP is presenting the people of Ontario with a mythical solution. The fact is this is the kind of magical thinking that would not result in the building of transit, Mr Speaker. Because every time there is a challenge put forward in terms of revenue that's needed, in terms of investment that's needed, whether it's in transit, whether it's in roads and bridges, whether it's in health care, whether it's in education, Mr Speaker. The leader of the third party trots out the same number, Mr Speaker and the same solution. The reality is that under her lack of a plan, with her lack of a plan, Mr Speaker, there would be no new alignment of Highway 7 between Kitcher and Guelph. There would be no Highway 401 improvements in London and Highway 417 in Ottawa. There would be no Mealy Drive extension in Sudbury, Mr Speaker because you cannot do those things without the funding to make the input. New question, maybe the third party. Time this Premier needs money, she picks the pockets of everyday Ontarians and makes the society less fit. Mr Speaker, my question is for the Premier. The Trans-Pacific Partnership has a lot of people very worried. This Premier has been happy to hurl attacks at Stephen Harper when it suits her federal leader's purpose. But on his far-reaching secret trade deal, she's suddenly excited by Harper's plans. Despite the fact that the TPP could not only roll back environmental progress made under previous agreements, it could also restrict internet freedom, Speaker. Open Media has said that the TPP will criminalise our online activities, censor the web and cost everyday users money. The people of Ontario want to know, Speaker, at what point will this Premier actually draw a line and say enough to the dangerous provisions in Harper's TPP? She knows that there is a period of ratification now as the details of the plan are made clear. What I have said, Mr Speaker, is that we have some concerns. We absolutely do have some concerns. We have some concerns about agriculture and what the implications of the agreement would mean. We have concerns about the auto parts sector, Mr Speaker. Obviously, the auto industry is extremely important to the people of Ontario. We have some concerns about what the implications would be. But, Mr Speaker, there are also opportunities. If you look across the country, there are opportunities for industry in this country to find new markets, Mr Speaker, and to be able to expand. We are taking a cautious approach, but we are not irresponsibly washing our hands of opportunities that may exist for the people of Ontario. The Prime Minister has warned that the TPP could drive away one quarter of Canada's auto manufacturing. Guess what, Speaker? That's mostly in Ontario. The fact that Stephen Harper is throwing a billion dollars at the auto sector shows very clearly that even he knows it will be bad for manufacturing. And Jim Balsilli, the founder of Blackberry, is sounding alarm bells about the impact of the TPP on the tech sector, Speaker. The people of Ontario, of this province, deserve to know why their premier is jumping on the bandwagon with her federal leader to back this bad trade deal. Why is the premier of this province, Speaker, willing to accept a deal that kills 20,000 jobs in Ontario's auto sector and threatens Ontario's burgeoning tech sector? Not jumping on a bandwagon, not completely supportive, Mr Speaker. I have said that we are concerned about certain areas in the deal, Mr Speaker. We need to see the language. We need to understand exactly what the details are, Mr Speaker. We need to understand the implications for industry in Ontario. But, Mr Speaker, we also need to know where there are opportunities. And, Mr Speaker, this is an agreement that was forged for the whole country, Mr Speaker. And I understand that we are here in Ontario. It is my job to help people in the industries in this province. And I will do that, Mr Speaker. But we also have to understand that we're part of a federation, Mr Speaker. And we need to understand what the implications and the opportunities are for all provinces and territories across the country. So, Mr Speaker, I'm not jumping on a bandwagon. I'm saying let's look at it. Let's figure out where the cautions are. And let's figure out where the opportunities are. We cannot have it both ways. Let's go to the Empire Club and say something totally opposite in this legislature. The chorus of money is growing. Prominent U.S. legislators and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have now stated their opposition to the TPP because it will unfairly benefit big U.S. drug companies at the expense of patients, people, speaker. And because it will push North American wages down even further. Ontario families are already struggling with stagnant wages and cannot afford to be squeezed further, speaker. At what point will the Premier of this province stop going along with her federal leader and Stephen Harper in their race to the bottom and instead stand up for Ontarians? Well, Mr Speaker, saying that there are cautions to be very clear about in this trade deal, Mr Speaker, understanding that there may be sectors like the auto sector, like the supply-managed sector, Mr Speaker, where we have to be very, very careful that there are supports in place. I think that is standing up for the people of Ontario. I also think it's standing up for the people of Ontario when if there is an opportunity for us to strengthen our export capacity, Mr Speaker, to find markets that are going to help our businesses to grow, I think that's standing up for the people of Ontario as well, Mr Speaker. And the fact that the leader of the third party can't deal with that complexity is not the problem of the people of Ontario. It is complex. It is a complex global economy. And the sooner she discovers that, the better off we all are. You see that, please? Thank you. I'm expecting everyone to do that when I stand you stop. New question. Premier, last week, after the census violence that struck the Ottawa Valley, I asked the Attorney General just how many convicted offenders are released despite the refusal to sign probation orders. The Attorney General said she didn't know. In January 2014, Anastasia Kuzak went to the OPP because Mr Barudski violated his probation order, broke into her home and violently beat her. Mr Kuzak said that she thought he was going to kill her. His violent past should have raised