Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier. Across the province, when seniors open their hydro bills, they are shocked. Shocked that they might not be able to afford to pay their hydro bill. The same people that built this province as Canada's economic engine have had their government turn their back on them as energy prices skyrocketed. Those seniors have watched Ontario sadly become a have-not province. They worry about keeping the lights on in face of energy bills that have risen by over $1,000 on the watch of this government. Mr. Speaker, why does the Premier care so little about Ontario seniors? Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As I have said before in this House, I hope that when the issue of electricity prices is raised with any member of this House, that they point to the programs that have been put in place specifically to help folks who are perhaps struggling to pay their bills. So we have put in place the Ontario Electricity Support Program, and that is a program that will help low-to-modest income families save on average $360 a year. We have put in place on the industrial side the industrial electricity incentive, industrial conservation initiative, Mr. Speaker, and there is a property tax and seniors rate, Mr. Speaker, that seniors can apply for. So I hope that the opposition points people who raise this issue with him to those programs. Mr. Speaker, my question is once again for the Premier. When I think of the billing scandal at Hydro One, I am often reminded of that citizen from Timmins, that senior who saw $10,000 taken from his account incorrectly by Hydro One, seniors on fixed incomes, who in the words of the Ombudsman were mistreated, abused, were victims of deceit and deception. Mr. Speaker, how can the Premier callously ignore the needs of Ontario seniors because of her reckless energy policies? So Mr. Speaker, I take it the argument that the leader of the opposition is making is that Hydro One could be a better-run company. I hear in his question the assumption that it should be a better-run company. And Mr. Speaker, the motivation for broadening the ownership of Hydro One is to invest in infrastructure. That is our starting point, Mr. Speaker. But the reality is this is a company that can be better run, that can with professional board, Mr. Speaker, and leadership, Mr. Speaker, it can be a better-run company. And I would say to the leader of the opposition, I hope I do not have to employ yesterday's strategy, but I will. Please finish. Leader of the opposition, just to remind him of what he said on May the 15th of this year, and I quote, I generally believe that the private sector can do a better job than the public sector. I generally think market conditions would be helpful for a lot of government agencies. I assume he means Hydro One in this case. Mr. Speaker, again for the Premier, in this very chamber, the minister responsible for seniors, Premier's Liberal MPP for York West on the topic of the Hydro One privatisation said, I quote, we should try to protect this wonderful facility which, if sold, will not come back to the hands of the people of Ontario anymore. We will be at their mercy. Once again, we will have no recourse, no control with respect to the rates, and they will go high. It must be hard, it must be hard for the minister responsible for seniors to look seniors in the eye and tell them that this deal is good. Why won't the Premier listen to her own cabinet ministers? Why won't the Premier listen to seniors? Mr. Speaker, why does the Premier proceed with this Hydro Fire sale, callously ignoring the wishes of Ontario seniors? A debate around issues in a caucus, there are obviously different opinions. And Mr. Speaker, I know that the leader of the opposition has that situation in his own caucus. We have a better speaker within our caucus, and that's healthy. That is very, very healthy for democracy. I welcome those debates within my caucus, Mr. Speaker. I think that's how we make good decisions. I think it's how we hear the perspectives from around the province. We made a decision, Mr. Speaker, that we were going to review our assets. Ed Clark. I will now employ yesterday's strategy. Warnings are headed your way. Ed Clark and his team of experts, Mr. Speaker, helped us to look at the assets of this province. Answer. To leverage them. We've made a decision that investing in infrastructure in this province is great for the future economic well-being of Ontario. Thank you. New question. The leader of the opposition. Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier. Over the summer, the City of Windsor lost a bid for the new Jaguire land rover plant. The Mayor of Windsor, when asked what he could have done differently, what Windsor could have done differently, he said. The Mayor said it wasn't Windsor. It wasn't Essex County. It wasn't our region. There were other factors beyond our control that created a competitive disadvantage. The factors outside of Windsor that created the competitive disadvantage were the policies of this Liberal government. Minister of economic development is warned. Carry on, please. Mr. Speaker, these conditions created by the Liberal government are killing jobs in Ontario. Mr. Speaker, when will the Premier change her approach to make sure we create a competitive economy in Ontario? The 15,000 jobs that we're... Dufferin Caledon is warned. Carry on. Mr. Speaker, in the last seven months, 15,000 new manufacturing jobs in Ontario. Mr. Speaker, two years has been the number one jurisdiction for foreign direct investment. Mr. Speaker, the investments that we are making, the conditions that we are creating in Ontario, the supports that we are giving the industry, whether it is in electricity rates, Mr. Speaker, to allow them to have a reduced rate so that they can be more competitive, Mr. Speaker, or whether it's the direct supports that, quite frankly, the opposition has always objected to, Mr. Speaker. They have never supported the notion that we need to partner with business and make sure that we allow them to thrive, allow them to expand, allow them to become advanced manufacturers. In the case of manufacturing... Thank you. That's the kind of condition that we're creating. Thank you. Stop commenting. Mr. Speaker, again for the Premier, no one is asking for a handout. They just want the sector to be competitive Ontario. The reality is we've lost 43,000 auto jobs on the watch of this government. Windsor is a city that relies on manufacturing jobs. Instead of listening to municipalities, the Premier is making it harder and harder for municipalities to compete. Now the Premier wants to hammer municipalities with not only skyrocketing energy prices, but the cap and trade tax, the payroll tax. So my question is, why does the Premier continue to make it impossible for municipalities and cities like Windsor to succeed? Pretty much value our good working relationship with the municipalities of this province. There are 444 municipalities, Mr. Speaker. Our ministers and our members travel the province. We meet with municipal leaders, Mr. Speaker. I believe that it is extremely important for the provincial government to have a good open working relationship with municipalities, which is why we have put in place, for example, Mr. Speaker, the Communities Infrastructure Fund that is a direct result of feedback that we got from municipalities on the need to invest in roads and bridges. It's why there's a new Connecting Links program, Mr. Speaker, to deal with the realities of roads that municipalities can't afford to keep up and we need that support. Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is part of a party that has not supported the relationship that we have with municipalities. Mr. Speaker, it's not about photo ops around the province, whether it's in Windsor or Oshawa or any plant in between. It's the responsibility of government to create the conditions to be competitive, to create the conditions to create jobs. You have heard me say again and again that the auto sector is as important to Ontario as oil is to Alberta or pot ashes to Saskatchewan. Yet for 12 years the Liberal government has made it harder and harder for the auto sector to succeed in Ontario. Now it's being reported that the Buick's won't be made at GM in Oshawa after 2017. So Mr. Speaker, my question for the Premier is, has she entirely given up on the auto sector and manufacturing in Ontario? Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure. This party will never give up on the auto sector in this province. Work continued about the investments that we need to make. But the party that that member proposed to lead gave up on the auto sector in 2009. I'm going to remind all members again, but you have on your desk a reminder, you're speaking to the chair. Mr. Speaker, through you to the party opposite. That is not appropriate. You're speaking to the chair. Just to me, you're not spot speaking to them. Okay, Mr. Speaker, I'll let you have a spot on that. Except to say, Mr. Speaker, we have made $1.6 billion of investment, Mr. Speaker, in manufacturing. That's brought $15 billion of investment to this province. And 60,000 manufacturing jobs. I can see it's the member opposite, Mr. Speaker.  The purpose of my interjection was to allow us to bring the temperature down. It's not helpful when others continue to make it rise. New question. The leader of the third. Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Premier. The people of Ontario own Hydro One, but the Premier is plowing ahead with the privatization scheme and keeping owners in the dark, Speaker. She's held no public consultations and no public hearings. She's eliminated oversight by our watchdogs, like the Auditor General. And she's shed no light whatsoever on any evidence at all to back up her scheme. Speaker, why is this Premier determined to sell off Hydro One with no transparency, no public scrutiny by the people of Ontario? Thank you, Premier. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for what we have done and understand that the reason that we are going through this process, Mr. Speaker, is that we must invest in infrastructure around the province. There's infrastructure. There are infrastructure needs in every part of this province, Mr. Speaker, and the two go hand in hand. We're broadening the ownership of Hydro One in order to be able to leverage that asset, retain 40% ownership, Mr. Speaker, keep the regulatory controls in place, keep the process whereby Hydro rates are set now by the Ontario Energy Board. But at the same time, Mr. Speaker, allow us to invest in the infrastructure that is needed. And that is what we have talked about in our 2014 budget, Mr. Speaker. It's what we talked about in our platform when we went to the people of Ontario, Mr. Speaker. We held technical briefings for both opposition parties. We talked about it throughout the election campaign. We made it very clear, Mr. Speaker, that we were looking at assets to leverage them in order to be able to invest in infrastructure. Speaker, every day the Liberals' powerful friends are working to seal the deal on this $9 billion privatisation. Every day the Premier refuses to be open and accountable to the people of Ontario. And every day she ignores the fact that this Liberal Government still has no right to sell off how to think she is entitled to privatise Hydro One with no public support, no public mandate, and no public scrutiny. As I've said in this House, we've worked very hard to make sure that the protections that must be in place for the people of Ontario are in place and that the people of Ontario retain enough control, Mr. Speaker, of Hydro One, that they can, for example, remove the Board. The Government can remove the Board. Major decisions that will be made by the Board have to have two-thirds support, Mr. Speaker, and the Government will have, the people of Ontario will have 40% control on that Board. So those protections we have put in place, what I would say to the Leader of the Third Party, Mr. Speaker, is how can she, given that she purports to understand the needs of this province, how can she so underestimate the need to invest in infrastructure that she would say, stop building, stop investing just at a time where we need that economic driver, Mr. Speaker? Speaker, over generations, Ontarians have built our hydro system. Over generations, we've made sure that Ontarians are in charge. Sorry, Minister of Agriculture is warned. Carry on. Over generations, we've made sure that Ontarians are in charge and in control, because that's important, Speaker. That is important to the families and to the businesses of this province. But now this Premier, this Premier, is responsible for the biggest rollback of accountability in the history of Ontario's power system.  