Normal regression analysis is a very convenient technique because it will always give you some results. Maximum likelihood estimation, on the other hand, can sometimes fail and to understand why it fails will allow you to travel with your models and make informed decisions on how to get the model to work. In this video I will show you an example of logistic regression analysis. The purpose of the video is not to demonstrate the logistic regression analysis feature specifically but more generally what could cause a maximum likelihood estimation process to fail. Let's take a look at this data and we have 8 observations, x1, x2, 2 independent variables, dependent variable y that receives values of 1 and 0. We'll run a logistic regression analysis explaining y using x1 and x2 and see what happens. The analysis setup is here. We'll be using two different software just to demonstrate software differences. This is R and this is data syntax for running this model. The results are in. What happens? What do we note first? The first thing we note is that lots of things are missing from the state output. We don't have significance tests, we don't have standard errors, we don't have the overall model test. We have results that are missing. Another thing is that the software gives us different results. R says that the effect of x1 is 15 and data says that the effect of x1 is 33. Effect of x2 is 30 and effect of x2 according to R is 6. These are significantly or substantially different results because normally if we interpret the coefficients using old ratios, we exponentiate them. The difference between 15 and 30 is on an exponential scale, that's a huge difference. What do we do? Do we just pick one of these two sets of estimates and report that set as if there was no problem? Well, we need to understand what's going on. Also we note that the likelihood is zero here and the likelihood, the local likelihood is zero here as well, which means that the likelihood is one. That's a very unusual scenario, so it means that getting this kind of data from this model would be 100% probability. Getting any other observations, any other values for the y-variable would be impossible from this model. You don't have that kind of perfect model, so what's going on? Then we also have this warning and the successes and failures are completely determined. R gives a bit less user-friendly warning, just numerical probabilities, numerical 0 and 1 occurred. The important thing about warnings is that when you get a warning, that is software telling you that there is something going on that you should pay attention to. So warnings are not some inconveniences that you can just ignore and then report the results. If you got any, the warning is something that you need to then spend some time understanding what is the warning telling you and why is the warning occurring and then what you can do about the warning. You should not report any analysis with a warning unless you know what the warning is and have made an explicit decision not to care about the warning. Generally, we want these warnings to go away. So what's the cause? Let's take a look at the data set a bit more closely. In this case, the problem is the variable x1, so we can just take x2 out. What do we see here with x1 and y? We see that when x1 receives values greater than 4, y is always 1, and when x1 receives value less than 4, y is always 0. So the x value here perfectly predicts the value of y. So that's the thing. And y, that will be problematic for maximum likelihood estimation. Let's take a look at how maximum likelihood estimation works. So this is the R analysis. And maximum likelihood estimation always starts with some kind of initial guess. So the computer is feeding an S-curve because this is a logistic regression analysis. And the first guess is that the S is quite... It's not very steep, but it goes up. So it goes up for x1 instead of going down. And the estimation then proceeds by trying different values for the coefficient x, so that the curve would fit the data better. And in this case, we originally had the curve fitting here, so it predicts this observation to have about 60% probability. And then we make the curve steeper and steeper. We can see that this observation is explained or predicted better and better. The problem here is that there is no limit on how steep the curve can be. So the steeper you make the curve, the better it predicts these observations. And you can make it indefinitely steep. So there is no limit on how much you can increase the x1 coefficient here. And it will always make the curve a bit steeper. So we can see that it's not straight up yet. We could still make it a few pixels more steeper. So the coefficient of x1 just goes to infinity if we allow the process to continue. What will happen to the likelihood or the log likelihood in this case, it will go to zero. And it gets to zero when every observation is predicted perfectly. So we don't have a maximum for this likelihood because the likelihood can never be exactly zero. It just goes to very, very close to zero, but we can always make the curve a bit steeper to make the log likelihood closer to zero. So the maximum of this log likelihood here does not exist. The consequence is that the maximum likelihood estimates for this model don't exist either. So our maximum likelihood estimate is indeterminate because making x1 larger and larger will always fit the data a bit better. The increase in fit is marginal, but we can say that x1 coefficient 50 would be the correct value because the coefficient of 51 would fit the data better. So the estimates don't exist. So what do you do? And this is a scenario that is so well understood that statistical software have checks for this. So this is for Stata user manual. And if we run the logistic model without the as is modified that I had before to force it to run, Stata says that no, we can't run it because x1 predicts the data perfectly. The estimates don't exist. And they have an explanation about it. So there are a couple of pages explanation in the user manual. What causes this problem, how Stata deals with it and what you can do about it. The problem is that not all possible scenarios are programmed in your statistical software. So there are scenarios where maximum likelihood estimation can fail and there is no specific check. And then it will just fail and you have no warning indicating why it failed. The perfect prediction that's well understood, you can rely on software catching up. But now let's take a look at another problem where the software doesn't catch it before estimates. So this is another variant of the same analysis. We had one more observation. So we had a ninth observation with values of x1 at 11 and x2 at zero, which is the same values that we had for the eighth observation, but they are the y variable resist the value of zero. So now we cannot predict perfectly because the prediction calculated from x1 and x2 is always the same. And if we predict one perfectly, then we don't predict zero and vice versa. So we can't predict perfectly using this data. So what will happen is that the perfect prediction check will not trigger. Stata will try to estimate it or will try to estimate it as well. And we again get a warning. So we have convergence not achieved warning. So Stata tried to estimate it couldn't find a maximum of the likelihood. It went through 1600 iterations, which is the default limit, and then it just gave up. You can also of course increase the limits, have Stata try 10,000 different sets of estimates. It will still cannot find the maximum because for this model it doesn't exist either. So Stata tries gives up and so what do we do about it? We see that we don't have standard errors for one of the parameters. That's an indication that we have a problem that we have to deal with, at least because we want to report that the standard error or if not that, then at least the p-value and we have nothing to report. So that the missing standard errors indicate that there's some kind of problem. We can see also that the likelihood here says that it's not concave and that gives us some information that is useful for troubleshooting. I will not go through the troubleshooting procedure in this video, but just to demonstrate what's available for you, what the not concave means. When we estimate maximum likelihood, then we do trial and error. This is from the video where I demonstrated the maximum likelihood estimation of the population mean using this data. So we can see that when the values are 2, 3 and 4, then a good estimate for the population mean is 3 and that's actually the maximum likelihood estimate. If we try any other values to likelihood function, we get smaller likelihoods. We have the actual likelihood here and then we have the log likelihood here. What's important about the log likelihood that it's a curve that bends down, so it kind of curves down and we say that this is a concave curve. It's a curve that curves down and the concave curve has the second derivative which quantifies the curvature here always negative. So if you have a curve that is concave, then the secondary derivative is negative. If the secondary derivative is negative and this is concave, then we know that there's a peak somewhere and that the peak is our maximum likelihood estimate. What will happen is that if this curve, for example, is flat here, then it's not concave because it's not bending down all the time. We wouldn't have a maximum likelihood because we have multiple different values of the parameter, the estimate of the mean, that are equally good from the maximum likelihood perspective. Also we could have a curve that goes down first and then curves up, so that would not be concave either. So that's what the non-concave