every conceivable red flag. Just nine months after Mr Barudski was released on probation, Anastasia Kuzak, Natalie Warmerdam and Carol Coulton are dead, allegedly at his hands. Mr Speaker, why has the Premier failed on her commitment to combatting domestic violence and take immediate action to ensure violent offenders are more closely monitored? Mr Speaker, I know the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services is going to want to comment in the supplementary. What I want to just say is that this was a horrible, horrible tragedy and when it happened it was shocking to everyone involved and my heart absolutely goes out to all of the families and quite frankly to all of the communities it was just a terrible tragedy and Mr Speaker highlights why it's so important that we all work together whether it's on the select committee or the changes that we are going to be bringing forward to legislation to make sure that there are supports for victims, that there are more protections put in place for people who are dealing with sexual assault and violence and helping them to come forward and as I say, the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services will respond to this supplementary. Thank you Mr Speaker it absolutely was a tragedy and we could have tried to prevent it so this government has failed to protect these three innocent women from a dangerous repeat offender who refused to comply with any court ordered restrictions. This government is now putting more women at risk with its decision to cut the length of the partner assault response program from 16 weeks to 12 weeks because there are more than 3,000 offenders who are on the waitlist. Three years ago the Domestic Violence Death Review Committee compiled a list of risk factors for enhanced assessment and safety factors that the government should have acted on to prevent the murders of Anastasia, Natalia and Carol. Their families at the very least deserve an apology and an explanation. Mr Speaker will the Prime Minister explain why she's failing to act on the province's own committee's report to prevent the victims of domestic violence? Thank you very much Speaker and I also want to echo the Premier and all members of this House is that the kind of incident that took place few weeks ago and will know is shocking and is unacceptable. Speaker we know that domestic violence is despicable and absolutely unacceptable anywhere in Ontario. Everyone has the right to feel safe in their home and in their community. All police services in Ontario are required to have policies and procedures in place for managing domestic violence investigations. To support police services across the province the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services have developed the Domestic Violence Occurrences that Ontario have designated Domestic Violence Coordinator to provide a consistent approach for responding to domestic violence incidents. Not to mention Speaker we are putting emphasis on training through the Ontario Police College to make sure that we've got appropriate training for our police officers to avoid domestic violence. Thank you. Thank you Speaker. My question is for the Premier Speaker 20,000 good-paying manufacturing jobs in Ontario and manufacturing sectors are estimated to be at risk from the secretive Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement that the leader of the Liberal Party plans on waiting and seeing about. But let me localize this for you Speaker. In my community of Windsor and Essex County that's as many as 3,000 good-paying manufacturing jobs. A community that is already reeling from the highest unemployment rate in Canada, one that's seen good-paying manufacturing jobs to the lowest wage jurisdictions on the planet over the last 10 years. Speaker is the Premier prepared to tell the people of my community of Windsor and Essex County that she will indeed wait and see what happens with the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Thank you. Well Mr. Speaker there was no waiting and seeing. We had the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Affairs go to Atlanta where the deal was being finalized Mr. Speaker to express concerns to have a meeting with the Federal Minister because as the as the member knows provinces and territories were not included by the Federal Government in the discussions Mr. Speaker they weren't consulted with we didn't have any idea of where they were going we didn't have information about what the issues were going to be at the table Mr. Speaker so we had to insert ourselves into the process which is why the Minister went to Atlanta so Mr. Speaker we are not being passive in this in any way nor are we being passive in terms of supporting our industries Mr. Speaker we are very very actively engaged with businesses across the province to work with them so that they can thrive and you know part of that Mr. Speaker to go back to the question by the leader his leader we're investing in infrastructure that's needed by communities all across the province. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Speaker the Premier has repeatedly said that she doesn't know what to expect from the TPP trade agreement but she can't expect the people of Windsor and Essex County with a 9.5% unemployment rate to just wait and see. Stephen Harper said in September that the auto industry wouldn't like what was in the TPP trade agreement that's why he's bracing for this impact with money announcements Mr. Speaker at what point will the Premier admit that she has absolutely no idea how to help the people of Windsor and Essex County withstand another hit from the expected TPP trade agreement. On this agreement that we have a concern about the auto sector Mr. Speaker there's no doubt about that and we are we are we have been very clear but Mr. Speaker the deal has been negotiated by the federal government the deal has been negotiated without consultation with the premiers of the provinces and the territories so Mr. Speaker it is my responsibility to make sure that we put forward the cautions that we make sure that the federal government understand that we are at risk in terms of a number of our sectors Mr. Speaker beyond that it is very important that where there are opportunities for our industries to grow we take advantage of those opportunities Mr. Speaker and we have to work with the federal government who has