You know, the Leader of the Third Party knows that we have put in place protections. We have brought in Denny Dezotel, the former AG of Canada, to oversee the IPO, Mr. Speaker. She knows that Hydro-1 will be regulated by the Ontario Business Corporations Act, the Ontario Securities Act, and the Ontario Energy Board. But the Leader of the Third Party, I think would like people to believe is that Hydro-1 is the same company as it was 40 years ago. And, Mr. Speaker, what she hasn't been saying is that we already have a mixed system, that there already are many, many people in this province, Mr. Speaker, who are not served by... The Member from Redstone, Nipissing, Pembroke is warned. Carry on. That the system is already mixed, Mr. Speaker, that there already are private companies, municipal utilities who deliver, who have the distribution and the responsibility of transmission, Mr. Speaker. And I think that that's a nuance that she has chosen to ignore as she talks about what we are doing. And she also has chosen to ignore the fact that... Thank you. New question, the Leader of the Third Party. Newsflash to the Premier. It was public 40 years ago, and it is public now. She likes to say that she has had a choice to make, that somehow this is all about just a choice she had to make. But Ontarians know that a choice between public hydro and transit and infrastructure investment is a false choice. The truth is the Premier could have made better choices, Speaker, to fund transit and infrastructure. She could have made the kind of choices that new Democrats have been calling for. For example, restoring fair rules that the federal government put in place for CEO needs. So here's the real question. Why is this Premier choosing to protect the interests of her powerful friends instead of the interests of the public? Stop the party. In case you didn't think I noticed, I finally figured it out. The member from Newmarket Aurora is warned. I think we just got an insight into the philosophy of the leader of the third party. She would like us to move back 140 years when nobody needed broadband, Mr. Speaker, when there were no transit needs, Mr. Speaker, in many of our urban municipalities. Mr. Speaker, we're not going to live 140 years ago. We've moved on, and we need to make the investments that are needed in 2015 going forward. The fact is, Mr. Speaker, 24% of the province's distribution is delivered by Hydro One. It is a mixed company. It is very different. It's a mixed system. It's very different than it was 100 years ago, 50 years ago, 140 years ago. We're in 2015, Mr. Speaker. We need to make the investments that are needed in 2015 and that are needed for 2020 and 2030. If the leader of the third party doesn't want to come with us, Mr. Speaker, that's a prerogative. But the people of Ontario need those investments. Leader, please. Final supplementary? It's only my second. Supplementary. This Premier is making the wrong decisions, Speaker, for families, for businesses, and for the future of the province of Ontario. She is plowing ahead with the sale of Hydro One, even though Ontarians overwhelmingly reject this scheme. She's removing public oversight. She's rolling back accountability in our electricity system, Speaker. This is not the right direction. And she is using a false choice, Speaker, a false choice between public Hydro and infrastructure investment to deliberately, to deliberately cater to her small group of powerful friends. How can this Premier, how can she put the best interest of her friends ahead of the best interest of Ontarians? Sorry, Mr. Speaker, but I buy my powerful friends. I don't know whether the leader of the third party means the mom who needs to get on LRT in order to be able to pick up her kids from daycare, or by my powerful friends, whether she means the young family in Barrie that have jobs in Toronto and want to be able to go back and forth, or whether she means the family in Hamilton, Mr. Speaker, who needs to get across the city in decent time. If that's who she means by my powerful friends, they are powerful. They're the people of Ontario. They need you. Final supplementary. It's easy for this Premier to make those kind of comments if they were so damn powerful. She should listen to them and not come on back. That's exactly what she decided to do. She could have kept her promise because she made it to keep Hydro one foot public hands, but she chose to break that promise. She could have been open and transparent every single step of the way, but she chose to keep the people of Ontario in the dark. And even better, she could have found smart ways to fund transit and infrastructure, like restoring fair corporate taxes and closing loopholes for corporations. But she chose to sell off a public asset. The member from Eglinton Lawrence is warned. Please finish. A public asset that belongs to all Ontarian Speaker. Why does this Premier keep choosing to put the interests of her small group of powerful friends ahead of the best interests of Ontario? Thank you, Premier. So, Mr. Speaker, let's be clear that the leader of the third party has put forward one alternative, and that is only to increase corporate taxes. That is the only thing she has put forward, Mr. Speaker. And what she is saying is that she is proposing that she would raise corporate taxes enough so that we could pay for all of the infrastructure, the Barrie line, the Kitchener line, Mr. Speaker, that we would pay for the Hamilton LRT, a billion dollars for the Hamilton LRT, the new alignment of Highway 7 between Kitchener and Guelph. Highway 1117, four-laning between Thunder Bay and Nippagon. That the LRT, the second phase of the LRT in Ottawa, the EA for high-speed rail. Member from Hamilton Mountain, you're warned. That all of that she would fund through increases in corporate taxes. Well, I would put to her, Mr. Speaker, if she were to do that, then the whole discussion about the economic competitiveness and vitality of this province would change, Mr. Speaker. We would not be drawing direct investment, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Member from Prince Edward Hastings, you're warned. New question. Member from... To the Minister of Agriculture, 28,000 members of Green Farmers of Ontario have been forced by your government to go to court seeking an immediate state of regulation banning the Unix. Peggy Brechtfeld of Thunder Bay Dairy, Crop Farmer, Vice President, Ontario Federation of Agriculture, charges your regulations are unworkable, and I quote, we will be required to have a certified crop advisor inspect our fields. There's only about 100 certified crop advisors that are qualified to do these inspections. Minister, your regs question the integrity of consulting agronomists, disqualifying those who work with the seed trade. Where are you going to find sufficient crop advisors who are not associated with Ontario seed trade sector? Mr. Reagan-Polson. Mr. Speaker, for you, I want to thank the member for his questions this morning from Harlem and Norfolk. Clearly over the last little while, Mr. Speaker, we have identified four key areas that have put stresses of pollinators in the province of Ontario. We've identified over the last two winners that have been extremely cold, which has an impact on our pollinators in Ontario. We do know that there are mites that invade the bee hives in the province of Ontario, the verola mite. Thirdly, there is the management of hives in the province of Ontario, those hives that are professionally managed and those hives that are managed by hobbyists in that area. At fourthly, we do know the blanket use of neodeck application of the province of Ontario is having an impact on the health of pollinators right across the province of Ontario. And just recently, Mr. Speaker, we've embarked, along with our agriculture partners, a general pollinator strategy for the province of Ontario. It's a way to go forward. I just want to remind, as I reminded others, make sure that it's to the chair. To the rigs, and farmers do want to know just who is standing up for farming at the cabinet table. Amended rig 6309 indicates that all treated corn and soybean seed is now registered as a class 12 pesticide, so to characterize a treated seed as a pesticide and therefore regulate the seed, not the pesticides, unacceptable. It's unnecessary. It's inappropriate. You will cause significant and irrevocable economic damage without any clear evidence of any offsetting benefit for pollinators. Yet another reason farmers realize your regulatory process is simply unworkable. Minister, why would you, as Ontario's Minister of Agriculture, regulate a seed itself as a pesticide? Mr. Speaker, I certainly want to thank the member for his supplement, but I want to know where the official opposition stands in defending supply management in the province of Ontario. I want to know where the official opposition stands, providing 60% by the government of Canada to make our risk management program whole for all the farmers of the province of Ontario. But thirdly, Mr. Speaker, I want to quote about some people who are agronominers in this area. Greg Stewart, the official agronomist for Bayzac Seeds, said a purchasing treated seed would need it. It's not too difficult. To have economists, Bob Thoreau said, the process isn't as odorous as sub growers think. We've talked about it with a few growers. It is any more work than the paperwork for having its sexeside applied by airplane. We decided it is less work. Can't cure it from prior to ground service. We are encouraging growers to have that discussion with their agronomists what acres need it and what acres they don't. This is what I'm hearing from Grassley Fark. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Premier. For more than a year, this Liberal government has failed to reach new collective agreements with all of our dedicated teachers and education workers. Last week, the government failed again and talks collapsed with elementary teachers. The only way for this government to reach a deal is to be at the table, taking part in genuine and meaningful negotiations. When will this Premier send her minister back to the bargaining table? Thank you, Premier. Mr. Vice-President. Thank you very much. And I'm very pleased to report to the Speaker that after very long and prolonged talks, we in fact have reached agreements, as you know, tentative agreements with the English Catholic teachers and with the Ontario Secondary School teachers. We are bargaining as we speak with the Francophone teachers, and I'm quite optimistic. We understand that each of our sectors is a little bit different. That the French sector is different from the English sector, that the public sector is different from the Catholic sector, that the secondary panel is different from the elementary panel. And for that reason, the conversations that we've had with each of our four unions, and I would like you to know that we've actually spent a lot of time with ETIO. Thank you, supplementary. Thank you, Speaker. The Minister of Education says it takes thousands of hours of negotiating to reach tentative deals. But to make that happen, to reach those agreements, the government needs to show leadership and actually be at the bargaining table. And once it's at the table, the government needs to negotiate in a genuine and meaningful way rather than trying to impose deals just to help the Federal Liberal Party. Why is the Premier refusing to get back to the bargaining table and get back to real negotiations? Minister? Yes, and Speaker, I have no idea where the notion has come from, raised by the NDP and the union, that this has anything to do with the federal government. The reason that we have put a complete package before the elementary teachers is because, in fact, they have been on strike since May 11th, and that has caused disruption to our students. Our students have not had their EQAO tests. They didn't get their report cards. Their parents aren't meeting their teachers and they're not having the field trips they would normally have. We want the disruption to stop, and that's why we tried to speed up the process with the elementary teachers is because we want to get the elementary model system back to the way it should be. We are absolutely, Speaker, willing to talk about how to find the EQAO. Any questions? A member from Beaches East York. