It is now time for a question period, the member or leader of the Registrar's Law Office. My question is to the Premier. Premier, we've lost 300,000 well-paying manufacturing jobs under the McGinty-Wayne governments. And this past week, not only Leamington, Southwestern, the entire province was devastated by the news that almost 800 jobs, direct jobs, will be leaving as Heinz shuts down that plant. Heinz's catch-up will no longer be made in the province of Ontario, tossing 800 families out of a livelihood. Premier, I need to ask you, in light of the job losses in manufacturing and the latest in Leamington with Heinz, do you still believe that the erosion of the manufacturing sector in Ontario is a myth? Thank you. Thank you very much Mr. Speaker. And my thoughts, first of all, are with the workers and the families of the people at the Heinz plant, Mr. Speaker. It's obviously of great concern and it's very disappointing that this decision has been made. But I want the leader of the opposition and people of Ontario to know that we connected with Heinz, that we did everything we could to make sure we understood what the basis of the decision was, Mr. Speaker, and to try to intervene on September 12th, Mr. Speaker. I called Mr. Brian Arbeek, who's the Managing Director for Heinz Canada, to discuss the potential implications of possible job cuts. We weren't sure exactly what was happening, Mr. Speaker. And that discussion focused particularly on the federal initiative to remove Canadian food packaging standards. And I wanted to know from Mr. Arbeek where that was a factor in a decision, Mr. Speaker. We followed up October 31st, November 5th, November 8th, November 11th. So, Mr. Speaker, we worked very hard to make sure we understood why and if this... Thank you. Supplementary. You know, it's a disturbing answer from the Premier, who just doesn't seem to grasp the enormity of the impact of lost manufacturing jobs in Leamington, in Niagara, Hamilton, in Eastern Ontario. You don't seem to understand that it's been a decade of policies that have increased hydro rates now among the most expensive in North America, have layered on more and more red tape and bureaucracy that's slowing business decisions down. It's been an increase in taxes. Premier, since you have assumed the office of Premier of the province of Ontario, we've lost 38,000 well-paying manufacturing jobs of province alone. Isn't this a wake-up call to you? That you've done something wrong when it comes to managing our economy? Isn't it time to go down a very different path? How many more manufacturing jobs like Heinz are we going to lose before you get a wake-up call and try part of our fight? Mr. Speaker, since the economic downturn, we have drawn in and there have been over 400,000 jobs created, Mr. Speaker. So, we have more than replaced the jobs that were lost as a result of the economic downturn. I have never said, Mr. Speaker, that there aren't changes in the manufacturing sector. There absolutely are changes in the manufacturing sector, Mr. Speaker. We are moving to an era of advanced manufacturing. Some of the issues that we are addressing with our youth job strategy have to do with making sure that young people have the skills that they need in order to be able to take part in the new manufacturing sector, Mr. Speaker. But the purpose of my answer was to make sure that people understand that in this particular instance, Mr. Speaker, and in all of these specific instances, we are doing what we can to make sure that we keep those jobs, Mr. Speaker. I had a long conversation with the mayor of Leamington on Saturday morning, Mr. Speaker. We are on the ground working with the workers and my hope is that we'll be able to find some solutions. Order. Supplementary. Final. I think the Premier's answers are insightful in the way she thinks about these issues and how we would take a very different path. She seems to think these things just happen, that they are the result of some circumstances beyond her control. Use the term that the decision was made. Premier, we have brought forward in this House hundreds and hundreds of times the evidence that run out of control, out of control hydra rates are closing down the manufacturing sector. Outdated labour laws, high taxes, more and more red tape from the provincial government. I worry that your ideology blinds you to need to take a different path when it comes to our economy to opening up our province for investment. My team and I, we have a turnaround plan for the province of Ontario, one that will say jobs will come first in our province again, one that says that Ontario can lead. I'm a vision of an Ontario that makes things for sale across the world, that actually rebuilds and strengthens our middle class with more advanced manufacturing jobs. Don't just seem to understand that as a result of decade of liberal decisions that have caused us to become competitive at the bottom of the list, our plan to put us at the top of the list, why don't you take some of our ideas and bring good jobs back to the province. Thank you, Premier. The ideology that blinds is the ideology that would take us to the bottom of the pack would fire people across the province, Mr. Speaker. And would drive us down, Mr. Speaker, would not invest in the skills and in the people that we know, Mr. Speaker, are going to take this province forward. I spent time in Waterloo on the weekend, Mr. Speaker. And what we know is that investment in our skills, investment in our innovation is what is going to make us strong. I am absolutely not happy that there are manufacturing jobs that have been lost, Mr. Speaker. But what I know is that there are more jobs coming to the province, Mr. Speaker. There is an outflow of jobs and there is an inflow of jobs, Mr. Speaker, but firing people and racing to the bottom is not going to get us where we want to go. A member from Prince Edward Hastings will come to order. New question? Leader? The problem you understand, Premier, is that for the 800 men and women who lost their jobs at Heinz, they have hit bottom. They've hit rock bottom. And we've seen the same thing with Vicks Pickles in Dunville, Red Pass Sugar in Niagara Falls. We've seen the same thing with Kangro. The food processing sector is emptying out because of high hydro rates, runaway red tape, outdated laws in our province. It was devastating news and there should have been a clarion call to you when U.S. Steel Stelcliffe said they no longer make steel in the city of Hamilton. So let me ask you this. You say your solution is actually to do more of the same, effectively to spend money on a deficit and tax away to prosperity. Those are ideas that the NDP drove us into the ditch and you're going to drive us into a deeper ditch. So what are you prepared to change? Are you going to get hydro rates down? Are you going to clear out the college of trade so we can actually attract more student trades and put them to jobs? And what option are you going to take from our plan? We'll actually bring jobs back to our province and restore hope for those who are losing hope because your plan has taken us to work. Thank you, Premier. Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that the leader of the opposition speak with the Ontario food processors and go to Conestoga College and look at the technology that is being used to train young people. And I am absolutely convinced that we have a bright future in food processing in Ontario. It's true that the technology in some of the plants has to be changed. It's true that there have to be investments in order for advanced manufacturing to take off. And it's true that we need to make sure that young people in this province understand what the possibilities are and understand how the businesses in this province can include food processing. So I am absolutely committed to working with the food processing industry. I am very disappointed about the height situation, Mr. Speaker. But that is not me. And we're going to pull off our hands and say that the people who worked in that factory, A, will never have a job again because I don't believe that, Mr. Speaker. I believe that there are many possibilities and we're going to work with the community to make sure that we realize those possibilities. As I've said many times, I don't doubt the Premier is sincere. I do believe you are committed. The problem is that you have no clue on how to turn our economy around. You don't seem to grasp that high energy rights are a devastating manufacturing sector in our province. You don't seem to understand how more and more laws that you move through the assembly are putting a bigger red tape burden on our province. I've got a plan to get energy rates under control by stopping your runaway spending of the feed-in tariff program. That's driving up our races, dividing communities. I have a plan to shut down the College of Trades because that's a new barrier to new job creation in our province. I have a plan to lower taxes, one to get spending under control. In short, we have a plan to turn on tariff round, a turnaround plan for the province. With all due respect to the Premier, we don't need ten months of a group hug. We need a turnaround plan to put people back in the jobs. Thank you, Premier. Economic Development Trade and Employment. Economic Trade Development and Employment. Well, Mr. Speaker, I can't believe what I'm hearing from the leader of the official opposition. Talking about supporting manufacturing went one of the most important funds that we set up to help manufacturers in Southwestern Ontario. The Southwestern Ontario Development Fund, which together with the Eastern Ontario Development Fund, have created or retained more than 22,000 jobs, Mr. Speaker. Eighty percent. The members on this side are not helping either. A member from... carry on. One of the most important funds for our manufacturers and to expand it, that was passed by this government a year ago. A member from Renfrew come to order. Leader of the opposition and your party voted against that fund. So, Mr. Speaker, we're not going to take lessons from that party when it comes to supporting our manufacturers. There are nearly 800,000 people working in that sector in the province, and we support all of them. Final supplementary. The Ministry of Economic Development and Trade, as you can't believe what he's hearing from the opposition benches. I know the truth hurts, but more importantly, it hurts an awful... Order. Minister of Transportation, come to order. We were asked a short while ago to close down their doors. It should be an alarm to all of us that U.S. steals Stelco and no longer steal in the province of Ontario.  And I'm disturbed to the Premier, actually, when I've asked her a few times what's going to be different, she's not answering and refers to questions. So, let me ask you this.  You think by borrowing more money from overseas lenders and racking up debt is somehow going to turn things around. So, that's the Premier back from her economics philosophy here. Can you please tell us, give us a jurisdiction where they actually spend their way at a deficit and tax way to prosperity. Thank you. Well, it's understandable, Mr. Speaker, that the leader of the official opposition would try to turn the question away from their lack of support for manufacturers and their lack of support of the Southwestern Ontario Development Fund. We're very disappointed. I'm very disappointed in the decision by Heinz last week to close that factory. I talked with the, as the Premier did, with the local mayor and I also talked with the local MPP as well. I've instructed my officials. In fact, the officials from training colleges and universities have also reached out and spoken with the union that represents the workers at that important factory. I've instructed my officials to go to Leamington this week to meet with local leadership to work, to look at all possible options. Southwestern Ontario Development Fund, the possibility of repurposing the plant and keeping those employees working and looking. And I've also said we have an important communities and transition. We're making it available to the community to help them through this difficult time. Thank you. New question. Leader of the third party. Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Premier. Ontario is still above the national average when it comes to unemployment. And more than half a million Ontarians are wondering how they'll make ends meet. In the fall economic statement, the government announced plans to study some targeted tax measures to reward companies when they put people to work or invest in Ontario. Can the Premier tell Ontarians when, if ever, these plans will see the light of day? Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And we've been clear that that's work that the Ministry of Finance is doing right now. We said that we were going to do that when we announced our budget in last year, just this past year. And we reaffirmed that in the fall economic statement, which, as you know, is an update. That work is ongoing. And we will be moving to make those changes within the next few months. If your people have watched as their bills go up and their paychecks go down, it's time to get the cost of living under control in this province. But the only thing the Premier announced to make life more affordable is that the cost for drive-clean would come down. Will the Premier tell Ontarians how much drive-clean fees will be coming down and when, if ever, they can see a bit of relief? So, Mr. Speaker, again, these are issues that we are working on and we will be making those announcements in due course. In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, I would hope that both the leader of the third party and the leader of the opposition would work with us to get the Small Business Support Act, the Small Business Act passed, Mr. Speaker, by the end of December because that is a piece of legislation that actually will help small business, will allow the small businesses to create more jobs and we need to get that through the legislature, through the committee and back into the House, Mr. Speaker. So I hope that the leader of the third party will work with us on that bill. Thank you. Final supplementary. Speaker, the fall economic statement says that people will have to wait for relief on drive-clean costs but it sounds like education property taxes will be going up. So the Premier won't tell Ontarians when they can see some relief on drive-clean costs. Can she tell them if the cost of their education property taxes will be going up and when might that happen, Speaker? Again, Mr. Speaker, I hope that the leader of the third party will support a targeted tax measure which is in the Small Business Act that will help small businesses will reduce their payroll taxes and will give them some relief. I hope that the leader of the third party will do that, Mr. Speaker. What we said in our fall economic statement was that we were going to be looking at other measures, Mr. Speaker, because the reality is that we are going to stay on target to eliminate the deficit by 2017-18 and, Mr. Speaker, we have to look at ways of making sure that all of the supports that we have in place are rational, that they make sense and where we need to change them, we need to change them, Mr. Speaker. And so the leader of the third party has identified one issue that was raised by Mr. Drummond. It's something that we need to look at in the context of a number of other measures, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Leader of the third party. We perhaps the Premier should tell our members to stop filibustering the general government committee and we'll actually get somewhere on that level. Families are wondering how they're going to be able to afford to retire. And while the government's committed to forging ahead with PRPPs that will create a healthy windfall for big Bay Street firms, Speaker, people are hoping for an affordable public retirement plan and they're getting nothing more than promises and endless conversation. The Premier has made a commitment to help Bay Street firms. When will she make a commitment to help everyday families, Speaker? Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And I think that the leader of the third party may be referring to the discussion about the Canadian pension plan enhancement that is being discussed across the country and the leader of the third party will know that it was our government that has been talking about this for a number of years, Mr. Speaker. The former finance minister raised this issue, talked about it across the country, raised it with the federal finance minister. The federal finance minister seems to have backed off, Mr. Speaker. But we are pushing this issue and I raise it with my colleagues at the meeting of Canada's premiers just last week, Mr. Speaker. And my hope is that we will be able to come to some consensus. The Minister of Finance has been able to come to some consensus with his colleagues about some principles upon which we think that the CPP should be enhanced. My hope is we'll be able to take it to the next step with the agreement of the federal finance minister, Mr. Speaker. Speaker, I think Ontario families are getting pretty concerned. They want to see action that will create new jobs. The government promises study. They want to see action that will make life more affordable. The government muses about a property tax increase and can't even commit to cutting fees at Drive Clean. They want to see change and instead they're getting panels, promises and a lot more of the same. Why should people believe the Premier when all she offers is endless conversation? Premier. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, let's just talk about what's happening. The youth job strategy, Mr. Speaker, already over 3,000 young people, Mr. Speaker, have been placed in jobs. The youth job strategy. And that's the youth job strategy that we put in place, Mr. Speaker, and that we are implementing. Full day kindergarten, Mr. Speaker. The 30% off tuition grant, Mr. Speaker. The investment of $35 billion over the next three years. So the leader of the third party can fabricate a narrative, Mr. Speaker, about...  I'm just going to change. Let's do it officially. Withdraw, please. The leader of the third party, Mr. Speaker, can create a narrative about what is or is not happening. What I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, is we've got programs in place that are helping people to get skills training that they need. We've got programs in place that are building, investing in infrastructure across this province, Mr. Speaker. And we know that's what communities need in order to be able to thrive. New silence. Mr. Speaker, the families who make Ontario work are worried about jobs for them and their kids. They're worried about the future and whether they're going to be able to retire. And they're worried about the fact that life keeps getting more and more and more expensive. They keep getting empty promises, study after study, and lots of conversation. The only people getting results, Mr. Speaker, are the well-connected interests promoting private public partnerships and pooled retirement registered pension plans. Why does the Premier think that well-connected friends should come ahead of everyday families in the province of Ontario? Well, Mr. Speaker, what I think is that the 90% of small businesses that would benefit from having their payroll taxes reduced if we could get the Small Businesses Act passed, Mr. Speaker. I think that they would benefit and those families would benefit, Mr. Speaker. I think the families of those young people, those more than 3,000 young people who have now got placements, Mr. Speaker, are going to get experience and training. I think they are benefiting from the initiative that we put in place, Mr. Speaker. So I am sympathetic to what the Leader of the Third Party is talking about in terms of people wondering about the future of the province. But what I know, Mr. Speaker, is that if we invest in the people and their skills and we make sure that they get the support they need, if we invest in infrastructure and if we create an environment where businesses can thrive, we will have that future that Ontario needs, Mr. Speaker. And we have to do that in a coherent way, Mr. Speaker, not jumping on every populist bandwagon that comes along. We need a plan. We're the party that's got that plan, Mr. Speaker. Question? Remember from Mr. Speaker? My question is for the Premier. Good morning, Premier. The economic assumptions which you've based the province's finances on have gotten significantly worse. Despite a weaker economy and a Bank of Canada stating you won't hit your growth targets, you insist that revenue will be nearly identical to your budget projections. This leaves us to conclude the government is hiding from the truth because these figures clearly demonstrate the province is not on track to balance the budget by 2017. It's obvious this government does not understand the size and scope of the problem they've created. Premier, will you tell us the truth? What is the real effect of the slowing economy on the government's revenue, spending and debt projections for the next three years? Good morning. Mr. Speaker, we've been very clear in our far-off economic update of the concerns that we all share around the world. In fact, our measures and our calculations are even more cautious than that of independent economists who made their projections. Ours was even more cautious than that. So we're taking a cautious measure and we're taking measures and discipline to control our spending. In fact, we cut our spending even last quarter as a result of declining revenues felt around the world. We are the only government in over a decade and anywhere in Canada who actually cut spending year over year. We're the only government that introduced financial transparency to ensure the integrity of those numbers and they were audited, Mr. Speaker. So the member opposite can stand and say what he wishes. We are going to continue to invest in our people of Ontario. We're going to continue to invest in our businesses and we look to you to support small businesses by passing the act so that we can get on with the business of helping them as well. Premier, you announced you will embark on a massive second round of stimulus suspending which apparently will have no effect on the government's deficit targets and very telling, you refuse to provide a three-year spending and revenue outlook traditionally included in the fall economic statement. This hides the impact of a weaker economy which the Bank of Canada said to expect and increased spending which you just announced. So it's obvious to us that you don't understand the size and scope of the problem you create. Premier, why did you deviate from the normal practice of including this information in the fall economic statement?  