means. The maximum likelihood is not something that is easy for us to estimate. We can check what's actually the problem by looking at the matrix of the second derivatives here which tell us how strongly this curves down and we can see that there are a couple of zeros there. So we have these zeros here and that indicates that we have a problem with these parameters. The troubleshooting on exact interpretation of this is something that I will leave for another video. Let's take a look at the problem. We have missing standardars here which is an indication that we need to do something, definitely. We have a warning that three failures and two successes are completely determined. The logical thing to do next is to ask which two and which three. To get which observations are predicted perfectly, we can use the model, even if it's not converged, we can use the model to calculate the actual predictions. So we can see here that predicted values for these three zeros are exactly zeros. For these two, the predicted values are exactly ones and that's the warning. The predicted value for this is very close to zero, so if we would allow data to go on forever doing the estimation, it would probably estimate or predict this to be zero as well and this to be one. So we have basically seven observations that are perfectly predicted and two that are not. So what's going on here? It's not perfect prediction because these are not predicted perfectly, they can't and for that reason data doesn't catch the problem. The logistic regression model with more than one variable, can be understood as this kind of surface. So we have X1 here, we have X2 here and then we have the Y on this axis and we can see how the observations depend on X1 and X2. The circles here are the values that are actual values, the ones. The circles down here are the actual values of zeros and the position of the circle indicates the values of X1 and X2 variables for that observation. Then the cross here is the predicted value on the surface. When we do maximum likelihood estimation, we want to adjust the surface by adjusting the coefficients of X1 and X2 so that the predicted values are as close as the observed values as possible. And what will happen again that if we make this surface indefinitely steep, so we can make it as steep as possible but this one observation is always, the predicted value will always be in the middle of the surface and it can be predicted perfectly because you can't predict one and zero at the same time. So this set of X1 is 11, X2 is zero corresponds with two different values of Y so that's why you can't predict perfectly. But the problem is the same, the coefficients of X1 and X2 grow large. The interest goes towards minus infinity and the log likelihood increases without limit. So you can always make the surface a bit steeper and then it will fit the data a bit better but there is no limit on how large X1 and X2 and how small the interest can be. So what do you do with these problems? There are four options how you can actually use the analysis. Option one, just if you use data and you didn't do the R analysis you wouldn't have noticed that the software gave radically different results. Choose the results that you got, ignore the warning and present the results and in your paper. I can't tell you how common that is but I'm pretty sure some people will do that. So understanding the warning requires effort and if you have some estimates that you could report and not go through the extra effort, some people probably will just do that. That's a bit unethical because the software with the warning tells you that there's a problem that you should pay attention to and then you're ignoring evidence of a problem and reporting the results as if there was no problem. The second alternative is trial and error. This is something that I have done a lot before I started to think that maybe I should understand what the computer is doing. So you just try, you drop cases, you drop variables until you get the warning to disappear. So you run and run and trial and error without understanding why sometimes the error appears, sometimes it doesn't and then you pick one of the analysis that doesn't produce the error. This is a bit better because at least you're trying to do something for the problem but this trial and error blindly could lead you with the suboptimal model. For example, you're dropping a control variable because the model doesn't converge because of the control there and then instead of getting the model to converge with the control you are doing a model that doesn't control for some explanation that you would really like to control. So this is not an ideal case. The third alternative is a bit better. So if you use, for example, logistic regression a lot this perfect prediction issue that I demonstrated here is a well-known thing. So any decent book on logistic regression analysis will tell you at least the first case but probably also the second case. Stata user manual will explain you both cases that I demonstrated and what stated us in those scenarios and why. So you can try and learn each special case and how to deal with them separately and it works if you just want to use a small number of analysis in your life. The problem is that the special cases for different analysis for example if you do negative binomerecus analysis there are different special cases. The number of special cases that you have to learn is quite large. Then the fourth option is to understand the estimation principle. So what do they are, the secondary values and the likelihood, what do they mean, how do they depend on the parameter values that the computer is currently trying and then you can see what's the problem. So this is of course more difficult but in the long run it will make you a better researcher because you can do diagnostics for your model in a way that just trying to memorizing every special case doesn't allow you to do. So these are the four options that allow you to present some results. The one is unethical, unethical to ignore warnings. Trial and error is bad. This is good but it's not the ideal case and in ideal case you understand what the software is doing. There's also the fifth option which is ignore the model. So give up, don't do the model. For example if you are just doing a robustness check you have your main analysis results, no warnings and then in a robustness check you have where you analyze a different model that's not that important you get a warning. So should I spend a day or a week troubleshooting it, should I spend a month studying it first and then a week troubleshooting it or should I just leave the analysis out? Leaving a problematic analysis out is a better alternative than ignoring the warning, ignoring the problem and reporting the results anyway. I do this all the time when the problem is not important I don't want to spend my time dealing with problems so it's a perfectly viable option that's something you should consider.


It is now time for a question period. The member from Nipissing thank you My question this morning speaker is for the premier premier this morning the Ontario Power Authority's CEO Colin Anderson brought a spreadsheet to the Justice Committee that showed the cost of the Oakville cancellation to be $1.1 billion less less any savings I'm sorry. He had to disclose that Order Thank you $1.1 billion less any savings for a net cost potentially 310 million The member from Willowdale will come to order and I'll start identifying individuals That includes members on all sides That includes members on all sides. I'm trying to get control and I'm the member from Renfrew has just got himself a little deeper than I think he wants to I'm seeking your cooperation. I will identify individuals from here on in Please finish your question. Thank you I asked him if the government knew it was more than 40 million dollars and he said yes And when I asked him who in the government knew speaker his answer was one word everybody Premier will you now apologize to Ontarians for not telling them what you've known all along about this gas plant scandal Mr. Speaker all parties first of all opposed the Oakville facility The government honored its commitment to the people of Oakville and renegotiated As I've tried to indicate to you it does go both ways and it is starting to happen that way So the member from Renfrew for the second time, would you please come to order? Minister of Energy Mr.. Speaker the government honored its commitment to the people of Oakville and Renegotiated the Oakville facility from Lee's friend will come to order in September 2012 the Ontario power authority posted on its website The memorandum of understanding and a 216 page contract. Mr. Speaker that contract identified sunk costs It also contemplated a wide range of other costs That was there for the whole world to see in September 2012 mr. Speaker the auditor general in the Sarasagha report It was very very clear from that that these are very complex negotiate very complex calculations. Thank you Mentor to Speaker Premier given what we've heard this morning I hope you're not going to follow the path of the other liberal witnesses who've appeared before the Justice Committee When you testify today, they've either all developed sudden onset selective amnesia Or they just plain didn't tell the whole truth to the committee One admitted to destroying documents illegally while another ordered the OPA to withhold documents We heard that this morning from Colin Anderson again Ontarians are fed up with this obstructive nature and are fed up with the liberals taking care of their political whims With hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer and rate payer money Premier, how can you expect to maintain confidence of this house