negotiated this deal Mr. Speaker to make sure that both those things happen the protections and the opportunities. Thank you Mr. Speaker My question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services. Speaker last Wednesday I picked up the Toronto Star and read about a number of changes that will benefit children and youth in care. I understand that these changes are making it easier to connect these vulnerable young people with a more permanent living situation and hopefully a place to call home. And in an editorial this weekend the star plotted these changes and saying and I quote it's not just the right thing for the province to give these kids a helping hand it's a fiscally prudent move that will make a big difference in their lives as they become adults. In my community of Kingston and the islands the wonderful dedicated staff and volunteers of the Children's Services of Frontenac, Lenox and Addington work so hard to provide safe and nurturing environments for more than 350 young people under their care and I know that they would also be interested in learning more about these changes. Through you Mr. Speaker can the Minister please inform the House on the important changes she announced last week. Thank you Thank you Speaker and I want to thank the member from Kingston for taking such an active interest in what's going on in terms of adoption in Ontario. It's an excellent question and Speaker we made these changes because we recognise there's a need to do more there's a need to do more excuse me to support permanency in our child welfare system Speaker the research is very very clear children experience better outcomes when they have a stable and permanent living situation that's why we're making these changes to strengthen the adoption system so that more children and youth can find forever families among the specific steps we're taking are measures to make it easier for traditionally harder to place children to be adopted and Mr. Speaker we're supporting families to adopt older children and we're expanding eligibility for our adoption subsidies so that more children can be connected forever family this is great news for children care in Ontario thank you Mr. Speaker and I'd like to thank the Minister for the update and for this exciting news I'm glad that more children in care will be connected with a permanent and stable living situation and benefit from the stability and care of a family I greatly admire the foster parents who strive to make a positive difference in the lives of so many deserving children and youth and I know that sometimes it can be hard adjustment as some children and youth that is one reason why proper stability support and of course friendship and affection are so important I am proud that our government is supporting families in this way I'm also glad to read on Twitter that these changes that the potential advocate for children and youth supports can the Minister please explain how the changes she announced will help children focus on their education thank you thanks again Speaker and there's a number of changes in the announcement from last week that we're all very proud of but I want to talk about children in care who are not progressing on the same timeline for finishing high school as children who live with family speaker I think we all agree it's our responsibility to ensure these young people are given every opportunity to succeed and quite often that happens and starts with a high school diploma so last week we announced funding for the ground wards to stay with their foster families past the age of 18 while they finish school this means they'll be able to maintain the stability necessary to finish high school without disruption to their home environment Mr. Speaker we heard from youth and we heard from the child and youth advocate that this was the right thing to do and we absolutely agree it's the right thing for our children and youth and we're very very proud to be doing this so we're here Thanks Bo Jay's Go we're all very excited for this afternoon my question is directed to the minister of health Mr. Speaker some of us may recall way back in the year 2000 the negotiation of doctor compensation when the Ontario government agreed to cover medical liability protection costs in exchange for direct remuneration Mr. Speaker this was considered a barter system paying the soaring malpractice insurance costs taxpayer money to doctors with this government's repeated cuts to doctor service fees coupled with the liberal government's proposed Ontario retirement pension plan is this government prepared to cover the high pension costs for medical staff and doctors offices as you did for medical liability protection costs Thank you Minister of health and long term care Well thank you Mr. Speaker I appreciate the question I'm proud that as part of our agreement past agreements with the OMA we continue to reimburse them for a portion of their liability insurance I think that that's something in fact it goes all the way back to the mid 1980s and something that every government since then has supported but you know I'm not sure exactly where the member opposite is trying to go our physicians and I say this with pride being one of them our physicians in this province as they should be the best paid in Canada we have some of the brightest minds the best physicians and experts providing the highest quality of health care to this province and that's as it should be so we're obviously in a difficult financial time we've asked our doctors to take a modest reduction in the fees that we provide the services that they provide to Ontarians but they are the best paid in this country it's probably North America possibly beyond will remain as such Mr. Speaker thank you supplementary thank you again to the Minister of Health and I would just say that I think that a lot of doctors would disagree with some of your comments the minister claims that there will be no new money available to pay our doctors this liberal government expects the total amount paid to all our doctors collectively to remain the same year after year with no extra money to account for our increasing population our aging population up-to-date medical treatments or the rising cost of running a clinic we certainly do not hear for example the Minister of Education speak in these terms imagine a neighbourhood school with a specific budget for teacher salaries now