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Associate Minister of Finance. Over the summer, I've had the opportunity to speak to many people in the writing of Beaches East York about the issues that concern them the most. And what I've heard is that there is a growing anxiety about retirement security. Quite simply, the CPP does not work for seniors who do not have outside independent third-party pension plans. So many of my writing, particularly those in their 20s and 30s, do not have access to a workplace pension and are concerned about their futures. They worry that they will not be able to maintain the same standard of living in retirement or they may outlive their savings. And they know seniors who are suffering from exactly that situation. And that is why so many Ontarians are very supportive, our government's plan to bring in the Ontario Retirement Pension Plan. And my constituents are very eager to learn more about the plan and how it affects them. So over the summer, I know the Premier and the Minister announced details about the ORPP. And I would like, Mr. Speaker, if the Minister would please explain to us the new detail. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Associate Minister of Finance. Thank you, Speaker. And I want to thank the member from Beaches East York for that very important question. Mr. Speaker, Ontario is leading on this important issue. We are creating the ORPP to help close the retirement savings gap. Our goal is by 2020 every employee in Ontario would be part of the ORPP or Comparable Workplace Pension Plan. When we talk about Comparable Plan, we mean Registered Workplace Pension Plans like Defined Benefit Plans and Defined Contribution Plans. These plans will need to meet minimum contribution thresholds and provide locked in benefits. And with these thresholds, we can confidently say that workers will be able to achieve similar benefit provided by the ORPP. We developed our approach by listening to people who developed our approach by listening to business. Mr. Speaker, this design ensures that all Ontarians can have access to the retirement security that they deserve. Thank you. Well, thank you, Speaker. And thank you to the Minister for that fine answer. She's doing an excellent job in giving us the security and retirement that we all need. The constituents constituent in my riding of Beaches East York will be glad to hear about the specific steps our government is taking to ensure all Ontarians will have access to secure retirement. So in recent months, I've also spoken with many local business owners and about the ORPP and many of them are very pleased to see that the government is introducing this plan that will give an affordable way for them to provide their employees with a meaningful pension. In these meetings, businesses have emphasized the importance of having time to plan for the introduction of the ORPP. And I know the Minister has engaged with business extensively and that they have an active participants in that consultation process on the ORP earlier this year. So Mr. Speaker, again to you to the Associate Minister of Finance, will the Minister please outline the steps our government has taken to help businesses plan for the introduction of the ORP? Thank you, Minister. Chair, and I want to thank the hardworking member for that important question. Mr. Speaker, the Ontario Retirement Pension Plan, the ORPP, is an investment in a secure retirement future for all Ontarians. That's not just individuals, that's business as well. Over the past several months, I've met with representatives from across the business community throughout Ontario. We heard that businesses and employees need time to plan. That is why we announced that we will be enrolling employers in stages, beginning with the largest employers in 2017. This coincides with expected reductions in EI premiums. We also announced that we will be phasing in contributions over three years. Mr. Speaker, the Ontario Chamber of Commerce said our approach is a step in the right direction. Throughout the ORPP and through its implementation, we are investing in our collective futures, which is good for all businesses in Ontario. Thank you. Is there a question? A member from Latin Kingdom, Middlesex. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My question today is for the Minister of Finance. Minister, in January, this Liberal government made significant changes to Ontario's estate administration tax. The $143 million death tax on grieving families is nothing more than another cash grab. Minister, one of the changes made is to force estate trustees, usually the children of the deceased or the grieving widow, to provide a detailed list of their loved ones assets and a description of their value to you within days of losing their loved one. Minister, where is this government's compassion? Here, here. Minister, a second? Mr. Speaker, interesting question, but let me be very clear. To you, Mr. Speaker, directly to you, because I don't think they listened on the other side. It reads as follows, the government has not introduced a new tax on the states, has not changed the amount of estate tax administration payable or the way that this tax is calculated, Mr. Speaker. All we are doing is ensuring the member from Glenn Gary Russell will withdraw. Draws me. Because the regulation ensures that the government has the information needed to perform the audits and verify that the correct amounts of the tax have been paid. All we're doing, Mr. Speaker, is ensuring that the procedure takes place. Thank you. Well, not very much a compassion there, Mr. Speaker. Back to the Minister of Finance. Minister, family farms or small businesses can give rise to a death tax amounting to many tens of thousands of dollars. This is a debt that when coupled with the income tax levied on capital gains may force the next generation to sell the family business. Minister, you've already collected a lifetime of taxes on these assets. The liberal view may be that small businesses and family farms are nothing more than money laundering operations for the rich. But we in the PC caucus recognize how vital Ontario's entrepreneurs and farmers are to Ontario's economy. Minister, I ask you, is there no better way to balance the books in the province of Ontario? I would offer this as advice. Third person, which means you're not talking to the minister, you're talking to the chair. Just as a reminder, we're going to try to get that done right this time. Mr. Speaker, the member opposite and the PC caucus should well understand the process because it was them that introduced the EAT in 1998. They introduced this administrative tax. All we're saying, Mr. Speaker, is that the regulation does not change the court process. The EAT is collected by the court staff and the new requirements will not change the court process or the amount of tax payable. Mr. Speaker, they're the ones that introduced it we're just making a certain that it gets implemented correctly. That's all. Thank you. No question. The member from Essex. Thank you very much, Speaker. My question is to the Premier Speaker. Yesterday we learned that a top infrastructure Ontario executive had admitted to defrauding York University instead of being fired, he was put in charge of procuring a stadium for York University. We also learned that as early as January 2012, infrastructure Ontario's chief risk officer knew about the fraud, but the fraud remained a secret outside of infrastructure Ontario. Today we learned that CEO David Livingston knew about the fraud. The same David Livingston who became Dalton McKinney's chief of staff and is being investigated by the OPP in his role in a cover-up. Yesterday when I asked the minister if David Livingston knew about the fraud, he refused to answer Speaker. Did the minister really not know or did infrastructure Ontario keep that information away from him as well? Minister of economic development and primary infrastructure. Minister of education, Minister of economic development. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I think the member's recollection of his question and the answer yesterday is an entirely accurate, Mr. Speaker. The fact is the member did ask me a question yesterday and I responded to the best of our knowledge. The board did not be informed of the particular circumstances. That remains the case, Mr. Speaker. We take this matter seriously though. It is a serious matter and it's one that I think we need to take very seriously. Infrastructure Ontario has appointed an independent law firm to review this matter to review the time that this individual was employed in infrastructure Ontario as well as the circumstances of his departure. Mr. Speaker, there's also forensic audit firm that's been hired to take a look at the transactions that have incurred and I as well, Mr. Speaker, I mean the process of retaining a third party as a full advisor to be our eyes and ears over this process at the same time. Thank you. Thank you. So political. Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, we now have evidence that senior officials at Infrastructure Ontario covered up the fact that one of its top executives had admitted to fraud. David Livingston says that he knew about the fraud and that he told the Infrastructure Ontario Board. Board members, however, deny this completely. Someone is not telling the truth. We just don't know who. Last December, the minister asked us to trust Infrastructure Ontario when it claimed without evidence that $8 billion spent on public-private partnerships wasn't a waste of money. And now the minister wants us to trust Infrastructure Ontario to investigate its own cover-up. Will the minister, Speaker, will the minister call for a truly independent investigation of the culture of cover-ups that evidently exists within Infrastructure Ontario? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Redarick Knot was standing. This is a serious matter, Mr. Speaker, and we're doing, I think, what we need to do to get to the bottom of it. I said yesterday and I say today there are unanswered questions surrounding the circumstances of this individual's departure and there are some unanswered questions that we want to ensure are looked into and that's surrounding his activities while he was with Infrastructure Ontario. Now the actions in question, the alleged actions that this individual took with York University were outside of his role with Infrastructure Ontario, but, Mr. Speaker, out of an abundance of caution and prudence, we want to make sure that during his time at Infrastructure Ontario, there were no further anomalies that can be identified and that's why we're taking the third-party actions that we're taking. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. New question. The member from Northumberland, 20 West. Well, thank you, Speaker. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Community and Social Services. Last month, I was pleased to be with you in Campbellford for an announcement of almost $400,000 over two years for a project that will offer additional human support for people with developmental disability in my writing in Northumberland, 20 West. This community have a residential model is a collaboration between Community Living Campbellford Brighton and Campbellford Memorial Hospital and will provide support to aging individuals with developmental disabilities in surrounding rural areas to allow for their continued independent living. Minister, this project is part of a broader development services, housing task force initiated that you mentioned in the House earlier this year. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister please provide us with an update on the work of the housing task force in the progress made for residential service in Ontario? Thank you, Minister of Community and Social Services. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to the member for Northumberland, Quinty West for the question. I was really delighted to be in Campbellford last month to announce the funding for the Community have residential model and also to be introduced to so many of my ministry's local stakeholders in the member's writing showing really how deeply rooted he is in his community. I was also in Smith Falls, Lanark County to announce a project which will provide residential supports to developmentally disabled adults with complex medical needs so that they can also live independently. These projects are recommended by the Developmental Services Housing Task Force and are part of the recent announcement of 12 community-based housing initiatives for adults with developmental disabilities. Our government has committed up to $6 million over the next two years for demonstration or recent projects which includes $3.47 million to support these 12 recently announced projects. Thank you. Supplementary. I would like to thank the minister for outlining the work this government and your ministry has been doing. In my conversation with residents and leaders in my community it's very clear the importance that access to residential services has on lives of the individuals living with disabilities and their families. There continues to be need for more creative residential options and they support for respite service. This is a struggle that individuals and families and development service sectors has known for a long time. However, the government's $810 million investment is making a tremendous difference in the lives of thousands of Ontario. Mr. Speaker, can the ministers please elaborate our efforts like Developmental Service Housing Task Force will work to work creating more opportunities for Ontarians that value inclusion choice independence for this vulnerable individual in need. Thank you Minister. Well, yes, thank you Mr. Speaker. And we know that many individuals with developmental disabilities have very unique needs and that there is a demand for a broader range of housing solutions that address these individualised needs. So our challenge isn't just about finding more supports it's about finding the right kinds of supports for each individual. The Developmental Services Housing Task Force was created to help find and encourage inclusive and creative housing solutions which would expand the options and choices available to adults with developmental disabilities. I'd like to thank the hard work of the agencies, the families, the community partners and the Housing Task Force members. We've had an opportunity to expand our knowledge and learn how creative partnerships can help us provide new housing support options. A second call for proposals for additional projects will be issued this year. And Mr Speaker I look forward to future creative partnerships that we can learn from and if they can be seen if we if we can replicate these across the province to help more people in the community. Do you have a question? And then the comparison on the scope. Thank you Mr Speaker my question is the Minister at Northern Development Mines. Minister the Fraser Institute's annual survey of mining companies as again placed Ontario near the back of the pack for mining jurisdictions. Used to be in the investment attractiveness index this year Ontario fell nine places to 23rd in the world. The high cost of electricity in Ontario's continually cited as a key contributing factor in this slide. This spring the Association of Major Power Consumers in Ontario revealed that the hydro customer was ignored in your government's plan to sell off the majority stake of Hydro 1. Members of Ampo employ thousands of people across Northern Ontario. Minister can you guarantee that the sale of Hydro 1 will not lead to increased electricity costs for industrial consumers in Northern Ontario. Thank you Minister Northern Development Mines. Thanks very much Mr Speaker well as as the member knows well Mr Speaker the Ontario remains the top jurisdiction of mineral exploration in the in the country if not across the continent and we're very very proud of that despite the challenges that we do see related to commodity pricing. Yeah the fact is that indeed we are also very proud of the fact that although we recognize the challenge of energy pricing early this year we made the Northern industrial electricity rate program a permanent program which has been tremendous help to the resource-based sector in terms of reducing those energy costs. And may I say with the time I have left we also are still seeing despite the challenges that are there the number of mines in the province of Ontario that are continued opening up being a very very real positive we're seeing operations certainly in in Red Lake in terms of the certain minerals in terms of the culture expansion the new gold expansion which I know the member knows well about we are very very proud of that and looking forward to a Thank you minister and you well know that the near program only applies to a handful of companies. So again to the minister minister we've seen this story before when jurisdictions become uncompetitive companies pull out and take local jobs with them. When Extrata Copper pulled up stakes in Timmins only to move across the border to Quebec they cited uncompetitive hydro rates as a key motivating factor in the move. Northern Ontario lost 700 good paying jobs. Minister will the self hydro one lead to more stories like that of Extrata Copper and more jobs lost in Northern Ontario. Thank you minister. It's actually rather unfortunate to hear the members that are talking down what is really obviously a very positive industry in terms of the economy in Northern Ontario. When we see the fact that the middle production of profits reached over 11 billion dollars in 2014 not from 5.3 billion dollars about 10 years previously that's obviously a very positive sign. We don't deny that there are challenges though certainly we all know about the challenge related. I ask the member as I have asked others you are addressing the chair. Excuse me your speed I thought I was looking at you but I now will indeed look at you and put out the fact that we are very very continue very very enthused about the positive opportunities in the mining sector. Certainly the Northern Industrial Electricity Rate Program is helping major resource sector producers of both the mining in the forestry site reduce the amount of which is allowing them to continue to make mines open up in the province of Ontario which we are going to continue to see we're very excited for the opportunities of mining sector. Keep working. Thank you new question the member from Kitchener Waterloo. Thank you very much Mr. Speaker my question is to the Premier. At this Premier's record on childcare just keeps getting worse and families across Ontario are paying the price. Ontario has no comprehensive plan for childcare and no targets no timelines. Most recently the Premier backtracked on her support for the $15 a day childcare. The Premier has stood on the sidelines while public childcare centres close their doors in communities like Sarnia Sudbury Windsor London Peel Region close their 12 regional centres as well. And now five public childcare centres are at risk of closure in Waterloo Region. Each of these five childcare centres has attained the triple gold standard raising the bar programme for the last 12 years. They serve 250 children and their families. Every time we lose a public childcare centre we lose quality care for kids and good jobs in our communities. Why is this Premier doing nothing to stop the closure of quality childcare centres and doing nothing to stand up for childcare that internal families so desperately need? Yes, Speaker and I'm very pleased to tell you that in fact I think the member opposite has misrepresented the data. In fact The Minister will withdraw. Misinterpreted perhaps but let me tell you what the data is and then people can argue over how they feel about that. Since 2003 our government has almost doubled the provincial spending on childcare. We are now up to over a billion dollars in spending on childcare. What that has allowed us to do is increase the number of licensed childcare spaces in Ontario by 70 percent so that we have added 130,000 additional licensed childcare spaces. Supplementary Into the Premier On Monday when our leader asked the Premier why she refuses to support making childcare more affordable the Premier said we have no understanding of what that would mean to the people of Ontario. Well parents across Ontario they know exactly what quality affordable childcare means it means not being stuck on a wait list for spot you can afford. It means knowing that your child has access to the safest care and with qualified professionals there are approximately 3,800 families and children on Waterloo regions wait lists almost half of those families need immediate care right now yet the province sits on its hands while centres have been closed or privatised across the province. Will the Premier commit to a real plan for childcare in Ontario that sets targets that sets timetables to grow childcare in this province rather than overseeing the closure of yet more high quality public centres across this province. Question thank you Minister. Speaker what we have done since we were elected first in 2003 is we have introduced whole day kindergarten. We've created a hundred and thirty. Finish please. We's doubled the number of the amount of money that we're spending to over one billion dollars. We've spent a hundred and twenty million dollars in building new childcare spaces new licensed childcare spaces. We have made a huge unprecedented investment in childcare and what we have said since the beginning not just the beginning of the election but the beginning of this story is that when Mr. Mulcair said he was going to introduce a new program he didn't say how he would answer. He didn't say what he was going to expect Ontario to pay for because we know we've already made a huge investment and we want to know what he's going to do to invest. New question remember him came sitting in the audience. It's not like an elephant. Is it a sign? Speaker we know that children's social environment is an important factor in determining whether they'll succeed academically, socially and in the labour market. This is exactly why one of the reasons why for example the premier's council on youth opportunities is such an integral part of youth engagement and bringing valued youth voices to the table. I was pleased to recommend the premier's council to the Kingston and the islands this summer. Across the province some children and youth experience more hardship than others. This is something that we all know in this house. Mr. Speaker would the minister please explain what supports her ministry provides to ensure that at-risk youth are able to succeed? Thank you. Research for the new sources. Speaker first I want to thank the MPP from Kingston and the islands for her fantastic work to support youth in her riding having our premier's council on youth at Kingston being part of it is just great and we all know speaker when kids are at risk we want to have the right support so that they can their full potential and make really positive choices for their future. So that's why we've taken a whole of government approach to serving and meeting the diverse needs of youth and speaker we've seen very very positive results since the launch of our 2012 youth action plan. We fulfilled all 20 all 20 recommendations of that plan. So now what we have our 27,500 youth facing bearers across Ontario accessing new supports and opportunities and the outreach youth outreach program has been increased and the youth opportunities fund provides five million dollars per year to support community products at risk youth. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker I'm glad to hear that the minister is taking these issues seriously and it's encouraging that the youth action plan has been expanded but I know that one of the main concerns for at risk youth is that without proper support and guidance they may become involved in criminal activity. Programs like youth diversion in my riding of Kingston and the islands focus on keeping promising youth out of the justice system where a criminal record can destroy the rest of their lives and erase the opportunity for a second chance. The staff and volunteers at youth diversion program understand full well the value in extra judicial measures alternative for proceedings. Mr. Speaker does the action plan address concerns about youth crime specifically. Thank you. Minister. Thanks again speaker. With the expansion of the current youth action plan we are providing 55 million dollars over the next three years to address the root causes of youth violence and to focus on closing the gaps in service for youth at risk. That's a very substantial and historical investment and we expect that the plan will create an additional 37,500 opportunities per year for children at risk and to help young people and to the labour force speaker we're partnering with training colleges and universities to invest 250 million dollars over the next two years for the youth job strategy. That focuses on skill development for young people and making sure they're making the right connections to where the jobs are speaker. We're very committed to providing this important work and providing wonderful opportunities for Ontario's at youth risk at youth at risk and we want to get continue to get at the root cost of cause of violence. Thank you. Thank you speaker. Thank you for the question about the concerns over the next three years. Thank you very much speaker. My question is for the minister of natural resources this morning. Joe Crowley speaker is the minister's species at risk expert and he testified less than two weeks ago at an environmental review tribunal in Prince Edward County that he recommended against issuing a permit for wind turbines to kill harm and harass endangered species on the south shore of Prince Edward County. What did the minister in his office do? They granted the permit anyway but when the minister and the ministry experts recommended against a project in the minister's own riding back in 2011 just before the election that year tell me it is the ministry couldn't kill that project fast enough. So the ministry's own experts have confirmed that politics and not science is guiding what wind turbine projects are allowed to kill endangered species in the province. Speaker will the minister overturn the anti-scientific decision that was made and revoke the permit it gave to Gilead in Prince Edward County? And so do you minister now to resources and forestry. Thank you and I want to thank the the member for the question I think it's interesting what's going on here. We know very clearly that this particular party and opposition is not in favor of our renewable energy projects that are going on across the province of Ontario and we also know very clearly I think we can state with some definition that they're also not in favor of the endangered species act legislation that we brought forward some time of the speaker. The beauty of this question and I've had one like this before is now we see the opposition party's position where they want to try and use endangered species act legislation to prevent a wind turbine project going forward that I think perhaps they don't on the ground support. So they have these two conflicting pieces of legislation one which will can stop or allow our project to go forward. Both of these projects this one and another one speaker are still before the environmental review tribunal. There's a not not a lot I can say specifically on them but I will speak more speaking to the supplementary in terms of what detail I thank you supplementary and thank you very much speaker back to the minister of for natural resources and forestry. Minister your government has a track record of hiding inconvenient truths from cancelled gas plants to e-health to orange the liberal name has become synonymous with scandal and it doesn't stop at all Strander point unfortunately we have learned just last week your government is up to your same old tricks just so you can to the chair please speaker this old tired government is up to this same old tricks because they want to cover Ontario's landscapes with costly unwanted industrial wind turbines. So back to the minister minister Barbara Ashby Laurie Gillis Ted Whitmore Bill Palmer the list goes on commuter to keep the question off Ontario want to know speaker why does this liberal government continue to plainly disregard scientific evidence in order to ensure thank you industrial wind turbines continue thank you minister speaker thank you speaker all renewable energy projects in the province of Ontario receive their approval to move forward through the ministry of the environment and climate change all of them they make an application they get a fit contract from the ministry of energy they get their broader based approval from the ministry of environment and climate change the projects in question have received those approvals when it comes to our particular ministry we get involved where necessary when it comes to endangered species if an endangered species is found to be on the site we then play a role on the ground district by district they make the decisions on whether or not there is an endangered species present and if there is on a district by district basis they make a decision on whether or not we are able to mitigate on both the habitat and on the species that's exactly what's happened in this case answer that's why we provided an overall benefit in both cases speaker and that's what we did on a district basis here nothing thank you speaker secretive about ending this point pursuant to the standing order of 38a I wish to advise you that my the satisfaction with the response of the minister of agriculture food and rural affairs to my question on mnemonic regulations the reason for my dissatisfaction is in my view there's not enough time for a fulsome answer to to a detailed technical issue the member from Haldeman Norfolk pursuant to standing order of 38a the member for Prince Edward Hastings has given notice of his dissatisfaction with the answer to his question given by the minister of natural resources concerning wind turbine process the matter will be debated today at 6 p.m. the previous one will be debated today at 6 p.m. as well minister of agriculture on a point of order order thank you very much Mr. Speaker in our gallery today I take great pleasure of introducing Wendy and Mike Radden from the wonderful riding of lapped and cat middle sex the parents of my wonderful legislative assistant Mackenzie Radden we welcome them here today there being no further deferred votes this house stands adjourned till 3 p.m. this afternoon


All right, our next session is a love story about how FormanMet Ansible, Adam, take it away. Thank you, Walter, for introducing me and the talk. As Walter mentioned, it's a talk about what happened when FormanMet Ansible and where we are now. I'm Adam Ruzicica. I'm a software engineer at Red Hat. I joined Red Hat something a little bit over five years ago and since the start, I was working on Forman or related projects as plugins and so on. I'm Adam Ruzicica on GitHub, in case you want to check out my stuff. I'm Ruzicica on FreeNote, if you want to reach out to me or underscore aruz underscore on Twitter. And that was enough about me. You're not here because of me, you're here for this. So this talk is about the Forman Ansible plugin. If you're here because you thought it will be about Forman Ansible modules, I'll have to let you down. It's not about that. It's about this plugin and we'll start right away. So I assume that you have a Forman deployment without Ansible. So just a couple of steps how to get it up and running. Ansible is in fact a specialization of the remote execution plugin. So it needs it to work. You can install remote execution with this simple command.  Then the similar thing for Ansible, just the names of the options are different. And in the end, this is what I personally like to do. It's probably not such a good idea in production environments. And what this option does, it makes the installer take the public key that Forman is using to connect to the remote machines and put it into a root's authorized keys. So you can use Forman to run remote execution or Ansible against the Forman machine itself. Again, you may or may not want to do that. Of course, you can run it all at once. You can use a slightly condensed form. It then looks like this. It takes, I don't know, five to 10 minutes to get it up and running and you're there. Okay, so you had an empty Forman. You're in the installer. It installed the Ansible plugin, but you have a blank Forman or you have one host, the Forman itself. Oh, sorry, where is it? Different tab. It may look like this. Sorry, the UI kinda breaks when you zoom in too much. But in here, I have a single host. It's the Forman instance itself. And well, you could do that. You could deploy the Forman and then use it to run Ansible against the Forman itself. But that's not the point why you have either Forman or Ansible, right? So the best option would be to let Forman do what it does best, and that is provisioning. If you provision machines for Forman, you would get them in the inventory in Forman. You can then run Ansible. When you're provisioning, it deploys the SSH keys Forman knows about to the machines so you can connect to them. And even if during the creation, if you assign roles to that host, it applies them to that host at the end of the provisioning. So you can get the machines configured fairly quickly. But every now and then, someone comes and asks, hey, Forman is cool and all, but I already have machines and I don't want to reprovision them just to get them into inventory to be able to run Ansible against them. What can I do? Luckily, there is a way. When you're in the installer, it deploys an Ansible callback, a plugin basically to Ansible, which at the end of the run, reports the facts about the machines to Forman. And when that happens, you get your hosts created in Forman. So let's try that right now. Let's see if I can remember all the right magic incantations we need to do. So first, decalback is configured only for the Forman proxy user. If you did this as route or any other user, it wouldn't work. I'm talking out of the box. You could make it work, but out of the box, you have to do it as the Forman proxy user. So we'll get another bash shell as that user. And then I have an inventory, handy, ready in here. And I can do something like Ansible playbook dash inventory, the path, and then we need to provide a playbook. I don't want to write it as a file, so maybe we can do something like this. And then we write the playbook. So we do all hosts, we give it some tasks, and we run the setup. This is important. It doesn't work with anything else. Setup is the one that triggers the callback. And that is enough. We end the playbook, we end the sub-shell or whatever it is and it runs. Permission denied. Okay, who knows why? What did I miss? Any wild ideas? Actually, two things, keys and the user. So let's jump right back and connect as a root and use the right private key. By default, it lives in user share, form and proxy, .ssh, idrsa, form and proxy. That's the private key we use. Hopefully it should be better now. We spin the wheel. We wait for a bit. But it's taking a bit of time. That's a good sign. It means it's actually doing something. Okay, here's the first one. Second one, go on. Come on. The fact is don't get reported until this all finishes. So it makes no sense checking in the UI right now with, first one. Question in the tree? Sure. If you have a proxy. Okay, so the question was, what happens if you have a form and proxy and with the keys on there? So if you're provisioning through form and, form and collects the keys from all the proxies you have and deploys them on the machines. So you can then use any of those proxies to connect them there. If you're doing something like this, then you have to pick the proxy where you know the keys are, right? Or use a password. It works too. Okay, this finished. So let's check into the UI. Let's refresh that and boom, there they are. We can now select them and we can do things with them. Back to the slides. This is what I did. And even in here, I missed the user. Sorry about that. Okay, now we have the hosts. What can we do with them? As I mentioned, the Ansible plugin is a special variant of remote execution plugin. So you can use Ansible the same way. You can just run commands or scripts against the target machines. But let's be honest, it's not what Ansible is good for. Ansible is not as good as SSH of pure SSHs, right? We have time. Funny story, I was doing some performance testing. I just wanted to know how things behave under load.  