Thank you. Mr. Speaker, we have displayed and identified all of the particulars in our fall economic statement. The member talks about a precedent that has also been established because in all cases even when they were in power they never took the steps to go beyond their naval gazing. The member opposite, my critic, can't get past his yellow tie. He's got to recognize we've got to take long term. We've got to ensure that we look beyond the immediate and that means investing in those particulars that stimulate growth. The member must know that across the board cuts a slash and burn policy will hurt our economic sensitive recovery and as well we cannot be reckless in our spending. We're doing both, Mr. Speaker. And the member opposites have to understand that we have to invest in our future to ensure that we afford the debt that we have by measuring our net debt to GDP ratio which is under control as well, Mr. Speaker. We'll continue to stay on track to balance by 2007. New question? The member for Messicks. Thank you, Speaker. Through you to the Premier, your Liberal government keeps talking about local food but yet stands idly by as processing facilities shut their door in devastated communities. The Heinz plant in Leamington announcement that it was shutting its doors after 103 years will leave 740 people unemployed. It will have severe consequences for the entire region. It will also leave 46 tomato growers without contracts to sell their products. As a Premier at any point met with the Heinz plant to discuss ways that the plant could remain operational and save these jobs in Leamington. Premier? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And as I said in answer to another question, we did the opposite of standing idly by, Mr. Speaker. We were very involved. We talked to executives in the States, executives here in Canada, Mr. Speaker. I talked with the Minister of Agriculture federally, Mr. Speaker, on the issue around packaging. So, Mr. Speaker, we did everything we could and we will work with people in the community, Mr. Speaker, to the best of our ability to make sure that, A, those people find their way back into the economy. They find their way back into jobs and to work to make sure that if there is a possibility, Mr. Speaker, that that plant can be transformed or whatever the options are, that we explore those because it is absolutely critical. On the other hand, Mr. Speaker, we have to make sure that we continue to draw business to the province. That is the future. That is what we need to make sure happens in the coming days. Thank you, supplementary. Thank you, Speaker, back to the Premier. For the record, the NDP warned the government and urged them to stop the Heinz shutdown in March and again in the summer. We urged the Premier to come up with a plan to save jobs and food processing in Leamington. This government's solution to job creation is to write a letter to the federal government and let them figure it out. 700 jobs and almost 350 seasonal workers will be left out in the cold in southwestern Ontario. The food packaging regulation change issue was raised long ago. Has this Premier done anything else besides mentioning this issue to the federal government? Mr. Speaker, as I said, I had conversations with executives in Heinz a number of times over the past months, Mr. Speaker. Starting in September, I spoke with the managing director for Heinz Canada. So, Mr. Speaker, we absolutely did that work. The fact is that the third party thinks that they can control the private sector. That's not how it works, Mr. Speaker. In fact, we are facilitators of those initiatives, Mr. Speaker. So let me talk about some of the major international investments of food processing in Ontario. Natural confectionary food processor based in Spade is establishing a manufacturing facility in London. Ferrero confectionary plant in Bradford, $385 million over the last five years, Mr. Speaker. Pet food plant in Pust Lynch, Royal Canaan, $73 million, Mr. Speaker. A baking ingredient plant, Parajos from Belgium, Mr. Saga, $40 million, Mr. Speaker. It pains me that Heinz is closing. We did everything we could to intercept that, Mr. Speaker. We will work with the people in the community and there are jobs coming to this province, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Finance. Our government has an economic plan for investing in people, building modern infrastructure, and supporting a dynamic and innovative business climate that drives economic growth and creates jobs for Ontarians. As the hardworking people of my writing in Glengarry, Prescott, Russell and across Ontario know well, small businesses must be central to this plan if we're to ensure a strong and prosperous economy. That's why our government has put forward the Supporting Small Business Act to cut taxes and remove burdensome red tape from Ontario's small business. For the Minister, please update this House on the progress of the legislation and our plan to cut payroll taxes for Ontario's small businesses. Thank you, Minister of Finance. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you to the member of Glengarry, Prescott, Russell, for the question, recognizing that small businesses are central to our government's economic plan. We introduced Bill 105, which will cut taxes for 60,000 small businesses and eliminate tax altogether for 90% of small businesses in this province. This legislation is exactly what we need to help drive the economy forward, help small businesses and create new jobs. Since it was introduced, my colleagues across the aisle have stood in their place and demanded this government bring forward job legislation and an economic plan. We did, and it includes this bill. But members of the opposition continue to stall these tax cuts for small businesses. Mr. Speaker, they voted down a motion to advance this legislation in committee. And they continue to hold it up display calls from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business for it to be returned for third reading. Mr. Speaker, it's time for the opposition to quit talking and start acting. We need to vote on this bill before the House rises. We need to pass this legislation now. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much, Speaker, and thank you, Minister, for the update. It's disappointing to hear that we're unable to find some common ground on doing the right thing for the economy and also the right thing for small businesses here in Ontario. Could the Minister please inform the House as to the consequences of continued stall tactics on the part of the opposition? Mr. Speaker, there are roughly 400,000 small and mid-sized businesses in Ontario. By eliminating apparel tax on 90% of these small businesses, we need to ensure our business climate is competitive and strong and maintain Ontario's competitiveness as one of the best places in the province, in the country, in North America to do business. And if we don't see this legislation passed before the holiday break, we won't be able to put these tax cuts in place for Ontario's small businesses. If we don't act now, Ontario's small businesses will pay higher taxes on February 15, 2014. And then again on March 15, 2014. And then again the next month and so on. It begs the question, why would then the opposition continue to stall this essential legislation? Because, Mr. Speaker, they're more interested in scoring cheap political points than they are supporting our small businesses. Mr. Speaker, I hope they can see past their short-term thinking and send the bill 105 back to the House for third reading so that we can all support small businesses in Ontario. Question? Remember from Barry. We're about to find out why. Now we're going to find out why. My question is to the Minister of Finance. Speaker, the only thing open and transparent about this government is their obvious cheap political gaming. So far this government has done nothing but bill 105 to General Government Committee whose legislative agenda they know is full, as opposed to one that is free. There can only be one explanation for this, Speaker. This government is scared and trying to skirt responsibility for the Pan Am Games. That's right. Can the Minister stand and tell us why they're playing games and using bills to block Pan Am Accountability Investigations? That's a good question. Mr. Speaker, on November 4th of this year, several weeks ago, a motion was put forward by the government to look at bill 105. It was defeated by the Combined Forces of the Opposition Party who then came forward with a Pan Am bill. We are in the process of talking about how we can do both. We can deal with 105, which is an important matter, and at the same time deal with the Pan Am game. Yet, Mr. Speaker, despite all they're saying here, they have shown no interest to deal with 105. Our government's position is very clear, Mr. Speaker. If they want to look at the Pan Am game situation, we are very happy to cooperate. But at the same time, Mr. Speaker, we are asking that time be allotted to bill 105. New supplementary. Nobody trusts these guys. Speaker, there are clearly other committees that are open and can handle this bill. This government is acting like it's afraid of the truth for a change. We need to know what's so bad about Pan Am planning that they're willing to sacrifice a very worthy bill 105 instead of allowing an investigation in the Pan Am games to go forward. And it has to be bad. It has to be bad, Speaker. We've already discovered four extra budgets at a total of $1.1 billion yet on the cost of security and transportation.  Your government may not be able to handle the truth, but the people of Ontario deserve to know. Speaker, will the minister come clean, stop worrying about other members' wardrobe, and actually tell us what the cost of the Pan Am game is? Seated? Minister? The member is quite frankly wrong. On November 4th, when we moved a motion to have the committee look into bill 105, there was no other business before the committee. The opposition voted against it and then came forward with the Pan Am suggestion. Mr. Speaker, the government members are pleased to go ahead with an examination of the Pan Am games and also auto insurance. All we are asking, Mr. Speaker, is that in a lot of period of time be given to bill 105. This afternoon at the committee, the government members will bring forward a motion which will allow all three, all three, Mr. Speaker, to go forward. Members from Cambridge, come to order. I am looking forward to members of the opposition to put their money where their mouth is and support that motion so that we can look at both auto insurance, the Pan Am games and make sure bill 105 is looked at by the committee and hopefully reported back to this legislature. Thank you. Your question? The member from Windsor to come see. Thank you, Speaker. My question this morning is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Good morning, Minister. After weeks of outrage and outcry from Windsor-Essex residents and persistent pressure from NDP MPPs, especially my colleague from Essex, this government has finally reversed its wrong-headed decision to cut thoracic surgeries in our community. Speaker, some of us remember well, a former conservative education minister who was caught on video saying, let's manufacture a crisis, create a crisis and then we'll look good when we resolve it. Does the minister think it's right that our MPP from Windsor-West is taking credit for evading a crisis? That was manufactured by her own party. Mr. Falco Long-Term Care. Well, good morning, Speaker and good morning to the member opposite. Speaker, this is good news for Windsor. I think really what the member was saying is this is good news for Windsor. Thank you, Minister, for making this decision. Speaker, I know how important this issue has been for the people of Windsor and I can tell you that the member from Windsor-West has been very, very thoughtful in her approach to this issue. She and I both have enormous respect for Cancer Care Ontario. Cancer Care Ontario is a global leading organization when it comes to providing highest quality of care for cancer patients, Speaker. They are doing an exceptional job. The unique circumstances in Windsor, Speaker, brought to my attention by the member from Windsor-West made me realize that this issue was one we had to deal with a little bit differently, Speaker. So I'm pleased that the member opposite is happy with this decision and I accept his support for this decision. Thank you, Supplementary. Speaker, the residents of Windsor-Essex are happy that their healthcare is going to be preserved. It was the right thing to do. It was the only thing to do, but the question remains about the government's lack of consultation with the local hospitals and the needless anxiety that patients have been put through. This morning, the member from Windsor-Essex was happily taking credit for the decision. Can the minister explain why this government took my residents down this path in the first place? Thank you. Thank you. The member opposite has a conspiracy theory going here. Speaker, that is a bit absurd to say the least. What I can tell you is that Cancer Care Ontario is making real change to the way we deliver cancer. In fact, as a result of the excellent work Cancer Care Ontario has done, the deaths after thoracic surgery have been cut in half. That is a significant improvement in quality, Speaker, that benefit all Ontarians. The circumstances in Windsor were unique. The member from Windsor-West worked very hard. She did her homework. She made a reasoned, articulate argument, Speaker, that this was a decision that did not serve the people of Windsor, and that's why we've made the decision we have. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Health and Long-term Care and it deals with the same subject. In Ottawa, we expect the best health care as do each and every person living in Ontario, and we need to ensure that access to all kinds of health services are available in all regions of the province. We have had residents in Windsor the expressed concern regarding the thoracic cancer will no longer be available to Windsor Regional Hospital and they might have to commute long distances such as to London and other centres for this specific treatment. My question for the Minister and to further elaborate on what she has done to ensure cancer patients in Windsor can continue to receive the services they need. Thank you, Minister of Health and Long-term Care. Thank you, and I'd like to thank the member from Ottawa, Orleans, who is a relentless advocate for improving health care in his community and across the province. Speaker, we have raised an issue of great importance to the people of Windsor. Last week, the member from Windsor-West wrote to me. She outlined a clearly articulated, thoughtful argument as to why services should remain in Windsor Speaker. We have had many meetings on this issue, many conversations on this issue. Speaker, I've also heard from Cancer Care Ontario the rationale behind their original decision, but it became clear to me, Speaker, that the thoracic cancer surgery in Windsor has a very strong record. It has very high quality. I have been convinced, Speaker, that Windsor should be designated a level cancer surgery, and that is, in fact, the decision that has been conveyed to Cancer Care Ontario. Here, supplementary. Well, this is great news for the people of Windsor, and I can recall when we got the good news that the Mofor Hospital was going to remain open when it was closed by the Harris Government in the 90s. And certainly at CHEO, we had the same issue at CHEO and the heart section was to be moved from Ottawa, and we were able to keep it there, and CHEO is a wonderful organization in doing well in our capital. So it's good to see that our governments are making the tough decisions needed to ensure that our healthcare system thrives and that all Ontarians have access and services closer to where they live. Cancer patients in Windsor and Ottawa and all across the province deserve nothing but the very best of care. Speaker, can the minister further tell us why she is keeping the cancer treatment program in Windsor? Well, thank you, Speaker. And I think this is a very good example of an MPP doing their work. The member from Windsor West met with people in Windsor, understood the issue thoroughly, presented some arguments as to why this was a decision that had to be changed. Speaker, I commend the member from Windsor West and from other members from all sides of this House who take the time to do their homework, who really do think and sincerely and thoughtfully about issues that reflect the concerns of their residents. Speaker, this is a victory for an MPP doing her work and changing government decisions. Thank you. Question to the member from Rippy Oshlaw. Minister, it's been almost three weeks since you first met with Kim Fletcher and she still doesn't have an answer. In September 2009, the Ombudsman released his report, A Vast In Justice, a cap for a Vast In treatment for those with colorectal cancer. In his report, he stated that the government must fund Vast In for increased patient survival. As you know, Minister, the effects of using a Vast In for colorectal cancer and for glioblastoma, multi-form brain cancer are the same in both scenarios. In both cases, a Vast In simply prolongs the patient's life. So, Minister, why is a Vast In funded for colorectal cancer and for Vast In? Minister, I hope not to interrupt. Speaker, this legislature made a determination several years ago to take the politics out of making decisions about what drugs would be covered for what conditions. I respect the will of the legislature on that issue, Speaker, and I am committed to maintaining the integrity of our evidence-based decision-making process when it comes to funding cancer drugs. And simply, Speaker, the evidence does not support a Vast In for brain cancer. Speaker, the committee to evaluate drugs will always review new evidence, always review new evidence. If there is evidence that supports this improves outcome, Speaker, then the committee to evaluate drugs will do their work. So, I think it's unfortunate that the member opposite does not respect the evidence, clearly articulated by the committee to evaluate drugs and by Health Canada. And I think it's very important to know this is not Ontario, it is Health Canada. Thank you. I think it might be helpful to go back to 2009 and refresh the minister's memory because in November 2009 you announced that your ministry would fund a Vast In for colorectal cancer. But this announcement came after the former member from Burlington brought awareness to this issue resulting in an Ombudsman's report. Minister, you stood in this house three weeks ago and said you would be breaking the law to fund a Vast In for brain cancer because the committee to evaluate drugs hadn't approved it. Yet, the committee did not approve a Vast In for colorectal cancer in 2009 but somehow you found a way to approve it.  Will you stand here today and promise Kim Fletcher and the other patients with cancer across the country? Thank you. Minister of Health. Well, thank you, Speaker and I guess my question back is are you suggesting we ignore the evidence? The member opposite knows as well as every member in this house knows that there are demands in our healthcare system that needs to be funded, Speaker. So we must, we must rely on evidence. The evidence is clear, the evidence to date is clear that outcomes do not improve with a Vast In for this particular condition, Speaker. So I would like to know from the member opposite if she want to bring politics back in decisions around a drug coverage, Speaker. Is she asking for one person to receive exceptional coverage, Speaker? What is she asking for? I think it's up to the member opposite to be clear about what their policy is on this particular issue. New question. Leader of the third party. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Premier. Liberal promises come and go in Thunder Bay just like the fall leaves. Election season must be getting close as the government is promising for the third time to convert the Thunder Bay generating station after cancelling the project twice at a cost of $20 million. But it is a short-term fix that won't meet the future energy demands of mining projects in the region. When will this government stop playing politics with the energy needs of the Northwest? Mr. Fingert. Mr. Speaker, we have deliberated on this issue notwithstanding the harassment from the leader of the third party and we have consulted with the people of Thunder Bay and we took our time. We were thoughtful. We looked at technical solutions and we provided the best solution that was available for Thunder Bay. The plant is going to continue operating with advanced biomass, Mr. Speaker. She may be concerned that it's limited for five years but we will assess the demand in the area as we proceed and if we have to add another unit and extend the time period, Mr. Speaker, we will. I have a very positive response from the stakeholders and the community. The mayor of Thunder Bay have said he's 75% unhappy with this decision and that's very good for him. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, the Common Voice Northwest Energy Task Force has called the government's latest plan to convert the Thunder Bay Generating Station to advanced biomass half a loaf. That's because running the station at a fraction of its capacity is what's in play here and actually running it only in a sustainable energy plan for the long term. Instead of focusing on a short-term bid to save some liberal seats, when will this government finally listen to local voices serious about the future energy needs of the Northwest? Mr. Speaker, I've been informed by two excellent MPPs from Thunder Bay. They have been in touch with their community. They have been in touch with our ministry. They have been working with their community. Mr. Speaker, we came up with a responsible decision for Thunder Bay. They will have energy when they need it. They'll have electricity when they need it. Mr. Speaker, for now and for the future. That commitment is there. We've proven it by our actions and we will continue to respect the needs and the electricity demands in Thunder Bay, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question for you is for the Minister of Economic Development, Trade and Employment. The Accessibility Directorate is now under the purview of the minister's ministry because our government is committed to ensuring that individuals with disabilities have equal access to job opportunities and economic security. As part of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, businesses must comply with the customer service standard, as well as businesses and not-for-profits with more than 20 staff must file a compliance report. How the customer service standard is being enforced. Thank you, Minister of Economic Development, Trade and Employment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to the member from Ottawa South for this important question. Mr. Speaker, all Ontario businesses and not-for-profits must be compliant with the customer service standard under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act. This is the law, Mr. Speaker. And as the minister responsible for the ODA across government, I take this issue very, very seriously. Not enough businesses have complied with the customer service standard. And Mr. Speaker, this is unacceptable. It is their legal responsibility to comply. My goal as the minister responsible is to enforce this law until we reach full compliance. And over the next two weeks we will be sending warning notices to businesses that have failed thus far to file compliance reports and failure to comply and to file, Mr. Speaker, will result in failure. Thank you, supplementary. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Minister, for the update. It's important that all Ontario businesses are compliant with the customer service standard. Adhering to the standards of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act is also important to our economy. One in seven people in our province has a disability. That number is expected to increase substantially as our population ages. Mr. Speaker, through you to the minister, can you please update this House about your ministry's plan to improve the percentage of organizations that have filed their compliance service standard reports. Thank you, Minister. Thank you again. And of course our government is committed to building a dynamic and innovative business climate. One where every Ontario can work in a safe and accessible environment. Ontario can proudly boast that it's one of the first places in Ontario that has filed their customer service standard compliance report. We will work with the Accessibility Director of Ontario to promote the customer service standard and find those organizations that after multiple warnings, I repeat, multiple warnings have not yet complied. Ontario is poised to be a global leader in this sector. It's a human right that our province can't afford to ignore and it makes great business sense as well. And as the jobs minister, I would like to thank you right across the province to promote the awareness of the customer service standard act. And I'd like to call on all members of this legislator to support me in doing that. Thank you. Any questions? My question is to the Premier. Premier, since your government came into power in 2003, my writing has lost over 10,000 manufacturing jobs. Your words tell us you are creating jobs but I question where? Last week, H.J. Heinz, the plant in Lamington announced that it would be closing after 104 years, resulting in the loss of over 1,000 jobs, affecting their entire supply chain and lost contracts for 46 tomato farmers who have up to $2 million tied up in equipment. The economic impact to Lamington, Premier, is devastating. Premier, you clearly stated this morning that you knew about this in September but you failed to let anyone know. You didn't make a statement the day of the closure announcement because you were too busy dealing with the City of Toronto's issues. So, Premier, the people in my writing of Chad and Ken Essex need answers now. Thank you. Seated, please. Let's talk faster. Premier. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker for your economic development, trade and employment. It's going to want to speak to the supplementary. But, Mr. Speaker, to the question of where are jobs being created, Mr. Speaker, let me name the places. London, Brantford, Puslench, Mississauga, Brantford again, London, Wheatley, Mr. Speaker. There are food processing plants, Mr. Speaker. There are manufacturing plants that are expanding, but I am very sorry and disappointed that the Heinz plant is being closed, Mr. Speaker. But it is not about just this plant. The Heinz company, in general, Mr. Speaker, is making decisions across all of their operations. I spoke with the executives in the States, the executives in Canada, Mr. Speaker. And, of course, I didn't talk about what those conversations were about because those were confidential interactions, Mr. Speaker. The announcement was made, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Thank you. The new supplementary, the member from Oxford. Thank you. Minister, during our survey last year, food manufacturers told us their biggest challenges are the result of your government. Heinz was one of the 75% that said red tape is increasing. And we heard about the high cost of doing business in Ontario, especially the spiraling cost of hydro. We told you all that last year, Minister. You knew the Heinz plant was closed, the closure was coming, and the only thing you did was issue a press release about container-sized deregulation trying to blame the federal government for the closure. The federal minister told you clearly they are not proceeding with the changes because it would cost jobs. No, Mr. Minister, he told you in those conversations since you knew the container-sized was closed, since you knew the container-sized regulations were changing, why did you issue that release the day before the closure? A member from Durham can play musical chairs all he wants, but I can still recognize his voice. And the member from Lambton, Kent Middlesex, will come to order as well. Minister of Agriculture and Food. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It is not true, Mr. Speaker, that that decision on packaging before the announcement of Heinz was made, Mr. Speaker. It is just not true, and in my conversations with the federal minister, there was no commitment that they would change their roles on the packaging, Mr. Speaker. There was no commitment that they would not make that change. There was very much a dissembling on that issue, Mr. Speaker. So it is absolutely not true that we have an open-for-business table where we are changing regulation. And I really think that my critic knows, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows that we are working with the food processing... All I'm going to tell you, and that's enough. Finish, please. We are working with the food processing sector, and as a result of the open-for-business table, regulations are being changed, Mr. Speaker, so that their businesses can flourish. He knows that, Mr. Speaker, and I know that he would like to know what the issues are. Good question. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the minister of education. The district school board of Niagara has called upon the education minister and the premier to visit the school board in hopes for some action on a decade-long underfunding, chronic underfunding problem of special education from the province. The school board estimates that they are being underfunded over the last 20 million over the last decade. Why did this government waste over a billion dollars on saving liberal seats during the last election while ignoring the needs of special education students in the Niagara region? Thank you, minister of education. Yes, and I think that we need to understand that there's just one particular component of the special education funding model that the Niagara District School Board is concerned about. In fact, the Niagara District School Board gets exactly the same per pupil funding as other school boards on virtually every component. The high needs component is based on documentation around the incidence of high needs kids. That's something that was introduced by the Tories, something that school boards complained wasn't necessarily a satisfactory way of getting at it. We got rid of that, and we actually do have a model in place that is gradually correcting that issue. Thank you, supplementary. Back to the minister. Well, you've had 10 years to actually fix it. Niagara receives only $355 per student in high needs funding. The average provincial school board receives $636 per student. So why does special education need students in Niagara receive just over half of the funding that special education students receive in other regions of this province? When and will this be fixed? Yes, and as I just explained, that amount is actually based on documentation which the Niagara District School Board has historically submitted to the Ministry of Education and we do have a program to look at phasing that to a different level. However, I think what is perhaps more relevant here today, Speaker, is we've just begun today a review of the complete funding model and we are working with school board stakeholders all over the province, Speaker, to review the school board funding model and to look at ways where it needs to be updated, areas where it can be made more effective to ensure that in fact we are providing the best possible support to school boards and to children all over the province. Your question, the member from Scarborough, Gilbert. Thank you, Speaker. Protecting the quality of the air we breathe is a fundamental concern for both the people in my riding of Scarborough, Gilbert and for Ontarians more generally. It affects their health and our healthcare costs. Both the federal government and the United Nations have recently issued reports that suggest Canada is not on track in meeting its commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 17% from 2005 levels to 2020. Air pollution has proven to have negative effects on health and can cause premature death. It is important that this nationwide trend is not the case in our province of Ontario especially for our youngest residents. Speaker, through you with the Minister of Environment please share with this House what progress our government has made towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Ontario. An excellent question and I strongly believe in improving air quality for the well-being of our residents. Our Green Energy Act continues to bring Ontario mission-free electricity and new clean jobs. Ontario's dedicated commitment to phase out coal-fired electricity by the end of 2014 has successfully reduced emissions in the electricity sector by 57%. Now and finally in November 1, 2013 our government has posted a proposal on the environmental and regulatory registries to consult with stakeholders on a provincial mandate for greener diesel fuels and that would include of course green diesel which is safe, non-toxic, clean-burning, biodegradable and renewable fuel to ensure the tangible environmental benefits are achieved. The proposed approach includes an average greenhouse gas emissions system sold and used in the province. Thank you. Thank you, Speaker and thank you, Minister. It is reassuring to hear that our government has taken steps towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Ontario. The community of Scarborough Guildwood is lucky to have a local biofuels company pond biofuels working towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions with investments in the state. It is green transportation fuels policy by consulting with stakeholders on a provincial mandate for greener diesel fuels including discussions related to the amount of renewable fuel content as well as greenhouse gas requirements. I am pleased that the Minister of Environment is delivering on this government's commitment to consult with stakeholders on greener diesel fuels through the November 1st proposal which you mentioned. Minister of the Environment, please share with this House further details on the proposed greener diesel field regulations and how this will affect the air we breathe. Thank you. First of all, it is part of that commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality. The Ministry proposed that regulation and it is going to require that Ontario's diesel pool contained a minimum percentage of diesel made from renewable sources. It is expected to provide air quality benefits including reduced particulate matter and greenhouse gas reductions. It is estimated that the greener diesel requirement will reduce Ontario's GHG emissions by approximately 200,000 tons per year in the first compliance period. One million tons annually from 2017 onwards and about 5 million tons on a cumulative basis by 2020. There are a series of initiatives being taken to improve air quality and I thank the people of this province for their support. Thank you. Pursuant to Standing Order 38A the member from Chatham Kent Essex has given notice of his dissatisfaction with the answer to his question given by the Premier concerning the closure of the building. In the members west gallery we do have a visitor who represented Burlington South in the 34th, 33rd, 34th, 35th, 36th and Burlington in the 37th and 38th parliaments Mr. Camp Jackson. Also in the speakers gallery we have a visitor, a former MP of Haldeman Norfolk Mr. Bob Speller. Welcome Bob. There are no deferred votes.