imagine the same school accepting 60 more students and requiring two new teachers no one would consider it reasonable for all the teachers at the school to give up a portion of their salaries to fund the two new teachers why then does the Minister of Health expect doctors to give up a portion of their fees well Mr. Speaker I'm proud to say as well that the average compensation for our doctors has gone up by 60% since we took office and in fact our budget the envelope available for physicians is remaining the same it's going up by 1.25% this year it's going up by 1.25% next year it is increasing but I have to say to the member opposite that I would have hoped she'd also reference our other healthcare professionals our PSWs which we've increased their wages our nurse practitioners that also we have substantial issues and recruitment and retention of our nurse practitioners and other healthcare professionals as we've committed to do to home care to mental health services as well so we're asking our doctors in the face of a 60% increase far in excess of any healthcare professional to actually take a pause a modest reduction so we can attend to those other priorities Mr. Speaker Thank you Speaker my question is to the Premier last November the Liberal Caucus including the Minister of Education voted to support the NDP's motion calling for the province to work with the federal government to provide low cost child care spaces however after it was cleared that the NDP was the only willing federal partner ready to support $15 a day child care the Premier decided to put partisan liberal interest stop the party order finish please the Premier decided to put partisan liberal interest ahead of the needs of Ontario families I wrote to the Premier in August asking whether she intended to honour or break the commitment her government made last year she has not answered so I ask again will the Premier honour or break her government's commitment to ensure that new child care spaces in Ontario will cost no more than $15 a day Mr. Speaker I do appreciate the steady stream of questions from the mall care campaign it's very encouraging Mr. Speaker and I would say to the to the member Mr. Speaker that it is not at all clear what what a mall care plan for child care would actually cost the province of Ontario Mr. Speaker so of course we have made significant investments in child care and will continue to do so Mr. Speaker child care funding has increased in Ontario from $532.4 million to close to over a billion that's a 90% increase Mr. Speaker we are committed to child care we understand how important it is Mr. Speaker and we will continue to remember to do so supplementary it sounds to me like the Premier is not willing to honour her commitment Minister of Transportation second time in order to sustain child care spaces in good neighbourhood schools less than a week ago the government reannounced a promise to provide child care that is close to home meaning they would be in schools but since 2011 the Minister has forced the closure of at least 88 schools across the province five schools in Windsor Essex are currently at risk of immediate closure how can the Minister promise child care spaces in schools when she is actively forcing the closure of good community schools education Minister of Education yes and I was very pleased last week to announce the beginning of a program for investment in new child care spaces about 4,000 new child care spaces we did the first 13 of those child care what the member opposite is missing that in some cases what we are doing is actually creating the opportunity to take a child care that was in the community and move it to a school or take a child care that was previously located in one school and build it in a new school and that's something that we intend to continue doing some of those spaces are for 4 and 5 year olds before and after care the particular group of spaces we announced last week are our pre-schoolers in fact we announced almost 800 new spaces just last week hello your question to members of the Agent Court thank you Mr. Speaker my question is for the Minister of Labor women and men should be equally footing in today's society early this week our premier spoke about a group of inspiring Canadians to advocate for women's rights our government has demonstrated commitment to women's equality by helping women better access to work force through major investment in education, training programs full day kindergarten and child care and also through the work of Pay Equity Commission Ontario's women's directorate and Ontario Human Rights Commission these independent provincial agency help to increase economic security of women and eliminate systemic barriers so however Mr. Speaker each day of my writing of Scarborough Agent Court hear the same issues there's a wage gap between genders that unfairly disadvantage women in our problem Speaker to the Minister what is being done to ensure that Ontario's move forward eliminating the wage gap thank you Mr. Speaker thank you Speaker I'd like to thank the member for this very very important question on a very important issue Speaker the sad fact is that the wage in Ontario do not earn as much as men and that needs to change as a member knows Speaker Minister McCharles and I previously announced our gender wage gap strategy steering committee the panel is made up of two external advisers Linda Davis the past president of the business and professional women's club of Ontario Dr. Partibial Singh is a leading expert in human resource management and in labour relations we've got the Pay Equity Commissioner for Ontario Bella Heineck and Nancy Austin from my own ministry the member's question could not have come at a better time Speaker today we're releasing our consultation paper announcing the kickoff of October 26 right across Ontario Speaker this is a very important issue whose time has come we're committed to developing a strategy that's going to close the wage gap between men and women thank you thank you to the Minister for the answer I'm happy the consultation will begin shortly and I'm looking forward to the recommendations that will put forward during this process I also know Mr Speaker this is a complex issue caused by many different factors I know that all women across economic spectrums are affected by the wage gap but the gap is more pronounced for women who are minorities aboriginals