It was this laptop. It has two cores in the hyper threading, so it's not really super beefy. And if the load goes up above 10, the machine locks up for like five minutes until the load goes down. So I went into Forman UI and why I wanted to use SSH. But I misclicked and selected Ansible instead and ran the date command on 10,000 hosts from this machine. It was back then when we had only the Ansible Playbook implementation, which spawned a single Ansible Playbook process for each and every single host. So I just clicked the button in the UI and suddenly spawned 10,000 Ansible Playbooks. The last thing I could solve was that the load went up to about 200. And the machine didn't recover. I had to kill it and start over. So if you just want to run shell scripts, why not use just Remote Execution? Maybe a better use case is actually running Ansible Playbooks. You can do that, you can go into the UI. You can either create Playbooks as job templates because in Remote Execution and Forman Ansible, what you run are actually templates which get rendered and you can provide inputs to them. So you can either write or Playbooks as templates which have no inputs or you can do what I do and that is have a single template which only thing it does is renders its single input. So basically what you give to it as an input is the thing that gets run. And then you can just go to the UI, select Custom Playbook, write a Playbook in there and click Submit and it runs. You can do that. However, there's another way how you can use Ansible. And it is more kind of configuration management type approach. Anyone is familiar with Puppet or to the other way, who doesn't know Puppet? Okay, we have several people, good. So in the Puppet world, there's the Puppet agent which runs on the remote machines and every once in a while it wakes up, calls to the server, asks, hey, what stage should I be in? Then it tries to get into that state and it reports back to the server. And this happens periodically, every, I think, 30 minutes by default. And you can mimic this behavior with Forman Ansible. You can describe the state, you want the machines be in, either by roles or just a single huge Playbook, whatever, and then you can have it run periodically. So instead of the machine, waking up every once in a while, Forman will wake every once in a while and run that against the machine. You will get fresh facts in Forman, you will be sure that the machines are in the state, you want them to be. And that's a perfectly viable approach, if you ask me. Several times I mentioned that you assign Ansible roles to the hosts. But with the roles, it's the same problem as with hosts. In order to have Forman to be able to do something with them, it needs to know about them. How do we do that? Luckily, it's simple, it's much simpler than with the hosts. You can just import them. They have to be by default in slashetc slash ansible slash roles. You just put them in there and then you go into configure Ansible roles and there will be a button that says import from and the host name.  Once you have them in Forman, you can assign them to hosts. And then they will be around either when the host is provisioned or when you kick off, it's called run all Ansible roles, I think. And that's what will happen. It will use those roles as the source of truth, basically, and will apply them to the hosts. What we do in addition is that we scan those roles for variables. So we look at the defaults and I think even vars from those roles and we try to guess what type they should be. So if the role provides some defaults, Forman can take a look, see okay, it's a string right now and the value is something. And then in Forman, you can see that this role has these variables which can change how the role behaves. And you can see that it's a string and you can override it there. You can either override globally or you can create matchers to say if the host has operating system, I don't know, CentOS, then this value should be XYZ. Alternatively, you can set those as parameters, directly on the hosts that works as well in host groups and even globally. So there are several things how you can do the same thing. Okay, I was talking for way too long. Let's see what I talked about. So we already have the hosts. Let's import some roles so we can sign them. So it's configure, the Ansible section and roles and see there's a big button. Click it and it will list us which roles exist on the machine. Most of these come from the Forklift project. It's something we have for development of Forman. It allows you to spin up Forman instances using Vagrant. But it uses Ansible roles to do that. So we can import everything, why not? Let's update and now we have them in Forman. It's a two-step process. Right now we only have the roles, so we may want to import the variables as well. And it's again, just click the button, select the ones you want. I want all the new ones. Too many of them and click update and it imports them.  It's a project for mesh networking. It can either act as an overlay network or it can act on the level two or later two. And in that case, it doesn't need any configuration which is ideal and I can just switch a toggle in here and it will be fine. So this is one of the variable. It's set as a default in the Ansible CJDNS role and we can see that it's a default and by default it's false. I don't want that, I want it to be true. So I just override it here and that's it. Now if I look at the variable, I can see a flag that it has some override configured. So it gives a visual indication that there is something non-default. Then I go to the hosts and I assign the roles to them. We go to edit, then there's the Ansible roles tab. Yeah, and we have to find them in this list. There are somewhere at the end, small screen size. Okay, it's this one, I hope. Ansible CJ, yo. Okay, so we submit it and it's assigned to the host. I could run this on the single one but let's do the CJDNS one as well just so we can see that it actually works. There, and we submit it. Then we can go to hosts, select the first two and have them run all Ansible roles. It will take the roles we assigned and run them against the hosts. This is current nightly setup. I must admit we had some issues with the JavaScript stack recently. So there should be chart right here which isn't currently there. And everything failed, okay, that's new. Failed to connect, could not resolve host name. Okay, we'll use poorman's DNS and it is ETC hosts. I'll just, and I only need to do the first two so it won't take that long. Okay, so this was a fun little exercise. I can now kick off the job again. Send settings, and have it run. Hopefully this time it will be green. While it runs, before I start about it, do we have any current form in the host? Any current form in Ansible users in here? Okay, one, two, someone there, awesome. I have some slides on what changed recently. And that is, we dropped support for the original Ansible playbook thing. So now it's only using Ansible runner. It also lifted the one process per one host requirement. So that should be better. You should now be able to use Ansible as an orchestrator, basically. And we reworked the way how we generate inventory for external services. So if you use Tower or AWX to pull the inventory from Foreman, it should be faster. And we started deploying Dimeflow. That's the internal orchestration engine or task engine we use to use Sidekick under the hood. So it should perform better, be more scalable and more reliable. That's for the news. Let's take a look back. And we can see that it is still running. All the role does is it enables EPL. It installs a package. It generates configuration and it enables the service. So it shouldn't take this long, but it's still running. We can use this time to do a little questions and answers session. Is there anything you would like me to talk about? So the question was whether we can change the variables for different hosts or host groups. Is that correct? Okay, you can. Either you have to specify the matchers. So you go to Ansible variables and then at the bottom of the page, you can specify matchers which match on different parts of the host. So you can do it either this way or you can go to the host group or to the host and edit the parameters of the host directly. Then that value will be used too. Okay, it's moving, it's moving. It performed the automatic configuration. It restarted the service. Awesome, so this is done. We can see that all the hosts completed successfully. CJDNS creates a new interface on the host. But if we go here into Nix, we can't see it. And that's because the facts about the host are collected at the beginning of the run. So the facts got collected and then the interface appeared. So we can't see it. However, if we run it again, it should run much faster now and it should give us the right facts. So this is something just to keep in mind. We see that now it's blazing fast, almost. And it is done, oops. And if we go back and to those details and into Nix, we can see that there is ton zero interface with MTU of 1300 and something and it has an IPv6 address. Go on. I think the plan is to keep Cthulhu as a plugin and not really merge them to one. Forman is fairly modular. You have the core which does provisioning and there are plugins for almost everything under the sun. So yeah, I think it will stay this way. All right, we are almost out of time. So one or two last questions, please. Can you select which smart proxy is used to do the NSPOR on if you're having separate networks? Okay, the question was if you can select the smart proxy which is used for running the job against the host. You can select it directly by going into the form and saying, hey, use this one.  So it's doable in a kind of roundabout way. Yes, please. So the question was if the configuration of which hosts, which roles are assigned to which host is something that could be version controlable, right? Yes. Not currently, I'm afraid. But it sounds like a reasonable thing. So please open an RFE for us and we can see what we can do about it. Please, if we can use it together with Puppet, well, you can. There's nothing stopping you from doing that. They live completely side by side and it's up to you what you use. Okay, it looks like there are no more questions. So thank you very much for listening. Please stop by the Forman booth and we can talk more. Thank you.


