Therefore, it is now time for a question period. The member from Mifeson. Thank you and good morning, Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Education. The announcement of a financial literacy pilot program is an important first step. But in a Toronto Star article, financial literacy expert Trisha Berry argues that the mandated financial literacy needs to be introduced much earlier. In fact, she suggests by grade six. She says, quote, elementary students should not be left behind. But this government, Speaker, is doing exactly that by saddling them with thousands of dollars of debt because of their overspending. In fact, it's nearly $23,000 a student. Mr. Speaker, how long is the Minister of Education going to keep elementary students in the dark about her government's fiscal mismanage? Question. Thank you. Minister of Education. Thank you, Speaker. I thank the member opposite for this question. I'm very pleased to rise in the House today and to talk about how we're investing in our students in Ontario in 21st century learning. And of course, that includes financial literacy I committed to in November to make financial literacy a mandatory part of the grade 10 curriculum. And that is exactly what we're doing, Mr. Speaker. In addition, Mr. Speaker, we have since 2011, in fact, made financial literacy a part of our elementary school curriculum starting in grade four, right through to secondary school to grade 12, Mr. Speaker, so that as students move through the grades that they're acquiring this really good knowledge and we're taking this step further by making it a mandatory part of the grade 10 curriculum, Mr. Speaker, we're ensuring that our students have what they need. Thank you. Supplementary. Yeah, Minister, Kimia Kamari, who teaches careers at Thornhill Secondary School, had this to say, quote, both money skills and digital literacy are critical tools for high school kids and our subjects are eager to learn about. Speaker, we just wish the Liberal Caucus members were as eager to learn about money skills. My question to the minister is, if she had introduced this earlier, what would be the most indebted subnational government on the planet? Thank you. You know, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite himself has said that he's happy with the new approach. He said that to me, actually, personally. He's happy with the new approach we're taking to financial literacy, so he supports this direction and this investment, Mr. Speaker. I do want to let the House know because we're very excited about the work that we're doing in 21st century learning in Ontario and the investments that we're making in our schools and our teachers and our students, Mr. Speaker. Just this morning I was at St. Mary's Academy, Mr. Speaker, with a member from Davenport to talk about schisms, Mr. Speaker. Those specialist high skills major programs that are really world leading programs teaching skills, real world knowledge that they will need to build on, and we're going to continue to invest in that, including information and communications technology, Mr. Speaker. That's good. And, of course, digital learning is a really important aspect of our curriculum in Ontario, and we will continue to lead, Mr. Speaker. Wow. Thank you. Final supplementation. Back to the minister. Well, we all know what happens when you don't have financial literacy. You get 13 consecutive Liberal budgets that throw hardworking Ontario families into debt. You get 13 consecutive Liberal budgets that make life harder for families and seniors. You get 13 consecutive Liberal budgets that mean people work harder, pay more, and get less. Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of Education be requiring her caucus colleagues to participate in the financial literacy pilot project? So, Mr. Speaker, I'm delighted that the member officer is aware of our pilot project, Mr. Speaker. 29 pilots that will be happening across the province, Mr. Speaker, involving our educators as researchers, involving our students, and the input, Mr. Speaker. We've heard from students in Ontario that they want financial literacy. We've been working together to ensure that this is part of our curriculum, a part of the mandatory course in grade 10, and we're really thrilled with the direction that we're taking, ensuring that students have the real-world knowledge that they need to succeed, and we're giving them the tools that they need, Mr. Speaker, in 21st-century learning. So, I thank the member for this question. Thank you. Thank you for the question. Question? Member from Nipissing. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Finance. When the Premier stumped for the Prime Minister during the election, she promised that it would reap benefits for Ontario, but it looks like the Premier traded her favours for nothing more than a campaign stop during the Whitby-Oshawa by-election. Yesterday, the Minister of Finance looked disparaged, deflated, and defeated when addressing the federal budget. Mr. Speaker, what else did the Minister ask for that he didn't receive? Does the Finance Minister need to rewrite the Ontario budget because the Prime Minister didn't give him what he wanted? Thank you. Minister of Finance. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the federal government came out with their second budget, reflecting on the deficiencies of the previous government that did nothing for Ontario, provided no investments to grow our economy, leaving us empty as we move forward in stimulated growth. We invested heavily. We've taken the steps to come to balance this year, Mr. Speaker, recognizing the measures that we've done to grow the economy. The fact that that party across the way has always, always declined. They would rather we cut across the board 100,000 jobs in one year, no, Mr. Speaker, and without any care for those that matter most. We have taken the right steps to invest in the economy, control our spending, coming to balance, and ensuring, Mr. Speaker, that we have a sustained future for all Ontario's going forward. Supplementary. Back to the Minister. Well, the finance minister is trying to hold his cards close to his chest, Speaker, but sadly he does not have a very good poker face. Yesterday he looked visibly upset. He got nothing he asked for. He didn't get the capital gains tax on housing purchases. He didn't get the health transfer he hoped for. We can only imagine that the release of the federal budget left his entire office scrambling. So, Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Finance tell us when he's releasing his Ontario budget, or is he now waiting for the rewrite? Thank you. Minister of Finance. So, Mr. Speaker, the federal government has aligned with the Ontario government in regards to skills and training, in regards to investing in childcare, and ensuring that we work through the labor market agreements that enables some of our most precarious workers now to have some support, which it didn't have under the Harris government, and under the Harper government in the past, Mr. Speaker. So, as we consolidate these initiatives, we're