newcomers are living with disabilities last Saturday Mr Speaker I host a health and government fair in my writing of Scarborough Aging Court from New Canadians about the wage gap issue the existence of gender wage gap is indicative of barriers of facing women that prevent them from making full contribution to the provincial economy Mr Speaker three year to the Minister can he please inform the House the goals of the steering committees and the steps it will take to achieve these questions thank you Speaker I'd like to thank the member again for that excellent question our goal clearly is to increase awareness for women in Ontario by closing the gender wage gap to help us do that the consultations are going to examine ways that government, business, labour other organizations, even individuals can work together to identify opportunities, remove the barriers and close that gender wage gap it's going to examine the role of women at work and their families in their communities and how this impacts on the gap following the consultation speaker the committee will be responsible for providing me along with the minister responsible for women's issues with recommendations that can assist us in achieving the goal we all have of closing the gender wage gap in Ontario I look forward to seeing the recommendations that come back from this committee taking the next step necessary to make Ontario a fair province Speaker as I said earlier this is an issue whose time has come we aim to deal with thank you I have a question to the Attorney General through the speaker Mascoka victim services usage is growing exponentially over the past five years alone the yearly caseload jumped from 185 to 822 individuals that's a 444% increase this local organization provides critical immediate support for individuals and families faced following crime or tragic events they do tremendous work Speaker because of the changes the Liberal government made to the funding model Mascoka victim services is being forced to do more with less a funding cut of 10% has left the organization scrambling to find ways to effectively serve their clients Speaker will the minister explain why the government cut funding to Mascoka victim services Attorney General it's really a good question because you know in the past there was no consistency with these program so a few years ago we did review the program we did analyze it and we now attributing the money to the request for service so but we know that in rural community and in the north you know the population is not there but they need the service so we have a special addition in the envelope for rural and northern community so if and it's being reviewed every year and if there is an increase then the envelope is readjusted so I'll say to the member please you know speak to me and I will give more detail with the information in hand thank you very much supplementary again through the speaker to the attorney general as the trend shows demand is increasing for local services provided for victims with the hard work of the organization over 50 volunteers that are doing their best to meet the increasing demand Mascoka victim services has had to resort to producing a fundraising video to help make up their budget shortfall speaker shouldn't the increasing access to victim services be a priority for the liberal government regardless of where in Ontario person chooses to live Mr. Speaker of course you know victim services is a very very important program and support for those who need the service so that is why in 2015 we created the victim crisis assistance in Ontario and as I said in my previous my previous answer you know we are not reducing the overall envelope instead we are redistributing the funding to meet service demand and under the new funding model 28 of the 47 agencies that deliver this program receive an increase but again you know these programs are revised regularly and if there is an increase in the demand the envelope will be increased thank you very much Mr. Speaker thank you speaker my question is for the Premier last year my colleague the member for Hamilton Mountain raised the issue of a young man Cameron Leflam who has autism and requires intensive one-on-one care and the supports provided through a day program the issue then was that he was about to get out of school and his mother needing to work full-time couldn't afford to put him into a day program happily funding was provided and Cameron received the care that he needed and his mum was able to continue to work but now the families learn that the funds available are going to run out this November and will not cover the full annual cost of her son's day program after all what exactly does the Premier expect this family to do if the funds aren't available speaker Mr. Children and Youth Services thank you speaker and I want to thank the member for the important question and as always as I do with the credit for Children Youth Services from your party I'm always happy to discuss cases with her to the extent I can I can't get into specifics of a case here of course but we work I think very well in terms identifying issues and her writing and other writings and our regional office often reaches out to the families who may need additional support and I know I know very well that families caring for young people with autism face very unique challenges speaker and we are very determined as the government to make further progress for these children and their families and that's why our government speaker invest nearly 100 million 190 million dollars annually in autism services and that's an increase of more than 200% since 2003 but we know there's more to it supplementary well speaker there's no doubt that this family was grateful that the work of the member from Hamilton Mountain with this minister helped resolve this case several months ago but the problem is this young man Cameron Laflam has not been cured of autism he still has autism speaker and still needs the program they're in crisis right now they can't wait for any other solution this young man has aged out of school he's been placed in a day program that works where he actually gets the care that he needs the solution is clear in fact the minister helped find it but not only are the liberals pulling the rug out from under Cameron now several months later but they're failing thousands of families just like his Cameron's mom