If his position is true, if I were to voluntarily, through voluntary transactions, acquire the surface of the earth, it follows that justice would enable me to kick all you off into space and die. That to me looks like a reductio ad absurdum of the whole position. I mean, yeah, you can create science fiction nonsensical examples that make anything... It's a counter example. It's not. It's a counter example. There's no counter example here because there is no possibility and we can walk it through the example of anything like that ever happening. Most of the east coast of the United States is privately owned. Has anybody ever approached even close to owning the entire east coast of the United States? But if they did. Has anybody even approached owning the entire island of Manhattan as anybody even approached? But they can't. But if they did. No, but metaphysically, but metaphysically, they can't. You can't go against nature. But will you admit that if they did, and if I decided... But they wouldn't. You can't... Oh, I don't know. That's not how philosophy works here. No, but you can't hypothesize a metaphorically impossible. It is how philosophy works. It's how good philosophy works, so it's a bad philosophy.


Hey, good morning everyone. So in the in this period of trying to understand mechanisms and using a hierarchy of models I'll be presenting today a process study that we did trying to understand the role of the connection between the tropics and the extra tropics to possibly generate low frequency of our ability in the Equatorial Pacific and this is a work that I've been doing in collaboration with Franca, Moltenia and Fred Kujarski So we've been listening a lot already about the PDO and what the PDO might be so this is a little bit of a summary that the PDO might be a Connection of many different things for example stochastically driven It could be a passive ocean response to atmospheric fluxes But it could also be perhaps a couple mode of interaction between the ocean and atmosphere as somebody has postulated before About what the PDO is made of it could be associated with both tropical forcing It would be listened to that through an atmospheric bridge of low frequency answer signal but also local exotropical IRC interactions and We've been listening to this talk already about the PDO which is probably not physical mode But it's just a statistical mode made of different physical processes so I've been Looking at one of these possible physical processes and what is the role in generating? Answer the KDL variability so they're all of tropical exotropical interaction So answer the KDL variability. There's a few hypotheses out there and some of them are for example the connections in this case now would be a Atmospheric teleconnections from atmospheric bridge, but the other around from the exotropics to the tropics It could be just tropical noise and and mean state changes Generating this low frequency answer modulation, but it could also be a teleconnection from other basings So for example the Atlantic generating low frequency variability in the Pacific and If we manage to understand some of the processes that might give rise to this low frequency variability in In the tropical Pacific then perhaps we can also put forward yet another explanation for the warming hiatus So this is the observed PDO Which at the Kdom timescales as I said is probably a Third a third of it is remotely driven from the tropics, and that's the time series of the observed PDO from Trumburth et al So we know also that there is a very strong correlation between PDO phases for example positive and negative phases and And so low frequency variability. So basically when you have a War mode in the PDO you have mostly aninos and the opposite So the connection between the PDO and the global means sees a first temperature and trying to understand The possible reasons for the warming hiatus This figure has been shown a similar figure has been shown already in a few papers So basically at the top. I'm showing here the global means sea surface temperature up to a month ago and the PDO index from observations and so you see the recent rebound in the PDO and the Accelerated signal already seen in the global means to surface temperature And again, you can go back to your previous hiatus periods and see and see that when you have a negative PDO You have hiatus periods and the opposite on on a PDO in a world phase So explanation for the recent warming hiatus. There's been a few already and for example The one from Kosaka and Shia in 2013 which says that a quarter Pacific liquid or a Pacific cooling has probably The most Influence on this warming hiatus and England et al has shown that if you account for the trends in the Trade winds in models, then you can reproduce the warming hiatus in model And this is a schematic that we've seen that we've seen before So all of these studies are pointing to a major role for the local Pacific in explaining the warming hiatus But there's also as I said teleconnections from the Atlantic which can cause low frugacy viability in the Pacific This is the sea surface temperature difference from observations between Two decades straddling the year 2000 You can see this negative phase of the PDO and in this case you can clearly see the AMO signal Even though there is a lag between the two indices so correlation teleconnection, sorry between the two basins can give rise to a Equatorial Pacific sea surface temperature anomalies and this is a pacemaker experiment by Kuchasky et al In which you can see that if you force the Atlantic with prescribed Well, if you prescribe sea surface temperature in the Atlantic in this case with a negative AMO signal Then you can force a positive sea surface temperature anomaly in the Pacific So part of those sea surface temperature anomalies in the Pacific might also be driven by teleconnections from the Atlantic So here I will try to put together two hypotheses that have been Going around for a few years, which are the atmospheric bridges that we've been listening to already but also the oceanic tunnels so also the ocean dynamics plays a major role in in tropical and isotropical interactions or at least we think they do and The upper circulation so the thermocline circulation gives roughly the time scale of these Seculations which is on the order of a decade so the the main hypothesis is that If there is a tropical forcing pattern that can force Exotropical flow response like in generating part of the PDO index then perhaps those atmospheric Signals in the isotropics can also foreenshune response that can feed back to the tropical Pacific And so the how the ocean does this is mainly through the isotropical cells these are observations from Zhang and McFadden in 2006 in which They are showing a quarter work convergence of the isotropical cells So the effect of both isotropical cells converging Mass flux at the equator and here the time series is reversed to show the highly anti-correlation with Equatorial C-surface temperature anomalies. Okay, so this is Data and here you can clearly see a low frequency signal in the isotropical cells and the high correlation with the C-surface temperature anomalies in the equator So we're going to be using a model and it's not going to be a couple model It's going to be an atmospheric model firstly Forced by C-surface temperature and then we're going to use an ocean model driven by those atmospheric anomalies So the model is pretty coarse is but it's the global region a global ocean model to the great resolution We have a control run which is forced with an atmospheric state Which is called the core coordinated ocean ice reference experiment Which includes all sort of data sets and the atmospheric model is the speedy model Which is developed here by Franco Moltenia and Frank Kowalski So what we're going to do is first we're going to run the atmospheric model Forced by SSTs observed SSTs and we're going to run a 10-member assemble of that and the Interanel variant SST are only present in the Pacific but in the Other regions Atlantic and Indian we're going to be using a climatological so We can be sure that the signal that we see is just produced by the interanel of our in SSTs in the Pacific Then we're going to take that ensemble member and we're going to take all those Atmospheric fluxes and we're going to compute anomalies the K-del anomalies straddling the year 2000 And we're going to feed those anomalies to our ocean model, which is forced by climatological fluxes Climatological Anomalphic state plus the anomalies derived from the atmospheric simulation So this is the anomalous forcing that we get By forcing the atmospheric model with SSTs observed SSTs so you can see the temperature The temperature up there the sea level pressure signal and the wind and wind curl Okay, so you can see Familia pattern here in the Pacific a very strong asymmetric response in terms of sea level pressure with your Newton law and The wind stress and we stress curl in this case that we are forcing with a negative SST anomaly at the equator The wind stress and we stress curl are responding in an in an opposite sense as the climatological State and that's going to be very important So now you might wonder where is the anomalies that we see in the exotropics coming from is it? Coming from the tropics, or is it local air sea interactions? So what we did is to force the those 10 member ensemble with Only anomalies in the equatorial Pacific so that we are sure that all the forcing comes from the equatorial Pacific and now from The local air sea interactions and this is the pattern that we get which is very similar to the previous one So most of the response in terms of wind and winters curl is really coming from the equatorial Pacific Forcing okay, so we are going to be running the ocean model now with all those anomalous fluxes and So as I said, we have a control run. It's very long control run Quite spun up and then we have a few perturbation experiments in which I will add the anomalous forcing to my Ocean model. Okay, there's a few of them Speedy all I put in all the anomalous forcing into the ocean model and down to the most simplified And the one where I get the largest response, which is pdw where I'm only using Anomalous forcing in the wind stress and winters curl So this is the atmospheric response, which is what we expect if we're forcing with a negative anomaly at the equator Then we get a weakening of the Hadley cell. This is The first top plot is the decade 2009 and this is the atmospheric stream function for the decade before If there's a difference between the two you