So it's Monday girl, look at this juicy jumbo twit. The last day of my blowout y'all, excuse me, last day wearing my hair blown out. That's a lot. Tomorrow's gonna be the last day because I'm gonna meet my friends for lunch, like I said. But this is very shiny looking good. I haven't had any to moisturizer after using it heavy as Allocane Naturals. Girl, that stuff is heavy. That Shea Yogurt, I would definitely be using it as a moisturizer. Anyway, this is flat twist. Not doing a video on this because I've done so many videos on flat twist. But it's Monday morning. This fan asked me two weeks ago, no, no, no, last week, he said, where can I go to get some sunglasses? And I'm looking like, you can go to any normal department store. He said, yeah, because after this cataract surgery, I won't even need regular glasses. And I'm like, well, if sunglasses will help you to not hit my damn car, I will go buy you seven pairs of sunglasses at the Dollar Tree. No, I told him he could go to any. If he's looking for a nice designer glasses, go to any department store. Hell, I said, go to Ross.  So yes, he's having his second cataract surgery. No, no, Wednesday. So my hair is itchy, y'all. Cause it's been now, I'm in nine days. And using that Allocane Naturals product, I think it made it even worse cause that product is heavy. Yeah, I was thinking about using it today. It's been about two days. I was thinking about using it today as a moisturizer. I'm not going to at all only because my hair is dirty. What I did two days ago is I used a witch hazel just on my scalp and it cleared it up. It cleared it up about 75% of it up. I'm going to use a little bit more today when I reset my hair. I know I'm going to set them a little bit smaller. Anyway, y'all know where I'm at. So I'm about to do a little venting. Look, I know I said I want only video on the weekend. Did I say that? I don't know. My goal is to try to tape film mostly on the weekend unless something happens like today. So today was to be my day to go into one of our office locations here to provide support for one of our trainings. Our office is about almost an hour away from me. And so the company that purchased us office is literally 15 minutes from me. And so this is where we're having one of our trainings. Sorry y'all, one of our trainings this morning. So I already told the trainer that, hey, I'm going to be coming down just yesterday. I told him that, hey, I'm going to be coming down there around nine-ish. I actually ended up getting there at eight-thirty. So I go in and you have to have a batch to get into the building, which I didn't have, but I did have my batch from my current batch, okay? So, because I just don't have access to this building, but I do have access to our building. So anyway, I get down to this building, sign my name in, following protocol, and just waiting for the security officer to come in to bus me in upstairs so I can go to this training again to provide support for the trainer. So a couple of minutes later, I didn't have to wait long and she came around the corner, apologized for me, wait, and I was like, oh no, it's okay. And so she's like, well, what are you here for? I said, actually work for this company. I let her know what subcompany I work for, basically the company that they acquired and that I'm here for so-and-so training. She's like, okay, well, who's your point of contact? And I looked at her and I'm like, I'm the point of contact, I don't know what you mean. This is our training that we're facilitating for this client. And she's like, well, you have to have a contact. I'm like, what? So I was confused, I'm like, but I work here. And she's like, yeah, I understand, but if you don't have a point of contact, you at least need to have the name of a supervisor or someone who can escort you up to the room. I'm like, okay, let me email the trainer. So I emailed the trainer and I knew, I knew that he wouldn't be able to come down and get me, he's in the middle of training. A few minutes passed by and y'all, I'm like, I'm over it, I'm over it, I'm gonna leave. So I say, you know what? He's not gonna respond to me until his break and that's gonna be a couple of hours away from now. I was only gonna be here just to provide support. So I went home around nine o'clock, I just turned around and went home. She apologized because she was sorry, but she's just doing her job like I said. So I went home, literally the trainer didn't even email me to 11 o'clock. He apologized and so he totally forgot even though I just emailed him the night before. Today has been a bit of an emotional taxing day for me. I had some footage earlier that, sorry, let the footage, here we go. I had some footage earlier of me on here where I was crying and all this slobbering and shit, but I had to delete it because I want you guys to not feel depressed or sad when you see my videos. I want my videos to ultimately make you feel better, but this is real life, okay? It's my life and what's going on and the emotions that I am experiencing. I'm gonna share it with you guys. So why I was crying was because it's over my child, over my baby, JB. So it seems like every other day when I had picked him up from school, the teacher is always telling me something wrong with him as far as his learning, learning ability. Oh, I've had to move him. Oh, he can't focus.  So today she tells me and in my, in my new, she also told me that he couldn't write his name and that it took him 15 minutes to write like the first three letters. And I was like, are you serious? So I'm taking her, you know, information and sticking it in and I'm coming home and you guys have seen me. I have material at home and we go through and he's cool at home, he can get through it. So when I got in today, when I dropped him off, she pulls me to the side and she's like, yesterday it took him an hour to get through the worksheet. So I'm like, okay. I'm like, wow. She's like, you know, he missed all the activities. He didn't get to go outside. I'm like, wow, okay. I said, well, I've been working with him at home. I said, but, you know, like this morning, it took me 15 minutes to get him to say a sight word because he just wasn't getting it. Right now they're doing sight words, which is really coming at this age and it's just not sinking in, you guys. So I was really, really upset about it. I cried in the way home.  And she's like, Vivian, take what the teacher says with a grain of salt. Some children just learn differently. As I know this, and I've mentioned this before, some children just learn differently. It doesn't mean that he's behind. It doesn't mean he hasn't learned. She said, JB is very smart. It doesn't mean that he has a learning disability. It's just that he learns differently. He may learn differently from other children. So spoke to my husband about it. And he's like, JB is smart. He's just, it's hard for him to focus. So, what I think I make the mistake of doing and I can own up to it. I immediately, when she initially told me that he had a hard time getting through his worksheets, I immediately printed out tons of worksheets. And I've showed you guys what this look like, what they look like. And I have him to sit down and I sit with him and we go through the worksheets. But the problem is that JB is not learning that way because he's just not. So I fell back and I'm like, okay, how can he learn? He learns more hands-on like most kids do. He learns through play. So what I'm doing is I'm looking into different ways to help him to learn at least his sight words. So that way by the time he gets to school, he could feel comfortable enough to actually sit down and focus on the worksheet. But I had no idea that these kids were learning how to read and pre-K. And hopefully reading in kindergarten, I had no clue and my husband was surprised too. He was like, what? That's one of the things I don't like about our education system here. The good thing about the school that he is going to is that say once he gets into second grade and if he's struggling in a certain area, then they may put him in a first grade, I don't know, like English class. On the flip side, if he's more advanced in math and he's like, I've already done this, then they'll put him in a third grade math class. So that's good to, you know, that makes me feel better. But I'm like, let's just get through kindergarten. Let's get to kindergarten, please. So yeah, they have me a little bit upset, but I'm not gonna worry too much about it. He's gonna get it. I know he is. He's gonna get it. So cooking dinner, tonight we're gonna be having beef. My husband picked up some beef, some assortment of meat from Whole Foods. So this is one of the few things he actually does know how to cook. So I asked him how he makes his, how he makes his, how he makes beef when he cooks it. Cause it's so good and it's really tender. And I'm gonna follow his instructions on how to cook it. Except it'll be really good. And I have this ginger garlic stir fry kit that I got on sale at Fry's. It was only $2.99. But those carrots are looking a little raggedy. So I'm gonna pick those carrots out, including in here, excuse me, or Brussels sprouts, kale and bak chow. There's carrots in there too. And then there's a ginger pouch of seasoning there. You have to excuse that. So I'm gonna pick out those carrots cause they look nasty. Cause I have my own shredded carrots and I have here some peppers. I have some ginger. I'm gonna slice up some bell pepper and I have my own shredded cabbage to add to this. All right. And then I'm gonna be making some Jasmine rice with that which shouldn't take no time. Okay. I'm pantry. I think I'm going to make, Oh, no, no, no, no. Oh, Laura, y'all excuse me. I'm in my car. I have to grab them. We have on here three different sight words. Now I want you to find this one that says saw, S-A-W. Saw. S-A-W? Saw. I want you to find all the ones that say saw, S-A-W. S-A-W. Mm-hmm. S-A-W. Yes. Pick that one up. Now find another one that looks like it. There you go. Put them together. All right. Keep finding them. Keep finding them. There's one more. Top tick. Does that give you anxiety? It's giving me one more S-A-W. Saw. S-S-S-S. So it's Friday. I have some things to catch up on work. I'm waiting. That's the thing about