can't quit her job in order to provide full-time support for him while waiting years for funding to come through when is this government and this premier going to commit to helping Cameron's family and others like them in a permanent way that helps them over time not just for a small window the minister of community and social services minister of community and social services thank you mr. speaker and certainly just as my colleague the minister of children and youth has said in individual cases of course we would welcome further information I'm not aware of this particular situation but if the individual is now an adult the individual needs to and the family need to consult with their local developmental service organization and I would certainly urge the member to consult with my ministry we are dedicated to ensuring that people have appropriate services we acknowledge the great efforts that families and caregivers do play the role that they play and their commitment to the individual that they are caring for and this is precisely why in our budget we did increase the budget for developmental services in this province new questions, member for Kitchener center thank you mr. speaker my question is for the minister of health and long-term care minister infertility is a very serious medical issue that affects about 1 in 6 families here in Ontario all different types of families want to know the joy of bringing a child into the world but for some they're not able to do so easily going through infertility treatments can be extremely trying on people physically, emotionally and financially and I can tell you that I have a family member who knows this all too well there have been a number of constituents in my riding at Kitchener center who have come to see me to ask how our government is supporting Ontarians who are facing these challenges as they try to conceive Mr. Speaker can the minister please tell us what our government is doing to support people who do want to grow their families who might be eligible for these services good question minister of health long-term care thank you Mr. Speaker I want to thank the member from Kitchener center an important question for thousands and thousands of Ontarians she's absolutely right that the implications of infertility can be incredibly emotionally painful and unless you've experienced it personally you can't even begin to fathom the impact it can have on your life and that of your family until recently access to fertility services has not been possible for many families because of the cost involved but last week I was extremely proud to announce that our government is expanding access for all Ontarians regardless of sex or gender sexual orientation or family status families come in all shapes and sizes in this province Mr. Speaker and this program will begin in December of this year for women needing access to in vitro fertilization our publicly funded program will continue to the cost of one cycle of IVF for all women under the age of 43 Mr. Speaker thank you Mr. Speaker and I want to thank the minister for that answer and I also want to add that family really is a gift every day I'm very proud of my husband and my three awesome kids children are the future in this province and in our country and everyone deserves a chance at parenthood I know that my constituents in Kitchener center are going to be very encouraged to hear about this news that as of December that our government is going to be expanding access to all Ontarians who are struggling with infertility Mr. Speaker I'd like to ask the minister of health and long-term care what are we doing to ensure that fertility services are not only accessible and equitable but are also safe thank you minister thank you Mr. Speaker Mr. Speaker patient safety remains my number one priority as the minister of health and long-term care and Ontario will be working with the College of Physicians and Surgeons in order to provide stronger quality and safety oversight in the infertility sector and our government is also working to improve safety and accessibility by expanding the definition of what one cycle of IVF is Mr. Speaker it means Ontario is going to contribute to the cost of one egg retrieval and also cover the transfer of the egg retrieval and also cover the transfer of all viable embryos one at a time what's known as single embryo transfer by expanding this definition patients get more chances to conceive and are more likely to have a safe healthy pregnancy and delivery in fact single embryo transfer will dramatically reduce the chance of having multiple births multiple pregnancies and reduce the associated morbidity and risks and costs associated with that Mr. Speaker Thank you Mr. Speaker my question is for the Minister of Health in long-term care According to Matthew's house hospice in my riding the organization's unfunded four beds hosted 90 patients last year affording them a dignified death this year Mr. Speaker that number sits at 41 clients so far in addition it's community hospice service supported 487 individuals last year and to date the organization has already been there for 380 clients Mr. Speaker the government has promised to fund 20 new hospices they promised this in the 2014 budget but Matthew's house still isn't funded and we're nearing the end of 2015 so Mr. Speaker can the minister tell this house when the government will step up and fully fund Matthew's house hospice in Alice Thank you Mr. Speaker and I agree with the member opposite that by reputation Matthew's house does an extraordinary job for individuals and families in extremely trying emotionally difficult circumstances that's why we've made a commitment as he mentioned as government to fund an additional 20 new hospices across Ontario and I've asked my parliamentary assistant John Fraser to the member for Ottawa south to actually lead a process where he's developing a palliative care strategy renewing our end of life strategy we were the first government to actually in 2005 bring in an end of life strategy and attach more than $100 million to that contribution we were the first government in this province actually to fund hospices in the first place we've made that commitment Matthew's house has a great reputation we're working directly the ministry is Matthew's as well as with our Lynn on this particular issue Thank you Mr. Speaker back to the minister and I thank the minister