and Ontarians when you knew all along your numbers? Minister of energy. Mr. Speaker. I'll continue the the answer that I was in the middle of before What's clear from today as well as the previous auditors report at the calculations are very very difficult So complex mr. Speaker that this morning at committee the OPA Acknowledged an estimate that it made about four weeks ago with a particular cost and had a different cost today mr. Speaker the consultant that was that was referred to in the particular report also had a different cost figure the Opposition has a different cost figure mr. Speaker That's why the premier asked the auditor general to come and do her report because we need an independent Reliable figure that we can count on moving forward mr. Speaker. Thank you Thank you, Speaker premier I asked Colin Anderson who in the government knew the cost of cancelling Oakville would be more than 40 million dollars and his answer Was? Premier there's nowhere for you to go now except to come this afternoon and tell the truth you've known about the costs For months and yet have stood in this legislature you and your ministers and told us something different Behavior like that is why you do not have the confidence of Ontarians and nor should you? Premier, what are you going to tell us this afternoon that you couldn't have told us a year ago? Mr. Speaker September 2012 the whole world knew there were extra costs it was on the OPA website 216 page contract identified some costs they identified that there will be more calculations and more costs to come mr. Speaker that the critic Well, that's about I so I will come to this side and say the same I'll start Identifying you individually, and my ear is pretty good. I don't even have to see you sometimes Mr.. Speaker we agree with them the whole world knew that there were additional costs it was on the website The critic stands up, and he misrepresents. He speaks Let me do my job, please member will withdraw cute Dems withdraw Will say is that he uses selective facts and selective quotes without completing the sentence Without stating without saying that the whole world knew there were additional costs There was a 216 page contract, and if he didn't read it in September 2012, that's his problem Do your job right? Member from chat and will come to order No question the member from simple great Speaking my question for the premier Remember Colin Anderson from the Ontario power authority said that your gas plant Oakville decision is at least three hundred and ten million dollars That's eight times the amount you stood and told this house Mr.. Speaker Ontarians are disgusted and what's even more disgusting is the premier's arrogance by saying this week that this house Only gets one confidence vote, and that will be the budget That's her decision forget the parliamentary rights of the rest of you Well, mr. Speaker the budget to be tabled will be overseen by a premier who's been rather liberal with the truth And it will be tabled by Stop the clock, please You can't say indirectly what you can't say indirectly, so I'm asking the member to withdraw And it would be tabled by a minister of finance whose seat was bought by one of the gas plant decisions So I asked the premier Do you honestly believe that this house has confidence in your government if so, and why don't you call the non-confidence motion right now? Minister of energy come to order, please Premier thank you very much. Mr. Speaker, and I've I've been very clear on the The issue of confidence I believe that the the budget is a is a an imminent and an important opportunity For the legislature to express confidence or non-confidence in the government mr. Speaker I really hope that the members opposite will read the budget, and then they will make their decision mr. Speaker I just want to I just want to say this mr. Speaker. I will appear before the committee this afternoon, but Whether I'm in this house Whether I'm in the hall speaking to media whether I'm at an event in in some part of the province I always tell the truth mr. Speaker the truth that I know are in a position mr. Speaker today that they They want to The reality is thank you that is the truth mr. Thank you supplementary Well premier you chaired the meeting where the Oakville cancellation was approved You signed off on the cabinet minute approving the cancellation of the Oakville plant You stood in this house, and you told us a dollar number that you knew was not the whole truth Collin Anderson said just a few minutes ago Downstairs in committee that everyone knew that everyone knew The true cost and that was much higher than what the liberal party and what you yourself have admitted So so mr. Speaker. I asked the premier who's telling the truth An expert and said that we should respect a long-time civil servant Collin Anderson or you the premier Are you telling the truth when you didn't know the true cost or is Collin Anderson telling the truth which he just said under all Premier if that Collin Anderson was telling the truth. Absolutely. We call the okay this morning as I understand it The OPA provided two different cost estimates mr. Speaker both estimates differ from what the OPA previously advised the government mr. Speaker That makes the case mr. Speaker that it's extremely important that we have the auditor general Situation that's why I asked the auditor general to look at it Mr. Speaker because of the complexity that the Minister of Energy was talking about because of the complexity that I have told the truth as I have understood it. I will continue to do that today final supplementary Mr. Speaker I want to be clear the premier stood in this house in September 24th 2012 and said directly that the cost of $40 million The liberals screamed and howled every time we the Tories said that wasn't true Now we can understand the liberals wanting to buy off the NDP In an attempt to clean the power during the budget discussions But what we can understand on this side of the house Is why it's in the best interest of taxpayers or the half a million people on board in this province To keep this government going to any way prop up this government mr. Speaker the liberals have been caught Red handed and red faced won't you get up now and apologize to the people of Ontario? We're not telling them the whole truth. You have an opportunity to do that You have an opportunity to say what little reputation you have apologize and call the non-confidence vote Thank you, premier Thank you very much, mr. Speaker I think that the complexity that collin anderson from the opa talked about this morning makes it very clear That waiting for the auditor general's report is extremely important in this case What what I want it what I want to say to the people of Ontario, mr. Speaker is that I regret that this situation has come to this I regret that we are in this situation We collectively mr. Speaker because every party in this house said that they wanted to make sure that these cancellations happen, mr. Speaker The complexity was not going to go away If it had been the pcs who had been implementing the decision or if it had been the NDP who were implementing the decision The complexity around the costs of these cancellations was going to be in place no matter who implemented the decision We implemented it mr. Speaker at every juncture. We were given information That's the information that I relayed whenever I spoke on the issue mr. Speaker and I when I came into this office I said we've got to get we've got to get these questions answered. That's why we opened up the process That's why the committee has had the opportunity to ask these questions Sir the member the leader of the third party newt question Thank you speaker. My question is for the premier the premier likes to describe her government as new People want change from the same old politics that have left them cynical about the work that we do here Does the premier agree that it's time for that kind of change? I'm not sure exactly where the uh the leader of the third party is going with this mr. Speaker But you know from my perspective what's very important is that I follow through on what I said I was going to do I said that we needed to open up the process around the uh the gas plant Discussion that we needed to make sure that all documents were available that we needed to broaden the mandate of the committee and make sure that all questions could be asked about every aspect of the decision Mr. Speaker, that's what I've done at different junctures the opposition Both opposition parties didn't want us to open up the process as much as we wanted it open We've managed to get it open so that the committee can ask its range of questions I think that's what I said I was going to do. I followed through mr. Speaker. So from my perspective That's what people of Ontario should be able to expect Well speaker the premier keeps insisting that things have changed But anyone watching committee this morning the committee that was charged with looking into the council gas plants Can see that it's politics as usual here at queen's park this morning The head of the opa confirmed that this the cost of scrapping the private power deal in oakville was eight times More eight times higher than the government claimed Does the premier thinks this will make people more cynical or less cynical about politics in ontario? Well You know, I hope that what comes out of this is a better process Mr. Speaker that we can make sure that this doesn't happen again because The reality is The fact that the opa has had different numbers to report at different points, mr. Speaker is a real problem It creates frustration. It creates a sense of insecurity in terms of well What are the experts actually looking at and how do we calculate these numbers? So how do we make sure that in the future? We have a better upfront process. We make a good decision about citing this kind of infrastructure But mr. Speaker if there has to be a cancellation, I think we all need to ask How do we better predict what the costs are going to be and how do we avoid a situation where the people who are the Experts and they are the expert on who we are relying are able to give us better estimates Supplementary that asked a member from Hamilton East County Creek to come to order. Please supplementary final supplement Fieker the premier said she'd offer change But instead of real answers and explanations Liberals are busy trying to call fail torii candidates to testify at committee in a desperate attempt to score some political Points and torii's table motions that will never be called for debate in this house Does the premier think this is a sort of change that people of this province want?  