see weakening of the Hadley cell and also a shift towards the equator of the Hadley cell Which is constant with the thermally driven Hadley cell if we look at the heat transport Here you see the climatological heat transfer in the model, which is quite realistic And here you see the anomalous heat transport again taken as the difference between the two thousand decades and the 190 decade and you see a negative Anomaly in terms of heat transfer in the northern hemisphere consistent with a weakening of the Hadley cell and the response from the SST Forcing so that's all very consistent with what we expect the atmosphere to respond to that force Now we look at the ocean model and we force the ocean model with those Anomalous fluxes and this is and this is the first response that we get we do an EOF of the SST in the North Pacific and we see something that might be similar To a PDO like button. This is a switch on experiment So what we see is a is an adjustment to the Forcing the anomalous forcing that we are putting into the model, which has a roughly a Decadal timescale adjusting to this anomalous force So now we look deeper into the ocean to see what is happening into the ocean yesterday. We've seen a Plot of the meridional overturning circulation in death space now. I'm showing the meridional overturning circulation in density space so this is Potential density the y-axis and this is latitude in the x-axis So here you're supposed to see two subtropical cells Around the equator and this is the anomalies again When you force the ocean model With those anomalous fluxes as compared to the control simulation You see a Weakening of the subtropical cell in the another hemisphere and a reduction in the heat transport associated with that in the non hemisphere as well and the response that we get at the equator is Because the subtropical cells are weakening. There's less heat transport away from the equator less upwelling at the equator And so we get a positive SST anomaly At the equator which is actually damping the original cooling that originated the whole thing So again, you might think What is the ocean really responding to is a responding to the anomalous winds at the equator Or is there responding to the anomalous winds that are north of the equator subtropical and exotropical regions So we did another set of experiments where we are forcing our ocean model only with anomalies north of 18 degrees pole worth of 18 degrees or Only within a band of 18 degrees at the equator and see what is the response of the ocean in that case So those two experiments are called speedy no-trop. So wind anomalies only pole worth of 18 degrees or Anomalies only within the equatorial bond And what we see if we force the ocean model only with the wind anomalies Within the equatorial bond is that we don't get that weakening of the subtropical cells No weakening in heat transport and that not much of a signal in terms of SST at the equator If instead we force only with the wind anomalies pole worth of 18 degrees and so the exotropical wind anomalies Coming from the atmosphere then we recover most of the signal in terms of weakening in the subtropical cells weakening in oceanic heat transport and that warming at the equator which dumps the original signal and You know to see the timescale of this you can look at the heat content anomaly within a box in the equator Which is given there in the top 500 meter. So if you do the Trop experiments or only force in the ocean model with wind anomalies within the equator Then you don't have much of a signal. It's it's a fast response and is actually Trying to reinforce the original anomaly but if you force your ocean model with exotropical wind anomalies, then you get this Increasing heat content because you get that warm anomalies at the equator and actually it spins up On a decadal timescale, okay, and it's quite it's quite stable as a solution. Yeah So now we try to model this already a simple Framework with a with an even simpler Model kind of a toy model and this is starting from the answer delay the oscillator of swaths and shawth so we start with three equations one defining the evolution of the Temperature at equator one is going to be the jar index and another one is going to be the cell Sotropical cell index. So the the hypothesis here is that the C-cephus temperature are forcing the jar index circulation, which Is then connected to the Sotropical cell index. Okay, there's a few parameters. This this is the the well-known part from Swaths and Shawth and there's the The jar index as I said is connected to the temperature at the equator and the Cell is going on the same sense as the jar by definition in this case so with a proper Tuning of parameters depending on on the trying to get a Correct response in terms also of the observations then we get this this kind of behavior in terms of Temperature at the equator the jar index and the cell index. Okay, so this is quite a A Good representation of what answer is in reality and you can see the blue line is the low-frequency Evolution of this T anomaly which shows some the K-doll anomalies and there are by construction anti-correlation Sotropical cell index anomalies in this and this plot of the Sotropical cell index, okay To test whether the connection between the temperature and the jar is really essential in order in this model to generate those Sotropical cells Low-frequency anomalies and C-cephus temperature anomalies then we can play with this model and for example eliminate the connection between the C-cephus temperature at the equator and the jar and so Is the Sotropical connection tropical exotropic connection really necessary to generate that low-frequency variability and in this case It is if you take off that connection Then you basically don't generate any low-frequency variability in the tropical cells and the C-cephus temperature at the equator Okay, so I'll listen this model the connection between the jar and the equatorial temperature is essential in order to Spin up the Sotropical cells so You know that you are put together this two hypotheses the atmospheric bridge and the oceanic tunnel Then we kind of look at the simplest schematic in which you start with anomaly at the equator Which through an atmospheric bridge? Generates some atmospheric response in the exotropics that atmospheric response is able to force the ocean Which responds by spinning upward down the Sotropical cells and then you get a reversal of the original SST anomaly in your in your ocean Okay, and this is this is all based on previous theories in in both the atmospheric bridge and the oceanic tunnel So we're just putting two pieces together here So is this does this make any sense in our in a more real model, and I think it does So this here I get yeah In gray is observations. So gray is the C-cephus temperature evolution Over the past hundred years and the data lines the gray data line is the observations of the surface The Sotropical cell index the one that I showed at the beginning If we force a global the same old global ocean model with time varying Core to force things then we are able to reproduce the Sotropical cells variability in this model's okay So the the model is actually able to reproduce the isotropical cell variability during this period so if we Remove the wind forcing within the aquatoria bond if what I said up until now make any sense Then we are supposed to maintain that low-fringacy variability in the Sotropical cell and we actually do This is the same kind of experiments by just forcing the ocean model with time varying winds north of 1015 degrees north and south of 10 10 15 degrees And so we retain most of the Sotropical cells variability and most of the C-cephus temperature variability in the ocean model so Do couple models semi-fi models are able to reproduce any of this low frequency variability and actually they don't So at the top left you see the reanalysis data the black line is the Sotropical cell index and the Gray line is the C-cephus temperature and all the other models basically Not reproducing any kind of low frequency variability during the historical records So for some reason Sotropical cells in semi-five historical models are not able to reproduce any low frequency variability as observed So conclusions the atmosphere response to tropical forcing does seems to have some feedback on the Sotropical ocean which in turn is forcing an equatorial time delay response at least in this simple framework So we are basically putting together do two things the atmosphere beach and the oceanic tunnel here So also soft tropical force soft tropical cells variability I think is a key player in generating this low-fringacy equatorial Pacific variability and the Sotropical cells are forced by soft tropical winds not equatorial winds and This natural mode, which is just one of the possible low-frequency Genen one of the possible mechanism that generates low frequency variability Can perhaps be another one that explains the warming hiatus together with the local Pacific decadal variability and also the teleconnections Thank you very much


The Appalachian Advantage plan is the simpler, better way to get the phone you actually want instead of paying hundreds of dollars up front.  It's called the Appalachian Advantage and is available at Appalachian Wireless. With just a few weeks to spare, Letcher County's Mayfest will be hitting the streets in downtown Whitesburg this month. Friday Mountain Top spoke with Letcher County Tourism Director Clay Christian to learn more. Mayfest is an event we have every year in downtown Whitesburg. Unfortunately, we haven't had it the past couple years because of COVID, but this year we're coming back bigger and better than ever. It has live music, games for kids, beverages for kids and adults. Their restaurants will be open with food and they will also have live music after the event in the street is over. It's just a great thing for the community for everybody to get out, have some fun, hang with your friends. And it's also a great day for the businesses downtown to help them get some people in. During the event, visitors can expect beverages, live music and products from local vendors. So the opening artist is his name is Cody Howard. We are a single artist playing and the band that is coming on after that is Johnny Pop Day and September Run. Cody will be playing from five to seven and then Johnny Pop Day and September Run will be playing from seven until nine. Mayfest begins May 21st. To become a vendor, you can email LetcherTourism at gmail.com or call<PHONE_NUMBER>. For Mountaintop News, I'm Joel Korgel.