for that answer and I also want to take the opportunity to also thank the Honourable Member for Ottawa south Mr. Fraser your parliamentary assistant for touring Matthew's house hospice just recently that was very good of him to meet with the staff and volunteers but I remind you Mr. Speaker that other hospices in the area the south end of Simcoe County the only hospice we have available beds in Richmond Hill when you see numbers like 80 90 clients having a dignified death at Matthew's house each year year after year you didn't have to pay for any of the bricks and mortar you didn't pay for any of the overhead so far you are paying for a couple of psw's through home care it's a good deal they've diverted at least 60 people from dying in the local hospital our very small Allison Stevenson Memorial Hospital it's a fraction of the cost to spend your last days in palliative care in great care with the volunteers and staff in the local hospice rather than the hospital so Minister I ask you again when can you announce that you're going to fund Matthew's house hospice in Illinois thank you Mr. Speaker and I want to I think as the member opposite has alluded to I want to commend I know there are a tremendous number of volunteers as well as the staff that work at the hospital that are doing an incredible job day in and day out for the individuals through Matthew's house the hospice that member opposite is referring to we've made a commitment to fund 20 more hospices we stand by that commitment I think the member opposite would appreciate that as we had in 2005 with our end of life strategy we're taking a very principled and coordinated approach to this across the province to identify those hospices like Matthew's house that are deserving of the funding in this new commitment I would request both Matthew's as well as the member opposite give my parliamentary assistant the member for Ottawa South that modest amount of time remaining for him to be able to consult he mentioned that my PA had visited Matthew's house but given that time to do the appropriate work so we can do this in a coordinated proper fashion thank you I want to add my own go J's go but I would also have to make an announcement that I'm saddened this is the last day for our pages I would like to offer us on behalf of all of us gratitude to this wonderful group of pages who have served us well point of order the member from Eglinton Lawrence Mr. Speaker I wonder is it an order in this house or one member to take pictures of other members while they're in this house I thought you made it very clear there are not to use camera devices to take pictures of members while they're in this house the member from Eglinton Lawrence is indeed mentioning a protocol and a convention that is not to be done I've spoken about this before that all devices are not to be used for anything else other than their personal use and quietly and unassumingly I would anticipate that all members are honourable in that way that they would not use that for any purpose other than what has been agreed upon I would also like to take a moment to point out to you that regrettably and I say this with all concern that if tweeting is going to be taking place about issues that happen in this house I highly recommend that it be accurate if it's going to happen I would recommend against it so there are no deferred votes this house stands recess until 1pm this afternoon


enthusiasm made your eyes burn said you have a secret let me feel allsy distraction set this well aside and see over size it's cold Right, that's a shortage driver on the way to the Pit-lochery golf club and I don't know a lot about the golf course itself it looks very picturesque as is everything in Perth that we've seen so far short drive, pitlockery is one of my Nan and Grandads favourite places to visit when they used to travel a lot through Scotland so we are looking forward to getting on that first saw that's a bad drive the drive up here to pitlockery has got to be one of the most scenic journeys I've taken certainly to get to a tea time this place looks stunning we'll just see how it matches up in terms of the golf course Onwys. What views to start your game of golf with? Fast learning golf in Persia, it's about a bit more than the golf in the sense that we play three courses all parked and all been in fantastic condition. But they all have incredible views as well. It's a gorgeous place to play golf, but plenty of other things to do as well. I would imagine if you into that outdoor lifestyle, if you like biking and walking or whatever all and fishing, we've seen so many people fly fishing. It's just, it is a really nice spot and we're up on the fourth tee. I know that this is the highest point, but that's an incredible view. She was the highest point. Well, it's not. The sixth is quite a bit higher as well. A few stays the same. I'm not sure where that's going to line. Is that bunker? No, it's not. It's pretty damn good. It's great enough and elevated tee. It just seems easier. I don't know why, but it always seems easier and from high up. There are a number of courses far too many for me to reel off in this Perthshire area. And we stopped in, I think it was at Comrie Golf Club yesterday, also at St. Philion's and their lovely little nine old courses, but in absolutely immaculate condition. I mean, you'd be you'd be more than happy to play on them all day long. And the fact that they're nine holes, you assume or I would assume that the quality is not as good, but that's a big mistake on my part, because honestly, the greens were immaculate. I've never seen anything so pristine in those two golf courses. Comrie and St. Philion's. About 70 yards back there is the teaching for hole number eight, it's called Bruce's Lookout. And it's said to be where Robert the Bruce came and fled his enemies, camped out, pitched up here to see that same enemy approaching down in a valley. He picked a good old vantage point to be fair. Right, hole number 10 and it's stroking next one. And I've got a question for everybody. When I get on the stroke one, for some reason, it's like a challenge and they always want to do, I want to par it, I want to birdie it, I want to see it. Obviously it's the toughest hole on the golf course. So for me, that's like a bit of a gauntlet. Is that just me or does everybody try their best on stroke one? You should try your best on everyone, shouldn't