Speaker We're trying to get and I know the opa came as an ndp witness But we had asked that they came that they come earlier Mr. Speaker the reality is that we are working with the committee process We are trying to get the information out We're trying to make sure that all the documents that both the ndp and the conservatives have asked for are available And that everyone who they've asked to come forward is coming are coming forward. I'm going to be there this afternoon Mr. Speaker this is not a political game from my perspective This is about making sure that people have the information that they need and it's about making sure that we find a way to work together And ensure that the next time around we have better information We have a better upfront process and the community is involved earlier on so that we don't get into a situation like this again What's that little? New question Speaker in tough times people are looking for some uh real sense that their government will put the challenges Facing people at the top of the agenda and not the challenges facing the liberal party and their well connected insiders The premiers made it clear what her priority is when it comes to facing the facts on the cancelled gas plans Is she ready to admit that this just isn't good enough for families to expect more and better from their government Speaker I know I have said that I regret that this situation Had evolved the way it did that we did not collectively have a better process in place So that the decision could have been made upfront I I agree with the leader of the third party that this should not have happened the way it happened Mr. Speaker, I agree that we should have had better information and that we should have been able to Pin down what the costs were going to be in the first place But mr. Speaker the reality is this is where we are a decision was made that was agreed to by all of the parties in the Legislature mr. Speaker and we are having to deal with the fallout from that and I am not happy with that I'm not happy with that at all mr. Speaker and I don't I don't think the people of Ontario should be happy about it either But what they should expect is that we get all the information We learn from the situation and we put a better process in place next time around Mr. Speaker Speaker people feel like they're falling behind and they'd like some sense that the government understands their challenges and will put their needs first That's not what they've been seeing here in Ontario speaker the millions of dollars handed to the hedge funds So the government could scrap gas plants and hold on to political power is just one example But when people see that money can be found for corporate tax loopholes and CEO salary hikes at hospitals While they're being told to pay more and expect less They know that it's time for a change is the premier ready to put people first in this province Thank you very much mr. Speaker mr. Speaker that is exactly what our throne speech and what our budget is going to be about mr. Speaker We are our society and I think that the leader of the third party understands that what that means That means Focusing on the education on the health care that our Citizens in this province need mr. Speaker that every resident of Ontario every child in the province every senior who needs service Every child who needs an education mr. Speaker has access to that excellent Institution that we that we are so proud of in in Ontario mr. Speaker That's what the budget will be about the budget will also be about making sure that we have the conditions for economic growth Making sure that we are fiscally responsible so that we can deliver those services The people in Ontario need mr. Speaker Speaker for people struggling with tough times this isn't a game It's millions and millions of dollars that could have been invested in hiring nurses That could have been invested in creating more home care Or could have been invested in helping young people to find the job that they need And when they open the papers today They see a lot more of the same top executives at Ontario's lottery corporation getting fat raises While people receiving chemotherapy treatment learned that their government refused to regulate the company that was mixing their drugs Is the premier ready to get her priorities in check and not just talk about it Very much mr. Speaker and uh the leader of the third party I think knows that it's extremely important that we Absolutely put people at the centre put the people of Ontario at the centre of all of the decisions that we make And to make sure mr. Speaker that as we bring our budget forward that we recognize that Making people's lives better making sure that young people have access to employment, mr. Speaker Making sure that people who need care in their homes get that home care, mr. Speaker Making sure that people in our northern and rural communities and the children who are The Aboriginal children who are not succeeding at school get the supports that they need mr. Speaker Those are the priorities that we need to focus on in terms of Of making this province a fairer society mr. Speaker in order to do that We need to stay on track in terms of our fiscal plan and we're going to do that and we'll be bringing that budget to this house on thursday mr. Speaker Remember from the team My question is for the premier of Ontario It's dealing with a very serious matter speaker order not only with her eroding credibility But also with the confidence the people of this province have in her government I was at the justice committee earlier today when colin anderson made it very clear that everybody knew that those costs were much higher than 40 I assume as do all of my colleagues that everybody includes You You've known all along that the cost of this politically motivated the environment will come to order But you misrepresented those numbers in this house several times The member knows that it's not allowable withdraw please speaker The the the premier knew as a minister and now is premier that those 40 million dollar figures She had been suggesting weren't true. So We have a serious question for you When were you first briefed that this 40 million dollar figure was inaccurate And can you tell this house why you deserve to have the confidence of the people of ontario given what you have done? And heist leader will want to comment on the supplementary because I know he's been following the issue very closely mr. Speaker But I just I just want to know I just want the member officer to know that no matter her accusations No matter the tone with which she Somebody's making it too loud Thank you premier No matter the tone in which she delivers the The accusation the reality is mr. Speaker that I have I have said I will appear at the committee I will tell the committee exactly what I what I know and my experience of this situation I will answer all the questions and I will continue to do what I have done all along Which is tell the truth at every juncture. I will tell the truth as I understand it At every juncture whether I'm hearing this house or whether I'm at committee or whether I'm out in the homes Thank you Supplementary Much mr. Speaker she can run and she can hide but the people of ontario have seen what this government has done Don't take my word for it. Colin anderson said it right in front of me in justice committee But the 40 million dollar figure was 775 times higher and that everybody knew his word speaker. They weren't my they weren't the member from nipissing They were her own handpicked OPA chair We know that premier win chaired the cabinet committee that signed off from the documents We know that she was the campaign chair for the liberals in the last election We know she sat around the table when when colin anderson said everybody knew the costs were much higher than 40 million dollars And then she stands in this house in september 25th and continues to cite that erroneous figure Mr. Speaker the people of this province have lost confidence They want to know will she put our want of confidence motion on the floor to be debated Thank you premier government house leader government house leader Mr. Speaker let's let's start dealing in facts. This is what mr. Anderson This is writing's name government house leader Let's quote for mr. Anderson in front of the committee this morning The 40 million dollar number was the one that was used at the time of the announcement because it was the one That was very crystallized if you will at that point of time But what was key in the sense that you just used 40 million in sunk cost because that's exactly what it describes It's a sunk cost which was acknowledged all along as only being a portion of the cost There were other elements that were noted, but you know what else mr. Speaker colin anderson had to