going to be able to support more skills and training. These are important initiatives, and when it comes to infrastructure spending, the federal government has again reaffirmed a desire to do so, without incrementality to the province. That too is critically important, Mr. Speaker. So while the member opposite sits on his hands and makes up numbers, we here are dealing with what's real, and that is the people of Ontario and their needs, and ensuring that we deliver for them. Thank you. Final supplementary. Thank you, Speaker. Back to the minister. When the finance minister planned for the upcoming budget, he certainly hadn't planned for a multi-billion dollar hydro scheme. At that time, this government didn't even think Ontario's hydro crisis was a problem. So that's billions upon billions of new government. Now his government has failed to successful lobby in Ottawa. They're missing out on billions in opportunities for Ontario. Mr. Speaker, is the Minister of Finance now scrambling to put together their budget, and when will Ontarians see this new budget? Thank you. Mr. Finance. So I appreciate the fact that the member opposite has recognized that we are reducing rates 25% across the board because of the measures that we've taken to afford to do those measures, Mr. Speaker, and because we've taken the steps necessary to afford them and still come to balance, we're providing for the people of Ontario to help their everyday lives. And as we proceed throughout that process, regardless of what the federal government has done, we've taken into consideration all of those factors. And that enables us, Mr. Speaker, and I want to reaffirm that we are balancing the books and we've taken the steps to do so without putting in harm's way health care or education or social programs or childcare or affordable housing and jobs, Mr. Speaker, 700,000 net new jobs have come to this since we've taken office in regards through that recession and we're succeeding and surpassing. Thank you. Thank you. New question to members from Nickelville. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thanks, Premier. The Premier has promised to reduce the burden of soaring hydro bills at Ontario Hospital by 2%. Let me be clear, that's not good enough. Health Sciences North in Sudbury, where I live, invested heavily in energy conservation and saw their hydro bill go up by 26%. Peterborough Regional Hospital cut their hydro consumption by 25% and saw their bill go up by 8%. Does the acting Premier think that our hospital in Sudbury would have been better off with just a 24% increase, or does she think that the people in Peterborough would be comforted by a 6% increase rather than an 8% increase? Thank you. Thank you, Premier. Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Minister of Health, Long-Term Care. Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I'm actually elated that the member opposite has referenced Health Sciences North. Well, the member opposite wants to see me even more excited. And I think if they just wait a minute, they're going to see that. Because Health Sciences North has spent the last two and a half years taking advantage of a number of government of Ontario programs that help them specifically with their energy costs. They've received a quarter of a million dollars in incentives to help with efficiency updates. And the result of those upgrades that they've made... Member from Kitchener, Waterloo. The result of those upgrades is that they now save more than $500,000 per year on their energy costs. And I am getting excited and I am elated with this because when you combine that, Mr. Speaker... With the increase in the funding we've provided, and I'm happy to talk about that in the supplementary. Thank you. Supplementary. Thank you, Speaker. Well, St. Joseph Health Care in Hamilton saw a 105% increase in their hydro bill under the Liberal Plan. They will get a 2% decrease. Is the minister okay with a 103% increase in hydro bill? So, Mr. Speaker, we need to remind Ontarians that the electricity costs of hospitals on average are approximately 1%. We increased the entire operating budget of Health Sciences North last year by 3.2% or almost $9 million. We increased the operating budget, the entire budget, not the 1% that the member opposite is talking about, which is electricity. The entire budget of St. Joseph in Hamilton increased by 3.8%, over $15 million, Mr. Speaker. And Mr. Speaker and Peter Burl, again, as what happened in Sault Ste. Marie, the CEO of the hospital had to come out and had to actually refute the claims made by the NDP, saying that hydro costs represent less than 1% of their budget and that Peter Burl Hospital has dramatically decreased energy consumption through various energy-saving programs and measures across the hospital. They've reduced their consumption by 25%, Mr. Speaker, and they have surrogated that they are working well and working closely with the government on further measures, Mr. Speaker. What about the hospital in Niagara? A 96% increase. The hospital in Windsor, a 49% increase. Toronto East General, a 67% increase on their hydro bill. How can the minister touts the virtue of his government $40 billion borrowing scheme that does not address the really real concern that have been to express to him repeatedly and publicly by hospitals? Thank you, minister. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So with the Niagara Health System, we increased their budget, the entire budget, not the 1% of the budget that is applied to electricity, but the entire $381 million operating budget of Niagara Health Systems, we increased that budget by a further 2.5% or $9.4 million. And again, the hospital in Niagara as a result of the misinformation that the NDP has been spreading. The member will withdraw. I withdraw, Mr. Speaker. So in response to the confusion being spread by the NDP, the executive vice president of finance and operations of Niagara Falls says that our teams have been able to absorb any increase in cost by continuously looking for efficiencies in our operation. Even a member of Niagara's agreed that the increases, much of that was a result of the doubling in size of the new St. Catherine's Hospital, minister. Thank you. No question. The member from Nectaville. Thank you. My next question is also to the acting premier. Right here right now in Ontario, private clinics are charging people thousands of dollars to jump the queue. They are forcing our families and our seniors to wait longer for their care. For-profit companies are charging up to $100 just to see a doctor. They're charging money to get people a diagnosis. They are charging money for a physician to sign a prescription. Why does the acting premier think that it's okay to make people pay up or wait longer for the health care that they need? Thank you. Thank you, premier. So, minister of health and long-term care. Minister of health, long-term care. Well, Mr. Speaker, I think it's important to reassure Ontarians and indeed this legislature that what the member opposite is talking about, I believe what she's talking about is digital or