you really? Right, black and white marker post. Oh, hello and what's the best driver of it in nine holes? Where does it get to? We're sort of halfway up the hill and we should be. I think we're going to be playing blind back over that brow, it looks like. Well, I've just taken up while quite a decent walk to the brow, to be honest with you. And I can see my drive is clearly not long enough. But playing blind is a black and white marker that will disappear when I get to back to my ball. So it's a matter of trying to recall a line. But I reckon I've got the best part of. Well, there's almost 200 in. And that's why it's stroke one and is right on the marker. Be good. That is right on the marker. I can't see the green. We've got a camera up there, so you know better than me. But that is right on the button. Oh, that was nice. Will you get over the brow and it's total disappointment because I really thought it never moved off that black and white marker. It was right on for the flag. And I've got the you've seen the camera and maybe seen it land, but I haven't. But I'm assuming it's long. I am gutted. Joe, I'm even going to check in the hole. It's a bit optimistic, but I have no idea where that's gone. I am gutted that that ball is not in the middle of the green. It's an optimistic walk. Now, I know a lot of you are probably asking what happened on stroke index one and well, I'll tell you what happened. I lost my golf ball and it took me two more shots or this par three to get over it because I didn't have the benefit of the camera on the green of viewing that footage, which you obviously had. So I don't know what happened. I must have gone long right the way over, but I was gutted because it was such a good iron shot. But anyway, we've got on the green and super par three that. That follows it. Birdie would be nice, wouldn't it? Just to put me back in a good mood. Go on, ball.   What a great little corner of the golf course. This is superb. Right, we're just coming to the end of our game. We've just seen Harry and Graham. We were just going up, what is this Graham? That's a second hole. And this is the big course, isn't it, Harry? How old are you? Seven. You're seven. And are you any good at golf? You're good at golf? That's not bad, is it? Does it get you away from your son? Do you play on a PlayStation or anything like that? Or get one of them other games? So do you prefer golf or a tablet? That's the perfect answer. What do you call this club, Harry? That's your smasher. And what about this one here? A wacker. A smasher and a wacker. I'll tell you what I could do with two of them in my bag. Well, listen, I hope you enjoy it. I hope at some point you prefer the golf than the tablet. But in the meantime, keep on getting better at golf and keep on enjoying it. You take your time, Harry. I'll put it up for you. We'll go up there. Is this with a smasher or the wacker? This is the smasher. I can see why you call that a smasher. That's better than I can do. That's pretty good. It is very good. We happy? Yeah. Yeah? Are we going on the buggy now? Let's have a go with the buggy. Oh, this is your dad's one, is it? Is this your dad's smasher or wacker? It's an iron. I am going to clue what I'm on about really, have I? So the deal was, he said I'll come on the video as long as you get to go with the buggy. Is that the deal? Let's go then.  You need a buggy. Let's go. It's quite quick, this one as well, isn't it? Back in the 15th green and I don't know the holes in but I know we'll be making our way back down to the clubhouse and I'm conscious that we won't get as good a vantage point as this to finish the video. So this is where it ends. And what a position to end it, it's, I mean, you've seen the views, if we've made any type of video then it will speak for itself. It's been absolutely stunning in terms of some of the positions you get to. And the views are incredible. It's a really good golf course. I said earlier on, I think it's a friendly golf course and there's a bit of room there. Everyone can have a bit of fun and if you're playing a bit of a game you can put a score together. Another great golf course in Perth.


We're meeting today in an era when the United States is grappling with the legacies of histories buried and unacknowledged and the flux we're all living through and the debates swirling around the emergence of new voices in public debates give resonance I think to James Baldwin's observation that history does not merely refer or even principally to the past. On the contrary, the great force of history comes from the fact that we carry it within us and are unconsciously controlled by it in many ways. History is literally present in all that we do. That's true for all but I think there's an interesting particular resonance for Muslims looking back at their own history where the words and the deeds of the Prophet Muhammad and to a lesser extent of his companions the followers who helped form the first Muslim society have been said as gold standards of how Muslims live today. The subsequent eras that were closer to the time of the Prophet are also looked back for inspiration for contemporary Muslims too. Though the shake who strenuously avoids politics will never say it, I will. I find the evidence of women riding horse and camel back through the Levant is a resonant commentary on Saudi Arabia's historical ban on women driving which of course changed last June. Though it should be noted that it was also accompanied by imprisonment and torture of the women who campaigned for it, some of the women who campaigned for it, as well as more widespread restrictions on women's free movement and agency through the guardianship system. I think the madrasas filled with women learning fiqh and hadith in the 9th, 10th century makes a mockery of the hostility to women's education by the Taliban and other groups. So in summation, even if 39 of the 40 volumes remain buried, it's terrible news for real academics but I comfort myself that just the news of this accidental feminist history of women scholars and jurists remains a powerful tool for women activists and scholars and their allies as they contest their rights to access to public space and positions of power. At the very least it provides a long view, a suggestion of other times of other mores that women and their allies can bring into the public squares as they fight for their God-given rights. Thank you.