say We said and I quote mr. Speaker We have a board and we talked about the fact that there was a very strong commitment on the part of the government And the citizens in the area Remember from home all uh, this is please Yep, 10 second rapper mr. Anderson acknowledged The very simple fact that the progressive conservative party was out there on the campaign trail Supporting the relocation of both those plants. Thank you new question Anderson make a vote Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Speaker. My question is for the minister of health and long-term long-term care care The committee heard from marquesi the company that supplied the diluted chemo drugs to the hospital Marquesi has always known that they were unregulated Marquesi actually told us that they had directly asked both federal and provincial official to oversee their operation But they were refused Why did the province refuse to regulate marquesi even after they were asked? Well, thank you speaker and thank you to the member opposite for this question I think it's very important to note that the that marquesi did approach the college of pharmacists The college of pharmacists reported back to marquesi that because because this was not These were not drugs that were being Mixed for individual patients It did not fall under the definition of a pharmacy Therefore it did not fall under the jurisdiction of the college of pharmacists The college of pharmacists referred marquesi to health canada health canada is responsible for the Manufacturing of drugs indeed it has a policy on its books that if a pharmacy does not fit under the definition of the pharmacy Then it likely is a manufacturing and falls under the jurisdiction of health canada It is still it is still rather disappointing to hear the answer from the minister of health It's as if the college of pharmacists exist out there without the oversight of her ministry And it's as if the gray area is still news to her ministry But this were Facts that were known long ago The reality is that the government chose to do nothing to make matters worse The government now seems to be putting the responsibility of oversight on the backs of our hospital So my question is rather simple Does the minister understand that it is her job to provide oversight to our health care system? Speaker I Take my responsibility extremely seriously I do think it's important that the member opposite understands that health canada is responsible for the safety of drugs And I was very very pleased that health canada has clarified the position And that we have introduced regulations that the college of pharmacists is posting regulations That will fix this problem speaker that will go a long way to to to fix in this gray area Speaker I am as Concerned about this situation as anyone from where I come to her taking strong steps to fix the problem Thank you The member from scarverall agent carton. Thank you, mr. Speaker my question is for the minister of environment Speaker last week the minister released a 2011 air quality in ontario report Which marked the 41st year of long-term reporting on air quality in ontario Research has shown that air pollution has negative health effects increased health care costs and cost premature deaths The 2011 air quality report concluded that there was decrease in the levels of air pollutants And the air quality improvement in ontario This is great news especially in the health of the youngest residents in my riding of scarverall agent court Mr. Speaker through you to the minister can he tell the house the improvements have been made since the last air quality report Yes, mr. Speaker ontario's air quality is continuing to improve Emissions of harmful air pollutants continue to decrease air quality has improved significantly over the last 10 years Especially nitrogen dioxide carbon monoxide and sulfur dioxide pre-major smog causing pollutants We also measure levels of fine particulate matter tiny particles in the air that can come from a variety of sources like aerosols smoke fumes dust fly ash and pollen The early averages have decreased approximately 30 percent since 2003 Fine particulate emissions from industrial processes have decreased by more than 57 percent over the 10 year period from 2001 2010 and the transportation sector shows a gradual decrease of 20 percent over the same period The report confirms the actions we have taken Specifically the phase out of coal emission trading regulations emission controls the spouters and drive clean emissions Thank you, speaker I would like to thank the minister for his leadership and sharing with the health the positive news The air quality in ontario has improved significantly over the past several years In the minister's answer He identified some of the progressive initiative that our government has to undertaken which improved ontario's health And taken our commitment to the environment seriously Since 2003 our government recognized the health of our ontarian community like my riding of scarborough aging court And the environment is a high priority and we have taken many steps to improve the air quality in ontario Speaker through you to the minister Can he explain what our government is doing to do to improve the air quality in ontario? Thank you minister Well ontario's air standards as you would know are among the toughest in north america We're still looking at new ways to improve our air quality We don't intend to give back the gains we've made and there's still more to be done Exactly eliminating dirty coal fired Electricity generating units has the largest initiative of its kind in all of north america since 2003 our government has cut Coal use in ontario by nearly 90 percent here by the end of this year We'll only have two coal plants operating by the end of 2014 ontario Will be one of the first places in the world to eliminate coal as a source of electricity production Our emissions trading regulations for nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide have helped to reduce air pollutants And the drive clean emissions testing has successfully reduced emissions in our transportation sector An area where reductions are needed and difficult to achieve Ontario's long-term energy plan is helping to improve our air quality by increasing the use of emission free electricity Such as wind solar and other forms of wind interception Thank you very much My question is for the premier In light of the emerging gas plant scandal Where the government schemed to understate the true cost of cancelling the oakville and mississauga gas plants And then took deliberate steps to hide who was responsible for deciding to cancel the gas plants How can the premier continue to maintain the pretense that her government has the confidence of this house? Mr. Speaker, there's been a lot of talk this morning about Transparency this afternoon the premier of this province will be appearing before the committee After the arrogance mr. Speaker what went on across the way And I hope mr. Speaker that there will be an apology to the premier for the member from prince Edward Hastings Who stood in this house and said shouldn't we have to haul you before the committee like some kebek construction industry snitch The member the member from from leeds grandville who talked about playing calendar and playing games and yet Mr. Speaker when we asked the leader of the opposition to be for to be before the committee today He was suddenly too busy mr. Speaker. He may appear on the 7th or the 14th Who knows when we asked jeff yannisick the candidate in mississauga scepter before the committee He has refused and mr. Speaker. I will go on and my supplementary Here are There's a moment There's a moment in which it's difficult to find whether or not I can land somewhere because everyone's tackling Even when the answer is being given from the members of that side and when the question is being put on that side You'd help everybody if if we all agree just to stop tackling and let the question be put in the answer Supplementary, please Budget motion is a confidence motion But taken literally it only pertains to the budgetary policy of the government not confidence in an overall sense In contrast our confidence motion allows for a more comprehensive test of the confidence that the house has in the government Setting aside the political auction sales that the last two budgets have become in this minority parlor Hundreds of years of parliamentary tradition dictate that any vote can be designated as confidence by the government and any government that can't command The confidence of the house should resign By refusing to call the confidence motion for debate and a vote in this house The government demonstrates that it believes it might be defeated if a vote were held If they themselves don't believe that they can command the confidence of the house What gives them the right to table a budget this Thursday after me? You know, Mr. Speaker, I keep political games. I keep hearing heckles across the way that this is a serious business And it is a serious business The member from simple gray come to learn the member from Leeds Grenville come to order Thank you. Now you got it Mr. Speaker, this is This isn't Political games that we're asking these people to come before committee Jeff Yannisick put out a press release saying unlike the Dalton McGinty liberals The only way to guarantee this power plant does not get elected does not get built is to elect a tim hudak Ontario pc government We asked him to come before the committee to talk about the pc's position on the cancellation He has refused. We asked miss. We asked marianne demont wailin to come before the committee She put out a pamphlet to thousands of houses saying the only party that will stop the sure way power