my job, at least the film that I'm in. It's a lot of waiting on other people before I can actually complete my project. So right now I'm waiting on additional information so I can complete this project. It's that I did a little activity with him where I put all the words on some sticky notes. Not all of them. I did maybe three or four of his sight words and I made him find the ones that look the same. So he did really well with that. We're gonna do it again, possibly Sunday and just think of some other activities or other ways to incorporate sight words into learning. Yeah, he did really good, baby. I was on time. Yeah. So look y'all, what did I find out yesterday that, y'all like my nails? Anyway, that my doctor has had his license suspended. Girl. All that drama and healthcare issues I had last year, not just issues, anxiety and stuff I had last year. Granted, I mostly solved his nurse, the nurse practitioner's there. I saw her maybe two or three times. I did so much better. Thank you, baby. JB, you're working me, honey. He's rocking the camera. So he had his license suspended and girl, they have posted in the Facebook group, I'm in the Facebook group for my neighborhood because of course a lot of people in this area go to him. They posted the affidavit or whatever legal documentation. Let me read some of the stuff to the legal documentation. Y'all, so I'm in the Facebook group as someone is paid as hell and they loaded up this thing. I don't know the correct terminology but it's a legal documentation of the board of, who is it? Arizona Medical Board basically about their findings. So, responded is the holder of license number yada yada yada and the responded is the doctor, okay? The board initiated case number blah blah blah after receiving a complaint regarding respondent care and treatment of a 30 year old female patient, allegedly inappropriate prescribing of a controlled substance. Lehman's term, the doctor was prescribing some opiates to this patient misusing the script pad. Girl, on June 7th, 2016, patient was first seen by responded during the visit, responded prescribed patient, aphrozolem, aphrozolem, basically Xanax, Xanax 60 with two refills and no follow up noted in the chart. August 29th, same year, patient was seen as a follow up responded increased dosage to 90 with three refills. So in other words, she came out of there with 600, over 600 pills basically. In a few months. And now look y'all, at first I was like, what, why would he do that? Then I was like, wait a minute. Yesterday, and he was like, you know what? He's like, he was kind of odd, you know? I would tell, he said he would prescribe me whatever I wanted. I would tell him what was wrong. And he was like, I said, so yeah, gonna go to the gym. This is our Pac-Man game. Y'all, I could not stop laughing. I said, what? He's obsessed with Pac-Man. Pac-Man now. He's like, I'm hiding. I mean, what is it? Let me see. Yeah. He has figured out how to keep the Pac-Man in a corner so the ghost can. So I'm like, Jamie. He's like, yeah, I'm playing, but I'm hiding right now.  You want me to help you? Good morning, y'all. It is sun. Jamie has my old camera. That's now his camera for his vlogging. I need to load up some of your videos, baby. Yeah, see you. It's raining and go to Fry's. We're gonna go to Fry's. We're gonna go to Fry's. We're gonna go to the grocery store. And then we have a birthday party to go to later on today, which I'll do a little vlog of that. At this point, this video is gonna be a 25 minutes or so. Are you done? Are you done? Can I record or then you can record? No, I will still. Y'all. Y'all, this. The reason why I have to keep going to the store is because these people, between my husband and JB, they eat everything up in the house.   I'm like, no, we all got our own snacks. So, what else is going on? My husband is getting his car fixed Monday. Made him appointment for a local collision place. And yeah, it's gonna be $500 out of pocket for each car, but we're gonna do them separately.  He's the same age as JB. JB and their friends and they play around. He's a little boy. If y'all saw him in his birthday vlog, he has his hair to the side long. He is so adorable.  Okay, I need the ring. Hi, JB. So, it's not, it mirrors, it's a raptor. So it mirrors the raptor legs and they have things to open them now. Oh my God. So, it's like Jim Henson, puppeteer. Yeah. Where are we going? We're gonna go look at a creature. Okay, dinosaur, okay. Okay, thank you. You're gonna get in in all sorts of directions. I love dinosaurs. Okay, yeah, JB's scared. JB, it's fake. It's a, it's a, it's a, it's too big. All right, so he's just like that location. It's like a really, really big, it's too big. Child, JB was like, JB was like, I'm out of this. Right there. Hit it hard, baby.


So this lecture is part of an online algebraic geometry course, giving an introduction to schemes. This lecture we'll be discussing when maps of sheaves are injective or surjective or exact and so on. So last lecture, when we were given a pre-sheaf F, we constructed an etal space of F, which was a map from, which was a space A mapping to our base space X that F is a sheaf over. And you remember we did this by first constructing the fibres of A by taking a direct limit and then gluing these fibres together. So we're first going to start by looking at a couple of examples of what this etal space looks like. So you remember this map being etal means it's a local homeomorphism in the sense that each point of A has a neighbourhood that's homeomorphic to a set in X. So let's first of all look at the example where we take X to be the reals and we take X to be the sheaf of smooth functions. So F of U is just smooth functions on U. And the fibre at zero is just, you can just think of it as being germs of smooth functions at the point zero. So if we draw a graph of a smooth function, it might look something like this. So we have a smooth function defined in a neighbourhood of zero. And we might have another smooth function that say looks like this. But if these two smooth functions are the same in some neighbourhood of zero then they count as the same point of the fibre. So the points of the fibre are sort of germs of smooth functions where you can only see the smooth function very, very close to zero in some sense. And the point is this example, the space A in this case is not house dwarf. So you sort of might think well it's locally a homeomorphic to the reals so it's just a one-dimensional real manifold. Well it isn't some sense. The problem is it's a non-house dwarf real manifold. So let's see two points at zero that don't have disjoint open subsets. So the first point at zero I'm going to take to be the fibre of zero. So f is just equal to zero. The second point at zero I'm going to take to be the following function. It's going to come down like that and it's going to be zero there and then it's going to have a bump here and it's going to be zero there and then a bump there and zero there and a bump there and zero there and so on. So this is G and you notice that f and G are different points in the fibre at zero because there's no open neighbourhood where they're the same. These bumps go on forever but any open neighbourhood of G is given by taking some neighbourhood of naught and the open neighbourhood of G might sort of consist of the image of this bit of G and similarly an open neighbourhood of f might consist of you take a small open neighbourhood of zero and any function of zero in that open neighbourhood is in the image of f. But now you see any open neighbourhood of G and any open neighbourhood of f have a point in common because you can find some small patch near the origin where both f and G are identically zero in an open set and that will give you a point in the same open neighbourhood. So these etal spaces can be a bit weird because they can sometimes be none house dwarf. Notice that if G is the sheaf of analytic functions then G is in fact house dwarf. You can do that as an easy exercise. You see you can't get this phenomenon because if a function is analytic it can't have an infinite chain of zeros approaching zero unless it is actually zero. So somehow the question of whether this pre-sheaf is house dwarf or not house dwarf is rather like whether your functions have a sort of notion of analytic and analytic continuation. If you look at smooth or continuous functions and the sheaves you get are not house dwarf. If you look at analytic functions or regular functions in algebraic geometry then the sheaves you get often are house dwarf. So from any pre-sheaf we can get the etal space and from the etal space we can get a sheaf of sections. So this gives a way of going from a pre-sheaf to an associated sheaf and I'm just going to list some properties of this construction. I'm not going to bother proving most of them you can take these as exercises. So first of all this is indeed a sheaf and it's universal. If we have a map F goes to G where this is a pre-sheaf and this is a sheaf then it factors through the map from F plus to G. So there's unique morphism of sheaves making this commute. So this is a sort of universal way. It's the best possible way of constructing a sheaf out of F that any other way of constructing a sheaf out of F you sort of start with F plus and then embed it into this other sheaf. So also you can check if F is already a sheaf then the map from F to F plus is an isomorphism. So if you try and turn a sheaf into a sheaf you get back the sheaf you started with not very surprisingly. Also if A goes to X is already etal and F is equal to the sheaf of sections then the etal space of F is isomorphic to A. So in other words what we find is that sheaves are more or less the same. So sheaves over X are sort of equivalent to etal spaces A mapping to X. So incidentally the reason for the name sheaf is you can think of the etal space A as being the union of the fibres or stalks. So in sheaf theory when you talk about the fibre of a map from A to X you quite often call that the stalk of a map from A to X. And a sheaf in agriculture means you get a lot of stalks of corn or something and bundle them all up. So if you think of these as being sheaves of corn bundled together you can sort of think of the etal space A as being