internet interactions that are taking place. No one in this province is allowed to, permitted to under the law, to actually provide financial or receive incentives to receive ORIP publicly insured healthcare services and programs, Mr. Speaker. So that simply isn't the case. That individuals in this province have that legal right because of Medicare, because of our universal healthcare system, because of the legislation that we put in place in 2004 which makes it illegal for those kinds of activities to take place. If it takes place in a digital interaction online, Mr. Speaker, that is not currently a, except with certain pilot programs that we have, it is not currently an OHIP funded. Thank you. Comments, please. I think we can all agree, Speaker, that you should never need a credit card to see a doctor here in Ontario. But right here, right now, under this Liberal government, private clinics are charging thousands of dollars to jump the queue. And companies like Maple and Akira are charging up to $100 to see a physician. How can this minister allow private clinics to charge money for basic healthcare services and force everybody else to wait longer for the care that they need? Thank you, Minister. You know, Mr. Speaker, this, we have to be so careful here. And I know- A member from Kitchener Waterloo, second time. And Mr. Speaker, I don't want to be in a position where I have to withdraw or apologize again. But the kind of confusion that this member is sowing across this province right now, it simply is not the case that individuals in Ontario have to pay to see OHIP-insured health, to receive OHIP-insured health services. They do not pay to jump the queue. It's illegal. We're monitoring this so closely. The examples that the member opposite is providing, erroneous examples, I would argue, Mr. Speaker, that suggest somehow that people are able to buy their way to the front of the line, or somehow that people have to pay for prescriptions from a physician. It's simply not true. Thank you. We see it, please. We see it, please. Thank you. Final supplementary. Thank you, Speaker. I know the minister doesn't get it, but some things are not for sale. And that includes the health care that our families need and count on. Charging people thousands of dollars a year. Minister of Tourism, Culture, and Sport come to order. Minister of Agriculture come to order. And there's a carry-on, please. I can't even put this down here. Charging people thousands of dollars a year for health care is wrong. Charging people... Stop the talking. Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation come to order. Minister of Children and Youth Services, second time. No, second time. You didn't hear me, but I know the member wants me to do my job. The member from Megalinton Lawrence come to order. Start the clock. Charging people to see a doctor is wrong. Charging people to get a diagnosis is wrong. Charging people to renew a prescription is wrong. Minister of Municipal Affairs come to order. Why is the minister letting this happen? When is he actually going to stop it? So, Mr. Speaker, this kind of accusation is so irresponsible and even dangerous, Mr. Speaker, these wild and vague accusations. And I would like to challenge the member opposite. If she has specific examples, which run contrary to the law in this province, the law in this country, I want her to bring them to me directly. I invite her to share them here and now, with names, with specifics. Mr. Speaker, no question. The member from Haliburt and Córthal Lake. The Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. The demand for long-term care beds is becoming desperate in my writing. In fact, Central East Lynn continues to have the highest ratio of need to available beds in the entire province. There is now a wait list of over 1700 people in need of long-term care beds in Haliburt and Córthal Lake's Brock. That's double what it was a couple of years ago. And in Peterborough area, their number is now almost 2,900. The wait lists are so bad that a large group of concerned Ontarians drove down to Queens Park this past winter to protest the government's inaction. So, Speaker, when will the Minister finally act to address the crisis in long-term care? Mr. Speaker, we recognize that there are parts of the province where we need to do more and we need to ensure that the capacity that exists reflects the needs of that local population. That's part of the reason why we're engaged right now in capacity planning across this province through the Linn to look at a number of issues, including the capacity in long-term care. But since we're the member reference Central East, again, we've built more than 10,000 long-term care beds since coming into office in 2003, Mr. Speaker, including many of them in Central East. 75 beds at Craigley Nursing Home. 150 new beds at Yee Hong Center. 100 new beds at Scarborough Finch, Mr. Speaker. 128 at Halana Care for Seniors. Also in Central East. In Central East, 160 further beds in Mong Chong Foundation. We know that there's more work to be done. We're redeveloping 30,000 beds. We're already in the process of completing 13,000 of those 30,000. Supplementary. Well, the fact is the 10,000 beds number that the minister often likes to take credit for was actually the capacity started under the previous PC government. And so here we are, here we are 13 years later and there's no new capacity plan. We've been calling on the government for new long-term care beds for years, but the minister is just sitting on his hands. What's the point of having long-term care system that Ontarians can't even get into? They're dying on the wait list. So my question again is to the minister. When is he finally going to respond to the suffering families and address the out-of-control crisis in the long-term care beds? Thank you, minister. Well, Mr. Speaker, I think we need to recognize that what we're confronting here in Ontario is the same as what is being confronted across this country, across North America and indeed in the world. An aging population, an aging population that in many respects is aging more healthily, Mr. Speaker, but also that they are having changing needs and needs that we need to make sure that we are responding to. And that includes, for example, the investments that we're making in support for individuals living with dementia. That also includes, of course, recognizing that those in home care and rather in long-term care homes tend to be older now and they tend to have more complex conditions. So we've invested, we're investing about $50 million annually in behavioral supports for individuals in long-term care. We've, we're dramatically increasing our investments in home and community care in the order of about 5% per year. But we're focusing not only on new beds that we've created in long-term care and the redevelopment, but investments in the important resources that they need in those homes. New question, the member from Winsor to come see. Thank you, Speaker. I have a question. It's for the deputy premier. Good morning. I have a constituent, she's 67. Her husband is a stroke