plant is the Ontario pc party and this morning at the last minute mr. Speaker she cancelled will they work with their Colleagues to make sure that these witnesses come before the committee Thank you speaker my question to the premier Emails from chris morally former chief of staff to Dalton McGinty show the premier was briefed personally About canceling the oakville gas plant Presumably there was a discussion of costs Does the premier agree that it costs a lot more than 40 million dollars to relocate the oakville gas plant? And when did she know that these costs were much higher than her government was claiming? Thank you very much mr. Speaker and I know that the member opposite knows that I am going to be at committee this afternoon I am going to be speaking to whatever questions Are put before me mr. Speaker and I will just say again that at every juncture when information was given to me That was the information that that I related mr. Speaker I I talked about the the information as I understood it But the reality is mr. Speaker that this morning the opa provided two different cost estimates both estimates differ From what the opa previously advised the government mr. Speaker the estimates have changed over time mr. Speaker That is what the opa said this morning mr. Speaker and I will be at committee this afternoon. Thank you supplementary Speaker for months the government has claimed it cost 40 million dollars to cancel the oakville gas plant The minister of energy said on october 3rd 2012 quote Let's be very clear the memorandum of agreement speaks to the cost and we know that the cost is 40 million dollars And since the premier was sworn in she hasn't corrected that number We know the premier was briefed by chris morally before she signed her name through the government policy to go into arbitration on oakville Why did it take months of public pressure? And committee hearings to get the premier to agree that the cost was a lot more than 40 million dollars Mr. Speaker it was this premier who has asked the auditor general and officer of the legislation to look into it So mr. Speaker there was a bit of noise before a little bit of enthusiasm Let me share colin anderson's quote from this morning The 40 million dollar number was the one that was used at the time of the announcement because it was the one that was Very crystallized if you will at that point in time What was key in the sense that you just used 40 million dollars in sunk cost because that's exactly what it describes It's a sunk cost which was acknowledged all along as only being a portion of the cost There were other elements that were noted Mr. Speaker we have asked the auditor general to look into it as has been pointed out a number of figures were provided by the opa Let's allow the auditor general to do his work And let's have the committee start to do some productive work to make sure a situation like this doesn't arise in the future Thank you, speaker my questions to the minister of municipal affairs and housing minister thunder bay and the surrounding area Municipalities of oliver papoonge and con me experienced significant flood damage in may 2012 This flooding which was reported to be as high as six feet in some basements resulted in damages to 4400 homes and businesses affecting countless families It also resulted in significant damage to municipal infrastructure Washing out roads bridges damaging culverts and causing shoulder erosion and sinkholes Speaker could the minister of municipal affairs and housing tell this house What the government has done to help the people of thunder bay oliver papoonge and con me to help them recover from this flood Thank you minister municipal affairs and housing Thank you speaker And I want to thank my colleague for the question and I want to Recognize the people and the staff and the first responders of thunder bay and oliver papoonge and comedy for their tireless work During and after this disaster to help their community As the house may know I was up in thunder bay last week And I was able to meet with the mayor of thunder bay Keith Hobbs and the disaster relief committee to commend them for their swift action at the time of the flooding And their assistance to residents to recover from the flood They acted quickly they repaired basements and removed dangerous mold And they ensured their residents were in a safe and healthy place to live as a result of the hard work and advocacy By my colleagues from thunder bay out of koken and here here and thunder bay superior north I was happy on friday to inform the city of thunder bay and that the province will provide four million dollars under the Ontario disaster relief assistance program To help the city pay for their response and we continue continue to work with them today Thank you speaker and thank you minister It's good to hear that we have support at the city of thunder bay and municipalities In repairing the damage that was caused by this flood over 4400 homes The minister mentioned in the original answer that our government To providing four million to help the city of thunder bay pay for these repairs to many of the private residents basements Unfortunately, there's been claims in this house that our government has only provided $300,000 to the people of thunder bay for this disaster Speaker could the minister share with this house if our government has provided additional funds to the people of the city of Thunder Bay and the surrounding areas to repair the damage. Thank you Thank you speaker I appreciate the question the promise remains committed to providing up to 17.2 million dollars to thunder bay An area municipalities under the ontario disaster relief assistance program to date We have already provided 3.5 million dollars to help to reduce the financial burden of thunder bay and affected municipalities These funds will help rebuild and rehabilitate infrastructure such as roads and bridges It also helps reimburse individuals who've suffered losses from this disaster We've also provided up to 200,000 dollars to cover the administrative costs of the disaster relief committee Who are volunteers who've done important work to help the people affected while I was in thunder bay I was able to clarify the odrap rules and when the staff of municipal affairs and housing looked into the estimates of those claims We noticed they were on the low side. I'm glad to report that the committee will be reexamining its eligible claims And I expect there will be an adjustment on those claims here here Thank you real question the member from grocery owned sound. Thank you speaker all questions for the premier Colin Anderson's testimony at justice committee this morning was a scathing indictment of your liberal government scandal He confirmed that your 40 million dollar figure to cancel oakville is not even remotely accurate and that the true cost is nearly eight times higher While we have become accustomed to your numbers not adding up even your finance minister must feel uncomfortable Standing behind the fudge numbers related to these gas plant boondoggles Our want of confidence motion has been tabled and refusal to call our motion for debate is an affront to democracy Premier will you stand in your place and commit to calling the confidence motion today? Mr. Speaker again Colin Anderson appeared in front of the committee I've shared some of the quotes some of the material that he talked about the original 40 million dollar figure He also provided the committee with a number of different cost estimates Which I think lends a lot of value to the move by this premier to ask the auditor general to look into it But again, mr. Speaker the other thing that Colin Anderson pointed out today Was that he was very much aware that all parties of this house supported the cancellation of the oakville plant As I say mr. Speaker these are not political games We ask the leader of the opposition to come today a man who's starting a youtube video a man whose candidates put out Press releases and twitter feed all promising this to talk about the work that they did the policy work in valuations We've asked conservative candidates to come forward and one surprisingly cancelled first thing this morning while another has refused to go So perhaps in the supplementary the honorable member can talk about his efforts to get them Thank you Thank you speaker same old same old spin Speaker my question is back to the premier again premier when you took the week-long mediation course You must have learned that there are two sides to each dispute and a means to resolve every dispute in case your memory fails You I would like to offer the following reminder Your liberal government told the hardworking people of interior But the cost of cancelling the mississauga and oakville gas plants to save liberal seats in the last election Was approximately 355 million dollars lower than the actual cost the hardworking people of interior are tired of your government wasting taxpayer dollars and scandals Premier the interior pcs have tabled a motion to test whether or not the people of interior still have confidence in your government Given the accumulation of the scandals under your watch Premier will you stand in your place show some integrity and call that confidence motion today? Speaker I I don't see this as being Spin the member from halton hanser june 1st 2010 The people of oakville have told you that they don't want the proposed gas Fired power plant and I agree with them the member from halton hanser september 14th 2010 oakville residents have called on you to change the location of the proposed oakville power plant I have listened to the people of oakville and I agree with them the member from halton press release september 14th 2010 minister will you move the oakville