a bit like that except that doesn't give a very good picture of the topology of A but never mind. So a sheaf when viewed as an etal space kind of looks like a lot of stalks all stuck together. And in particular if F goes to G is a homomorphism of sheaves then it is an isomorphism if and only if it's an isomorphism of the corresponding etal spaces which is the same as saying it's an isomorphism of all stalks. And this follows easily from the comments we made on the previous sheet that if it's an isomorphism of etal spaces if the corresponding map of etal spaces is an isomorphism then as we said we can just reconstruct F and G from these etal spaces and if the etal spaces are isomorphic then that shows that F and G are isomorphic. Well, we want to define whether, first give another example. So let's have an example of constructing the sheaf of a pre-sheaf. So let's take F to be the constant pre-sheaf where we just put F of any open set U is equal to some set A. So this is going to be a fixed abelian group and we saw earlier that this is usually not a sheaf. Well, so we want to work out what is the etal space of this? Can't spell etal. So the etal space of this, well, what's the fibre at each point? Well, the fibre at each point is kind of trivial to work out because F of U is just A so when we take a direct limit the fibre at each point is just A and if you work out the topology on the fibre you can see the etal space is just X times A mapping to X. So here A has the discrete topology and now we take a section U and want to know what is F of U? Well, F of U is just the sections of this map here. So we want functions from X to X times A such that if you do that then that you get the identity and you can see this is just continuous maps from U to A. Now, since A is the discrete topology this means that F of U equals A if U is connected and I don't want to get into arguments about whether or not the empty set is connected. So let's just say it's connected and non-empty. A good case for saying the empty set is not connected but anyway. And F of the empty set is just the zero and if U has more than one component then for instance if U has two open components then F of U will be A times A sorry this is F plus of sorry this is the sheaf F plus that we can construct from the pre-sheaf F. So if U has two open components then the sheaf F plus will be a product of two copies of A and in general if U is a union of open components then F plus of U will be a product of copies of A and you can get more complicated examples where U where the components of U aren't open in which case slightly more complicated things happen but I'm not going to worry about those. Now we now want to define whether or not a homomorphism of sheaves of Abellion groups is exact or injective or whatever. So we say this is exact if it is exact on the fibres. Similarly F to G is injective or surjective if it is on the fibres. So this is the definition of a map of sheaves being injective or surjective. In case you're worried about whether or not this is the right definition we've got a category of sheaves of Abellion groups and in the category we say something a map from A to B is onto if for any two maps from B to C these are the same if the composed maps from A to C are the same. So this gives a definition for map A to B and any object in the category to be an epimorphism and this definition is in fact equivalent to one defined using category theory and similarly for injective ones. So this just says that maps of sheaves are injective or surjective if the corresponding maps of etal spaces are injective or surjective and you may wonder why don't we just define sheaves to be etal spaces. In fact you can do this if you want so I think it was sometimes done in the early days of sheave theory. The problem is it doesn't really work when you do more general cases of sheaves over a category instead of sheaves over a topological space. So the definition we gave of sheaves as being a map from open sets to Abellion groups is the one that generalizes better. So let's finish let's let's do a couple of examples of exact sequences of sheaves so first of all we have a skyscraper sheave so a skyscraper sheave is defined as follows we pick a point P in X we pick an Abellion group A and we put F of U equals A if P is in U and F of P is not if P is not in U and let's try and draw the etal space of F so here's the base space X and the fiber at any point other than P is going to be zero so we just get the etal space has a zero point here but above the point P you can see the fiber is A and you can now see why it looks like a skyscraper because it looks like a sort of tall building just sticking up with everything empty around it and now we'll see an example of the skyscraper sheave if we take so this is the skyscraper sheave of A so let's put F so this is the etal space of F so this is the skyscraper sheave of F and now we're going to let G be the sheave of smooth functions on the reels and we're going to define a map from G to G which is just multiplication by X where X is pointing the reels and at all points X not equal zero the corresponding map on fibers is an isomorphism so this map is an isomorphism except at zero and at zero turns out we get the skyscraper sheave here so if we look at the fibers over each point if we look at a point X not equal zero here the fiber looks like naught goes to it's going to be some big space of all germs of functions at naught like this where this is an isomorphism because multiplication by X is an isomorphism if X is equal to zero then we don't get this we get if we've got a function at zero then we can write it uniquely as a constant the constant value of the function at zero plus X times another smooth function so X equals zero that the fiber looks like all germs of functions at zero but this time the fiber is actually the real numbers so we get the skyscraper sheave corresponding to the point X equals zero and A being the real numbers so that's a non-trivial example of an exact sequence of sheaves incidentally if you take any vector bundle over a space then you can obviously form the sheave of all sections of a vector bundle so for instance this sheave G is the sheave of sections of a smooth one-dimensional vector bundle now you see if you work with vector bundles you have a bit of a problem you can get quotients of vector bundles in a nice way here we've got two vector bundles but the quotient of the two vector bundles is really a sheave that isn't a vector bundle there's no way to get a vector bundle whose sections are not everywhere except zero where they're the reals so sheaves can be thought of as a sort of generalization of vector bundles that allow you to take quotients so we'll finish with an example that you probably came across in complex analysis so for this example I'm going to look at the following exact sequence nought goes to 2 pi i z goes to holomorphic functions goes to non-zero holomorphic functions so here these are all going to be functions over complex these are all going to be functions over open sets of the complex number so this stands for the constant sheave of the group 2 pi i times z and this is the sheave of holomorphic functions and this is going to be when I say non-zero holomorphic functions I mean functions such that f of x is not equal to zero for all x so I don't just mean functions that aren't zero identically everywhere I mean the function is not allowed to be zero everywhere and this map here is just going to be the exponential map and now we know that x of 2 pi i times any integer is zero so the map from here to here and from here to here is indeed well defined this is an exact sequence of sheaves and the reason is that it's exact on fibers because if you take a point in some fiber here it's represented locally by a little by holomorphic function near that point and if you've got a holomorphic function that's non-zero then you can't always take its logarithm but you can take its logarithm in the neighborhood of a point so the map from here to here is indeed on to on every fiber however it's not exact on sections of open sets for example suppose I take u to be the complex numbers minus the origin and I take the function in here to be the function x now if it's the image of something here then we would have to have a function f such that x of f is equal to x at all points so we would need a global form of logarithm of f but as you know from complex analysis we cannot define the logarithm of x as a holomorphic function for all non-zero complex numbers because when we go around the origin we get this extra factor of 2 pi i turning up so this is an exact sequence of sheaves but it's not exact on some if you take global the global sections of this over open sets are not necessarily exact they might be exact for example if you take u to be the whole of the complex numbers then the global sections are exact the problem is whether or not this u has none trivial loops in it okay next lecture we will be continuing discussion of sheaves


Muslim faithful in Port Harcourt River State Capital have joined the rest of the world to celebrate Idil Fitri, with many gathering early in the morning in the open-air special press called Salat al-Eid. Details are in this report. The Ahid Fitri is a festival celebrated by Muslims to thank Allah for the strength, will and endurance given to them to complete the Ramadan fast. In his Samoan, the Chief Eman Port Harcourt Central Max, Eman Malik Yahya, called on the Muslim faithfuls to continue the unity and love shared during the holy month of Ramadan for peaceful co-existence in the society. Vice President-General of the River State Council for Islamic Affairs, Nasiri Uhor and others speak on the significance of Ramadan and the need for a celebration of the Ahid. Ramadan fast is not all about obtaining from foods, drinks, and sets alone. It is more about beautification, physical and... Time for sober reflection, particularly at this material time when we have many challenges in this country and all over the world. The Ahid Fitri celebration is an annual festival to demonstrate the joy of Muslims across the world for a successful completion of one of the most important aspects of faith, the Ramadan fast, which is the fourth pillar of Islam.