victim. She's trying to save money, Speaker. She get rid of her electric clothes dryer, switched to natural gas, and it only saved her 10 bucks a month. Her most recent hydro bill was for $130 of usage, but more than $100 in delivery charges. Speaker, what does the deputy premier say to folks struggling to keep up with her government's failed energy policies? Thank you. Deputy Premier. Thank you, Speaker, and good morning to you too, sir. This example and many others that we have heard in this house for weeks now illustrate exactly why we are making the changes we are making, Speaker. It's part of- The member from Stormont come to order. Our values. People should not be struggling to pay their electricity bills when they have so many other demand, Speaker. So that is why we are bringing prices down by 25% on average, Speaker. There is additional support for people who live in rural Ontario and remote communities. There is additional support available for people who are in low-income household, Speaker. We've got additional supports available for people with medical needs that require additional electricity usage, Speaker. So it is exactly that kind of story that has compelled us to make this significant reduction in electricity. Thank you. A couple of minutes, please. Speaker, my constituent takes a monthly prescription pill. It cost her more than $100. It's not covered by OHIP. There are times she tells me when she has to make a decision. Do I buy more medication, or do I pay my hydro bill? She also tells me there are a lot of people, a lot of seniors in her neighborhood, and when she goes out in the evening and at night, those homes are darker these days, these nights, these evenings, because people can't afford to turn on their lights. She's not the only one struggling these days, Speaker. When can seniors in Ontario finally get a break from the failed policies of this liberal government? Thank you. Thank you for your... Well, Speaker, the answer is they've already seen a reduction, Speaker, that came in in the January bill. There will be additional savings if and when this legislation gets passed, Speaker. So what I would say to the member opposite, who I know actually cares about this issue and the people in this community, to support this bill, their plan, Speaker, is a plan that would take $4 billion out of the services that people in this province rely on, like healthcare, Speaker. So the plan to spend $4 billion would not take one penny off one bill, Speaker. Our plan will do that 25% on average and more for people facing particularly high elections. That's her. Thank you. Any questions to the member from the Kitchener Centre? Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change. Yesterday, Ontario made history by holding its first cap-and-trade auction. Soon, 60% of the world's economy will be covered by a carbon price, and 90% of which will be cap-and-trade systems. By entering into the carbon market, we're following through on our commitment to responsibly reduce emissions at the lowest possible cost. Our plan also calls for support for homeowners and businesses to benefit from home energy retrofits, public transit and electric vehicle incentives. These are investments which, sadly, are nonexistent in the schemes that we've seen from members of the opposition. Speaker, could the Minister please speak to the benefits of Ontario's cap-and-trade program? Thank you, Minister of the Environment and Climate Change. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank, because we don't know the results, we won't for two weeks, but it was technically a huge success, I want to thank Ontarians, environmental groups, the nine largest industry-emitting associations from cement to auto who worked with us and have supported that and are participating in this, and companies that are not passing costs on, as the opposition would suggest, but are reducing. St. Mary's Cement on biofuels to reduce costs and emissions. Gold corp, electrification of mining. Brookfield at Alice Dawn, net zero buildings, massively reducing costs of buildings in Ontario. Exporters reducing costs for small businesses and systemic programs. General Motors using biofuels in St. Catharines, UPS and FedEx reducing costs of delivery on Ontario with lower technologies. Nova Corporation doing massive co-gen in Sarnia. All across our industrial and services, people are using carbon markets and cap and trade to reduce costs, renew our industrial infrastructure and make Ontario a more competitive machine. Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the minister for his answer. It's encouraging to hear that our government is taking an approach that's economically sound and transparent. What's not encouraging, however, are the comments that the PC leader has made on the eve of Ontario's first cap and trade auction. When referring to the Western Climate Initiative, the PC leader told the Toronto Star, and I quote, we would want to exit from this framework as quickly as possible. Speaker, politicizing an auction a day before it goes live is not just careless, but can potentially undermine the auction itself. When pressed by the CBC on his climate strategy, the PC leader was quoted as saying, and I quote, we're still going through our policy process on that. Mr. Speaker, given that our government does have a process in place, can the minister please explain to us what it entails? Thank you, minister. Thanks, Mr. Speaker. I would agree with the observation by the minister that by suggesting you're going to tear up the market and the WCI and the eve of the market was calculated to disrupt the market, Mr. Speaker. And that wasn't an attack on the government. That was an attack on all of Ontario. Stop the talking. I am listening very carefully, and the member is dangerously close to making an accusation to a member, and I would caution him and ask that he no go further with that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This challenges the market, which everyone is relying on. It's not the government of Ontario. It's Ontarians who are finding the most cost-effective ways to reduce emissions. Businesses to compete. Our petrochemical sectors, our trucking sectors who are out ahead of it, all who support it, they're asking me what would happen if the opposition tore this up and put a carbon tax in place that would start fuel prices at $0.16 higher at the pot, Mr. Speaker, and have no money to sustain these programs, Mr. Speaker. That is all for Mr. Speaker. New question? A member from Sarnia-Lampton. Thank you. Thank you. The member? Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and to you and through you to the Acting Premier. Acting Premier, Sarnia-Lampton constituent, Carol Cote, and a small group of friends have been gathering for years in a Sarnia church to quilt. The group of the social conscience and soon began creating what they call comfort quilts for victims of disease, crime, or tragic incidents. The local church was kind enough to provide space in the gym one day a month for the group to meet. They only asked for whatever the donation the members of the group could give. Sadly, because of the unaffordable cost of hydro, the churches informed Carol that they will no longer be able to offer the gym without a rental charge. A charge to the group, unfortunately, cannot afford. Deputy Premier, your energy crisis now become a barrier to even charitable work in Ontario. Can you honestly say that you've done enough to correct the energy mistakes? Ah. Deputy Premier. What I can tell you is that we are the party that has a plan to bring down electricity prices, Speaker. It is a fair plan. It is about helping everyone, Speaker. Everyone will benefit from this plan. It brings the cost of electricity down by 25%. And then we're giving people the comfort of knowing that rates will go up no higher than the rate of inflation for four years, Speaker. This is a plan that we actually can stand behind. I'm still waiting to see what the PC plan is. But I don't think the people in Sarnia-Lampton can wait till your policy convention in November. They want action now, Speaker. And that's what we are doing. Sir. Thank you. Supplementary. Mr. Speaker, to you and through you to the acting Premier. Unfortunately, your hydro hail, Mary, comes too late for Carol and her group. Over the last five years, Carol and the Sarnia sister hood of quilters have lovingly finished more than 200 quilts for various agencies in the community, hospitals and individuals in need. They've never sought compensation or recognition. They only seek to make a positive remark on their community. Acting Premier, before your next million dollar ad buy, patting yourself on party on the back, will you stop and think of the welfare of groups like the Sarnia sister hood of quilters rather than the welfare of the Ontario level? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Thank you, buddy. Thank you. Thank you, Premier. Once again, we're hearing stories from real people. And I have no reason to question that story, Speaker. The difference between them and us, though, is that we have a plan and we are delivering on that plan. The PCs are saying that they are going to rip up contracts, Speaker. Even they know that that will be. Member for Bruce Grio and sound second time. That will lead to increased costs. In fact, the PC energy critics said that renegotiation. The member from Niagara, let's plan, Brooke, come to order. Huge cost to taxpayers. And we're going to continue to see electricity prices rise. Speaker, they don't have a plan. They're not even able to criticize our plan. But Speaker, we are moving forward. We are delivering results. We are reducing the price. Answer. Thank you. New question. A member from Tamiskimi Cochran. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the acting Premier. LCBO employees are professionals who perform an important public service regulating the sale and consumption of alcohol-related products in the province. And they're doing a very good job because even on the profit side, they've shown growth in 21 straight years. Last year, $215,216, $2 billion in profit. Profit that, because it belongs to us, goes to schools, to health care, to home care. But those profits would also be very attractive to the private sector, for good reason. My question is, and I have a question, will the Premier commit to not sell off the LCBO? Thank you. Deputy Premier. Who knows your finance? Sir, finance? Mr. Speaker, let me be really clear here. Notwithstanding what Smokey Thomas has requested, which is to buy the LCBO and privatize it for their own benefit, it is not for sale, Mr. Speaker. Elementary. Once again to the acting Premier. LCBO stores are clean, safe, highly-regulated places to purchase alcoholic beverages. Come to order. Please finish. They're a clear gem among this province's crown assets. And despite the minister of finance's attempt to deflate their, what's the Premier's word, conflate the issue, Hydro-1 wasn't for sale either. The Premier said it wasn't for sale. And then magically it was into LCBO. Thank you. Minister. You've got a question. Mr. Speaker, well, we still own Hydro-1 and will always be the largest shareholder into our economy to continue to build new assets. And the member opposite has made an important point. The LCBO is a highly attractive organization. Its value is strong. Its contribution to the province is strong. And that in itself is why, for itself is why we are not even considering mobilizing anything for the LCBO except expanding its reach to ensure that it continues to contribute for the benefit of Ontario. And Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we're doing. And when it came to Hydro-1 and other assets, we made the same assessment and realized we can do better. And we are doing better on all cases. LCBO is not for sale. Thank you. New question. The member from Barrie. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Minister of International Trade. In trade and in governance as a whole, taking a proactive approach to the issues that matter most to constituents and businesses is of the utmost importance to us. That's right. And it is a defining characteristic of our government. This approach was exemplified earlier this week when Minister Chan and Minister Dugud traveled to Albany, New York to join Monique Smith, Ontario's trade representative in Washington and her Quebec counterpart to meet with New York State legislators to represent Ontario's business interests. In light of the shifting trade climate, I know that the businesses in my community value the proactive efforts made by our government to boldly protect their opportunities for growth. Can the Minister share with this legislature the importance of a strong New York State trade relationship on both sides of the border? Good question. Minister of International Trade. Thank you. Thank you, Speaker, for the question, and I want to thank the member from Barrie for asking. Speaker, as part of our government's many engagement efforts with the U.S., Minister Dugud and I traveled to Albany, New York on Tuesday and engaged in seven meetings with New York State legislators. We advocate on behalf of Ontarians, seeking an exemption from proposed by American provisions that could potentially affect access to procurement contracts. Speaker, during these discussions, we stress the fact that both Ontario and New York State grow together as our economies are deeply integrated. Speaker, in fact, Ontario is the destination for 80% of all goods exported from New York to Canada. Speaker, trade matters to Ontario and a strong and balanced relationship with our U.S. partners serve the benefit workers and businesses in the size of the border. Thank you, Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Minister of International Trade for his efforts and his response. Minister, New York State's bi-American policy is part of their budget bill that will be passed at the end of this month. This policy will prevent non-American companies from bidding on New York State government procurement. This kind of protectionist policy is rightfully of concern to Ontario businesses. We understand that your trip surrounded efforts to