power plant? I am asking the minister to consider moving this plant the member from halton hanser at october 19th 2010 I was pleased when it was canceled the mr. Speaker I could go on Dozens and dozens of quotes from the opposition mr. Speaker where they put forward the exact same commitment It was a promise they made and a promise we kept My questions to the minister of health and long-term care Speaker yesterday we heard from london health sciences center the hospital most affected, but by the diluted chemotherapy drugs Hospital officials told us they were never they would never have knowingly used a non-regulated provider That they trusted the safety of the procurement process Speaker there is ample evidence that the ministry has known about this gray area for years Can the minister explain why her ministry did nothing for so long? Speaker I welcome the question and And I just want to take a moment to say thank you to the people from london health science center appeared yesterday, and I think gave Very thoughtful Very thorough answers to the questions that were put to them This has been a difficult time for everyone at london health sciences And I applaud them coming and giving the answers that they did yesterday Speaker as I said to the earlier question on this issue Marquesi did approach The college of pharmacists the college of pharmacists and pharmacists informed them That they did not have the authority to regulate that particular activity referred them to health canada Speaker I think what is very important here is that we are taking the steps necessary In collaboration with health canada to ensure that Speaker ontarians want to know exactly what went wrong and how this could have happened For the almost 700 patients affected in london the urgency is even greater The hospital seemed to do everything in its power to protect its patients But the ministry failed in its duty of oversight Will the minister explain why she failed to protect patients in london When they needed the protection the most That's the test the member from london is warned carry on I completely agree that the patients affected and their loved ones deserve answers And that is why I have appointed dr. Dr. Jake teeson to really do a thorough investigation So the member from Hamilton needs to know we can't take appropriate steps We're not waiting those speaker to take Steps the college of pharmacists and the hospitals are taking appropriate steps now, but we do await the longer The more thorough review. I also think it's important to note that that marquesi could have chosen to To deliver this under their pharmacy. In fact, the original contact was with the regulated pharmacy They then chose to spin off a separate company that did fall into this great area speaker Thank you new question the member from oakville Thank you speaker. I've got a question today for the minister of research and innovation Our government really recognizes that bringing leaders together across sectors is one of the best ways we can drive innovation Our province is home to world-class researchers Leading institutions and we have very strong private sector partners that have helped make this province number six in the world For the quality and the impact of its research This research creates jobs that generates economic growth and it makes ontario I think one of the best places to live and work in but speaker through you to the minister of research and innovation What is our government doing specifically to ensure that leaders across all sectors including government Are collaborating to produce the best outcomes for ontario when it comes to research Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for that question Mr. Speaker as the minister of research and innovation I am proud to be a part of the government that is forward thinking and innovator Mr. Speaker Great advances can be made by sharing best practices ideas and resources Our government recognizes the importance of collaboration Collaboration will translate into job creation better health care cleaner environment and a stronger economy Mr. Speaker recently our government invested a hundred million dollars in the ontario brain institute This investment will support a network of data on brain diseases across disciplines Researchers will be able to turn information into clinical applications and commercialization opportunities Mr. Speaker data is the integral part of our knowledge based economy. Thank you Thank you speaker and thank you minister for that answer I'm glad to hear we're investing in an institution that's doing important work as in the area of brain disease I know that uh, the minister was traveling in the thunder bay area recently to the regional research center And we all know in this house. I think that collaborating and sharing information is critical We can find solutions to our shared challenges that we do that Big data is a major trend in the technology and research communities and appears that's going to drive a lot of innovation Some say that data is a currency of the new economy Our ability to access to understand to search organize information is important So the work of the ontario brain institute is a great example I think of the important work that can be done through sharing data So speaker through you again to the minister what other government investments are being made to ensure the sharing of data Thank you minister Thank you, mr. Speaker. I want to thank the member again for that question Mr. Speaker our government recognizes the importance of data sharing with our contribution of seven million dollars IBM Canada was able to partner with the leading universities across the province to create the IBM Canada research and development center Using state-of-the-art computing facilities of this center Is focusing on solutions on climate changes gridlock and also on the human brain mapping Mr. Speaker, I recently attended the thing conference organized by orion Which is the ontario research and innovation optical network, which is focused on big data Orion members, mr. Speaker can access a global grid of research and innovation and educational networks Students educators Researches and the businesses mr. Speaker across the province and access and explore data and the share information Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a part of government whose investments in innovation Collaboration and also forward thinking projects Thank you Mr. Speaker my questions for the premier Speaker the government has quote No one from the outset that the true cost of canceling the oakville plant are exponentially higher than 40 million dollars The premier knew the minister knew the cabinet knew the liberal caucus knew And the liberal party knew this government is rotten to its core It's morally bankrupt Premier the time has come Will you call the confidence motion so we can put your government out of its misery? You'll write your own questions. This is a premier who when she took office Immediately offered a select committee to the opposition They refuse mr. Speaker because they want to undertake a witch hunt against a former member of this legislature This is a premier mr. Speaker who asked the auditor general to look into the oakville situation And as has been pointed out the opa brought a number of figures a number of estimates before the committee this morning And spoke about the complexity. Let's allow the auditor general to do its work This is a premier who asked government members of the committee to come forward with emotion with the broadest search possible of government Ministries and agencies to produce documents and tax plans and they voted against it. Mr Speaker the fact of the matter is mr. Speaker We have a premier who will appear in front of the committee this afternoon as invited who is showing thank you Thank you. You see the please supplementary Well, thank you, mr. Speaker again to the premier the NDP may be willing to excuse your failures And nine years of scandal, but the pc caucus will not The liberal government has lost the moral authority to govern It's over premier call the pc want of confidence motion today Mr. Speaker Who writes these questions? We have media interviews talking about the commitment of the progressive conservative party to cancel those plants We have statements in the legislature. Mr. Speaker. We have press releases. We have the twitterverse Mr. Speaker We have the leader of the opposition Appearing starring in a youtube video all we have asked mr. Speaker is that pc candidates The leader of the opposition come before the committee to explain their side of the story The costing and analysis that they undertook and so far mr. Speaker We've been stonewalled at every term We asked the leader of the opposition to be there today and he played calendar, mr. Speaker We asked progressive conservative candidates to come forward and mr. Speaker They cancelled the last minute or refused to come forward. When will the progressive conservative party show the level of transparency that the Thank you, speaker. My question is to the premier premier You will know because you were minister of education at the time that you Your government has followed a rfp process that has essentially put out a business small bus companies that have been operating For years in this province Just last week we had the minister of education say it was the perception of her ministry that in fact There are more small businesses that are in the bus business today than there was before How does that square up with the reality of all those small businesses that closed down across ontario From central ontario to northern ontario and across this province Yes, and I I'm pleased to respond as as uh as the member knows As the member knows we've asked our school boards to move to consortiums so that they can consolidate the bussing between the public and the catholic boards And uh that and provide a more efficient management of the service Those uh those consortiums then in terms have been asked by the auditor general who looked at this and and the ministry I agree, but the auditor general when he uh did the first audit of school boards when we expounded his mandate actually looked at school board procurement of transportation services and uh suggested that just Having a contract that went endlessly on with no competitive procurement process was not an acceptable process Tell you what's not acceptable is when the government decides you're going to put out a business People have been operating buses in this province from 50 to 100 years. That's not what is acceptable There are bus companies in very there are bus companies in cornwall and in timmons Elgin and across this province who have been shut down as a result of this policy And why because this government decides only the big it only the big big international bus companies Should be in the business of providing services to those school boards into our children I say again Will you for once get the real perception and understand what you're doing is killing small businesses in this province Something that should not be done Mr Thank you Keep this in perspective that since 2003 our government has increased the funding for transportation services by 34 In fact, if you look at because you mentioned small rural boards We're actually provided that in this school year that we're currently in we've provided 217 million dollars in funding specifically to rural boards for transportation But you asked about what has happened with the procurement in those boards where they are doing a competitive procurement And in fact where the consortium is doing a competitive procurement We've seen the number of local operators increase their market share from It's uh, never too late to be warned and it's never too late to have someone named Never Thank you Member Thank you, mr. Speaker. My question is for the minister of community safety and correctional services Our government was the first in nearly a century to strengthen the ontario society For the prevention of cruelty to animals act in 2009. This is something i'm very proud of In scarborough southwest we have many animal rescue groups and they are concerned concerned about the well-being of all animals There was discussion last fall about how ontario can ensure that we continue to have the strongest animal welfare system in the country Speaker, can the minister tell us what is our province doing to further strengthen the protection of animals in ontario Speaker and i want to thank the member from scarborough southwest for his question. I know that he's uh an animal lover and After I uh announced a three-point plan We consulted with many of our partners including the ospca the canadian council on animal Care the ontario veterinary college the canadian federation of human society Various animal protection and advocacy group like the zucha and term ministerial partner the the AMO the city of toronto and former employee from marine land and other Animal organization we have completed the consultation now and we are reviewing the feedback And our goal is the same We wanted to start any Changes this spring any required changes this spring including possible legislative amendment to better protect animal in ontario Thank you The uh member from renfrew nipissing penguin on a point of order. Thank you very much speaker Earlier today in a response to a question to the uh member from halted hills and I would like to cite That might be funny, but you still have to have decorum The member on your point. I would like to draw your attention speaker to standing order 23 h You don't even know what it is makes allegations against another member They hide the house leader of the government Made allegations that the leader of the opposition refused to come before the committee The justice committee looking into the gas plant table those scandals That the liberals have perpetrated. I have in my hand speaker, which I will Present to you as well a letter from the leader of the opposition indicating to the committee his Okay That's enough. Thank you I uh I will I will allow the member and any member at any time can correct the record if uh, they've made a statement that needs to be corrected That is not my preview. It's the members preview if they've made a statement that is not correct I um I uh I would like to uh introduce in the speaker's gallery today a guest of mine the mayor of bramford chris frill From nipissing uh point of order To correct my record. I stated earlier that the uh oakville Cancellation costs from the opa were 1.1 billion. I've just redone the math speaker. I apologize. It's 1 billion 94 million. Thank you That is the point of order Pursuant to my goodness Pursuant to standing order 38 a the member from kimmits james bay Thank you Has given notice of his dissatisfaction with the answer to his question given by the minister of education concerning bus contract RFPs this matter will be debated today at 6 p.m. There are no deferred votes This house stands adjourned until 3 p.m. This afternoon


Going on everyone Sam here with late in sports cards. We are ripping 21 upper deck skybox metal universe champions Hobby one box break number 53 random pack style There's a look again at your random results as always you can find those on the website under the results tab as well as the link That's currently in chat. So good luck guys. Let me just organize these so I know who's got what be Good luck again. So way this will work is we've got open the box That is packs one through five Packs six through ten and packs 11 through 15. Whoa thunder. Oh boy. Whoa. Whoa All right start with pack one Thomas C. Good luck Thomas. Calm down mother nature. I'll chill mother nature Fresh foundation Tiafima Lopez That is a PMG is gonna be Joanna Jed Rezik nice one there on the gold PMG that is giving me number two one hundred nice PMG for Thomas No, it's there you go, buddy Gold PMG coming your way Danny Willett and Francisco at Malinari Pack two is gonna be Colby C Do a Colby fresh foundation Lexi Thompson that is LeBron imitation Intimidation nation nice one there on the bronch Tom Love Lady and Sarah Pavin You should this is three mark B. Good luck mark What When you went oh my god to the thunder he thought it was to the package to people Shawn Montero fresh foundation Cocoa golf and Tony Fina on the skybox premium It's one there Molly McGrath and a camera inch and golly. There you go mark a couple of nice cards coming your way, buddy Four five and six are gonna be Stephen Jay. So good luck Stephen got a next couple of packs here. It's gonna be yours Who this who's to say it was True feeling green there's metal universe Mac Jones on the blast furnace Same doesn't know I was thinking I don't think I want to know what you were thinking you never do Stephen Jay on five again as well Good luck Stephen If you knew it was wrong through my head all day, who? fresh foundation Trace sermon that is gonna be a Carlos Colmaris there's a Kyle Pitts on the universe Okay, then waddle and at Naomi Osaka very nice pack number six Stephen Jay again. Good luck, Stephen Not alone base base base that is nice that it's gonna be Justin Fields on the platinum portrait. These are short printed man. That's cool. Grats on that one Stephen. That's sick.  Yeah, no, I don't even think it's a day. It's like holes in it. Oh, yeah Base and base that's actually that's pretty cool Seven and eight Trevor T. Good luck Trevor. Definitely unique fresh foundation at Red Gerard Base there's intimidation nation John and Kaminga That feels is pretty sweet and base there you go Trevor and Trevor again now on number eight Fresh foundation teal all That is gonna be behind it Devonta Smith on the premium foil. Hey, Johnny's boy Actually probably Donnie's boy. Yeah joking Donnie's boy.   Yeah, we're always on the links Oh, and uh, it's all wood There's Kyle Pitts on the metalized fresh foundation Najee. Oh, no Ben Simmons.  Cocoa golf and base Number 10 we've got Steven Jay Jones metalized. There's see heat to gala on the metal universe guard Brick of compost Mac Jones and woge All right on to number 11 now Daniel C at number 11. What your Daniel? Everybody here other than us now Jake Yeah, that is fresh foundation Scotty Barnes. We've got a insert reaching for the stars Mac Jones There aren't I think they're just really hard to hit. Yeah, you'll either get like Basically the way it'll work is you'll either get like a PMG in an auto Two PMGs or like a PMG in like that fields that field is like counts is like the hit basically to Matt H at 12 look Matt is Ark weld Scotty Barnes And base There you go Matt pack 13 will em Yeah, but there are autos in this like Gretzky's got autos. I think Jordan has autos Yeah, I remember it before it stayed right for us pull the Gretzky. Yeah Fresh foundation Josh Christopher That's Colin at more kawa We've got premium rookie at Josh giddy Be now and Justin Fields 14 we've got Trevor T Boy for Tampa just made a cool cool cool play. I made a fool of himself. Yeah, I know he tried a cool play Fresh foundation Jaden springer last spurn is Bryson DeChambeau Nice one there. We've got a z Cheng Tao and LeBron Last pack of the break is going to Steven J. It's 15. Good luck Steven See it buddy. That is woman DS fresh foundation Jalen Johnson. We've got Jean Montero on the universe Sabrina Inescu and a woge No, not woge that is What's his face Ryan Whitney? That's right with me That'll do it for the break guys. Thanks again for the Phil no real thing to recap. It's a little too difficult So thanks again