ask New York State legislators to exempt Canada from this policy. My question to the Minister is, how did the meetings go and what happens next? Thank you, Minister. Speaker, to the Ministry of Economic Development and Growth. Minister of Economic Development and Growth. Thank you, Mr. I want to begin by thanking my colleague, the Minister of International Trade and the Minister of Economic Development for Quebec Dominique Anglad for traveling with us and working with us in our efforts in Albany this week. As New York State is our number one international customer, Mr. Speaker, and we are their number one international customer, I want to say that the Minister and I are very proud to stand up for our business community here in Ontario and strongly make the case that Canadian businesses need to be exempt from the bi-American policy, or Mr. Speaker, it could very well cost indeed New York State jobs as well. So it's very important that they get that message. I'm pleased to report to all members of the Legislature that our message was very well received. In fact, I was pleasantly surprised by the knowledge of that, by the folks that we met with, and Mr. Speaker, we'll continue to pursue this path. Thank you. New question, a member from Wellington, Halton Hills. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Attorney General. The Attorney General is well aware that Halton Region is in urgent need of a new courthouse. The existing courthouse in Milton is aging, overcrowded, and inadequate to deal with the needs of a rapidly growing Halton Region. Working with local stakeholders, we have been advocating for a new courthouse for more than two years now. As one of the Halton Area MPPs, I have raised this issue in the Legislature many times. My question is very simple. Why is it taking the Attorney General so long to announce approval of the new Halton Courthouse so desperately needed? Thank you, Attorney General. Thank you very much. I want to thank the member opposite for a very important question. Indeed, a new courthouse in Alton is a top priority for my ministry. Speaker, I want to give a big thank you to the members from Oakville, Burlington and Halton for their ongoing advocacy on behalf of the community. Working along with the member from Halton Hills and making sure that we have a new courthouse in Halton. Speaker, I've had the opportunity to meet with the local community as well, with the local government as well to understand the need of Halton, along with the members from Oakville, Burlington and Halton and the member from Halton Hills to make sure that we have all the processes in place and, Speaker, in supplement. I will speak to exactly what steps we have taken so that we have a new courthouse in Halton. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, we have been assured repeatedly by both this Attorney General and his predecessor that a new Halton courthouse is his ministry's top priority. However, despite these assurances, we're still waiting. And while we're waiting, access to justice in Halton region is compromised. According to the Halton County Law Society, litigants are often required to travel to Brampton or Guelph because the current courthouse simply can't handle the volume of cases. In fact, there have been examples where criminal cases have been thrown out because it was taking too long to get them to trial. Surely the Attorney General would agree this is unacceptable. Will he commit to this house that a new Halton courthouse will be approved and announced this year? Speaker, as I said earlier, a new courthouse for the Halton region is on the top of the ministry's priority project list. Again, I want to acknowledge all the work that members from Oakville, Burlington and Halton has done on this very important issue. Speaker, as a result of that work, we have created a design expert, appointed design expert who's been hired to develop the design requirements for a new courthouse and has met with Infrastructure Ontario as part of the design process. There also, Speaker, has been meetings between the design expert and the users of the court and the local community to better understand the needs. Those consultations, Speaker, began in August, have put the ministry in a good position to move forward with the project implementation of the Halton region consolidated courthouse. We recognize, Speaker, that there is a clear need to address facility challenges in Halton region, and I assure the member opposite, and I've assured the members from Oakville, Halton and Burlington that this is our top priority, and we will get it done. Thank you. New question to the member from London West. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the acting Premier. More than a year ago, London Health Sciences Centre, CMHA Middlesex and Middlesex London EMS came up with an innovative project to divert 3,000 mental health patients each year from the emergency room to the CMHA Crisis Centre. The project has stalled because provincial legislation only allows ambulance transfer of patients directly to a public hospital and not to a community-based crisis centre. LHSC, CMHA and EMS have been asking for months for the Minister of Health to approve the project as a pilot to allow it to go ahead. The minister told the media yesterday that the project is already underway, but in fact it is waiting on his desk for sign-off. Will the minister commit to signing off today so that the project can proceed immediately? Thank you. Minister of Health, long-term care. So, Mr. Speaker, I did have the opportunity to speak to this. I believe it was yesterday. And the work that CMHA, the Canadian Mental Health Association, is doing in London with the brand-new crisis centre that we funded to the tune of $1.2 million. It's remarkably important because it provides crisis intervention for adults, youth and adults aged 16 and up in both London and Middlesex County. They have put forward a proposal that we're looking at which would permit emergency medical services to transport patients in crisis directly to that crisis centre. The member herself has acknowledged that it is currently illegal to do that. It would require a legislative change to the Ambulance Act. It obviously would have implications province-wide, but it is something that we're looking at. Thank you. The mental health crisis in my community keeps getting worse. On Monday, this week, LHSC psychiatric ER was at 152% capacity with 26 mental health patients waiting for beds. This ER diversion project could save about $2.5 million annually by reducing the need for ambulances to transfer patients to the ER first and then wait sometimes for hours before they can transfer patients to the crisis centre. After he signs off on the pilot, hopefully today, will the minister commit to reinvesting the $2.5 million in savings back into the community so that the crisis centre has enough nurses to care for the expected 3,000 patients and LHSC can start putting patients in beds instead of hallway stretches. Thank you. Well, you know, Mr. Speaker, I wish it was that easy. First of all, if I was to approve the pilot that the member opposite is advocating for, and I have to say that the member from London North Centre has been a strong advocate for this and we have had conversations about it, but I can no more sign off on a pilot which is nowhere near my desk, by the way. I can't sign off on that because it would be breaking the law. No, no, no. That's... I'm asking for quiet. Carry on. But this is a very important project and it points to the success of... Mr. Speaker, this is a very important project and it points to the success of the crisis centre that we, this government, funded. Those beds that are available, the supports that are available in the community. I'm taking this very, very seriously. There is a lot of support for this, including the member to the left of me. And Mr. Speaker, the ministry is looking at this, but it does have bigger implications in terms of it is currently ideal. It would require legislative changes to the ambulance. New question. The member from Bradford Springdale. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my question is to the minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation. The number of First Nations communities in Ontario without access to safe drinking water is unacceptable. As the Premier stated yesterday during question period, this matter is of high priority to our government. I know that the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation, as well as the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, are both working hard to address this issue. Can the minister please elaborate on what our government is doing to ensure that our First Nations communities have access to safe and clean drinking water? Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation. Thank you, Speaker. We are committed to a trilateral process with Canada on a five-year plan to provide First Nations reserves with access to safe drinking water and to develop a longer-term strategy to ensure that solutions are implemented and long-lasting. Ontario is pleased with Ottawa's $2 billion investment in water treatment plants on reserves across Canada. Since 2015, Ontario has spent or committed a total of $23.74 million in provincial money to on-reserve drinking water projects in Ontario, but more work needs to be done. This trilateral process with Canada and First Nations will continue to identify options, to expedite and ensure that safe water drinking priority is a priority. Thank you, supplementary. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's assuring to hear that our government is working hard in placing a high priority on this matter. All Ontarians must have access to safe water, especially partners in our Indigenous communities. Although there is much work left to do, I'm encouraged to know that this government is taking the necessary steps to solve this issue. I know that this is also an important matter for the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, and they are also involved in the trilateral process. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister please elaborate on the specifics of what the Ministry of Climate Change is doing and what they've done and what they are currently doing? Minister. Speaker, I refer this supplementary to the very effective Minister of the Environment and Climate Change. Justice, title please. Minister, Environment and Climate Change. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The role of our ministry in working with Minister Zimmer's ministry and the federal government of First Nations is important. And what we're involved in, Mr. Speaker, is getting the planning and the assessments ready to support the capital infrastructure being undertaken by the federal government to re-inferved in its budget, Mr. Speaker. We are carrying out water sampling in eight communities. We are doing the profiling of water and microbiology and chemistry in 14 more within the next two months, Mr. Speaker. We are doing the onsite assessments and visits to provide recommendations for seven communities so they can establish their water treatment facilities. We are providing expertise and support to 10 councils and First Nations organizations to help them accelerate the movement of water projects forward. And we are providing comprehensive training across Ontario's First Nations for facility operators to operate the plants once they are repaired and new ones are established. This is a powerful and transformative partnership with First Nations and the federal government, Mr. Speaker. Finally, getting clean water to communities who have been waiting too long for it. New question? The member from Scarborough, Bruce Redford. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Mayor John Tory wrote what I've been saying for a long time, and he said, quotation on, I've talked to hundreds of people about Scarborough's survey extension, but I've also listened to those people and I've heard the message loud and clear from Scarborough residents. Scarborough needs better transit. Mr. Speaker, they need better transit now. Mr. Speaker, when will this government get a shovel in the ground and start building the Scarborough subway? Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Transportation. Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. I thank the member opposite from his first question. I believe that everybody in this chamber knows that this Premier, our Premier and our government, including our members from Scarborough, of which we have almost every right and covered in this caucus, Mr. Speaker, we're first at the table with respect to providing $1.48 billion to help support transit expansion for the subway expansion in Scarborough. We continue to work very closely with the City of Toronto, with Mayor Tory, with our federal partners as well to make sure that we continue to expand transit, that we build the subway extension in Scarborough and that we continue to build transit in every corner of Toronto and right across the GTHA and frankly in communities like Waterloo and Ottawa and so many others. I look forward to the follow-up question from the member opposite. Thank you, Mr. Speaker again. Mayor Tory talked about his time at the Scarborough Town Centre Arty Station and I was with him that time and said he talked to people as they made the mad morning rush to transfer from a bus to Arty just so that they could transfer again to the subway station and subway at the Canada Station. Order, please. The vast majority of those riders were ready for some transit relief now. Mr. Speaker, Scarborough is ready for transit relief now. What will the construction, when will the construction begin? Thank you. That's good. I try to be nice in this House from time to time when members are asking questions that actually make a lot of sense. I don't really understand that member's perspective. He is a former City of Toronto Councillor. He would of course know that the City of Toronto is leading a project he understands. It's a project the City of Toronto is not only leading on, the TTC would build. I think if anybody reasonably checks the historical record, they would understand that that particular member throughout his long political career has had a multitude of positions on this particular item speaker. There's only one party here on this side of the House that's being consistent on this. We are going to build the Scarborough subway extension speaker because of members on our side of the House who represent Scarborough and do it proudly as the only political leader in Ontario committed to building our province up. Thanks very much. Can you see it, please? Can you see it, please? Thank you. New question, the member from Kitchener and Waterloo. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Acting Premier. We know that our public libraries provide extraordinary value to their communities whether it's employment skills upgrading or the integration of new Ontarians or whether it's providing free space or the early development of literacy skills. Our public libraries create community across this province. However, in Waterloo, our public library hydro bills have been rising with no end in sight. In fact, I've heard firsthand over the last three years the increase in their hydro bills have been staggering. In 2014, 15 Waterloo public libraries electricity cost rose by 18%. The following year by 26%, public libraries operating budgets are being squeezed and public service is being sacrificed. My question is simple to the Acting Premier. Can you tell Ontarians why she's allowed energy cost to impact the public libraries in the province of Ontario? Thank you. Thank you, Speaker. And again, we hear a story about the impact of high electricity rate speaker. We understand those stories. We hear them ourselves in our own communities and we are taking action to significantly reduce the electricity bills for organizations, for individuals and for businesses and libraries would be included in that speaker. So my question back to the member is you don't have a plan that will take a penny off a bill. Your plan is to actually spend $4 billion more for something that will not take one penny off a bill including the bill of that library. So, Speaker, we have a plan. We're moving forward. We would welcome the support of the members opposite for our plan. Thank you. Well, Mr. Speaker, with all due respect we haven't seen your plan. You have not tabled this legislation in this House. Problem it's that side of the House on this file, Mr. Speaker. So, Premier, back to the Acting Premier. Our public library budgets are being compromised because of your federal rates. Your government's public library operating grants fund less than 5% of library operating budgets. In Toronto utility bills increased by almost $700,000 between 2014 and 2015 and they're projecting a significant increase this year. Rising electricity bills and chronic underfunding have created a crisis for libraries. Out of desperation, Toronto public libraries are now opening without staff. Imagine libraries without librarians. Acting Premier, why is your government forcing libraries to choose between paying their bills or stepping their libraries? Minister of Tours and Culture and Sport. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, I'm always happy to stand in this House Speaker and talk proudly about our support for public libraries and I know the member opposite will join me and not only celebrating that support Mr. Speaker, but supporting it when it comes to forward as we table our budget Speaker and on our ongoing conversation. The member from Hamilton each 20 Cree come to order, please. And the member from Hamilton Mountain come to order, please. Finish, please. Thank you, Speaker. In the spirit of quiet conversations in libraries, Speaker, perhaps we can continue. Happy to start that since 2003, Speaker, over half a billion dollars this government has invested in our public and our First Nations libraries. A million dollars last year alone, Speaker. That support is going to continue and we're proud of it, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Mr. Speaker, Ontario's agri-food sector supports close to 800,000 jobs and contributes more than $36.4 billion towards the province's GDP. The agri-food sector is one of the biggest employers in my riding of Etobicoke Lakeshore and also includes the Ontario food terminal, all of which is powered by Ontario's farmers. This past week, the Canadian Agricultural Society Agricultural Safety Week took place with the goal of raising awareness of farm safety across Canada and our government commends their efforts here in Ontario to make sure that they are safe and healthy. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister please provide this house with more information on how the Canadian Agricultural Safety Week is working to improve safety in farms across Canada each year? Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Etobicoke Lakeshore for his question this morning and I know during his work as MPP for that riding, he goes door to door. Mr. Speaker, Canadian Agricultural Safety Week happens every year with the goal of raising awareness for farm safety in Canada and our government commends their efforts here in Ontario and across the country. I'm proud to stand with the Canadian Agriculture Safety Association and the Canadian Federation of Agriculture recognizing the importance of farm safety. Their three-year farm safety campaign being agris safe family has been successful. Last year the campaign's focus for Canadian Agricultural Safety Week was on children. This year the focus is on adult farm safety and in 2018 the focus will be promoting farm safety for seniors. Mr. Speaker, I want to conclude I even made a wonderful short video highlighting the importance of agricultural safety week. I post it up by video. You will conclude. The member from Renfrew and Nipissing Pembroke on a point of order. In the Greens Park today, Opsu member Brian Hickman who is a liquor store employee in Eganville in my riding of Renfrew and Nipissing Pembroke. Thank you for joining us. Member from Mecca Belt, from Mecca Belt on a point of order. Thank you, Speaker. Through my question, the Minister of Health had asked for information on to the two-tier system and he's asked that I send it over. Not a point of order. You can do it. Mr. Speaker, may I just want to very quickly acknowledge that ministry officials from the Ministry of Education who have worked on bill 92 are here in the gallery and watching and I just want to thank them for their work. We have a deferred vote on the motion of third reading of bill 92 an act to amend the school board's collective bargaining act 2014 and make related amendments and other statutes calling the stand. All those in favor please rise wanted to time be recognized by the program. Mr. Smith? Mr. Smith? Mr. Nicholls? Mr. Nicholls? Mr. Nectonale? Mr. Nectonale? Mr. Pettipies? Mr. Petipies? Mr. Choe? Mr. Choe. All those opposed, please rise in one at a time, be recognized by the court. Ms. Satherer? Ms. Satherer? Ms. Chubisan? Ms. Avantos? Ms. Denovo? Ms. Denovo? Mr. Miller Hamilton Eastony Creek? Mr. Miller Hamilton Eastony Creek? Ms. Taylor? Ms. Taylor? Ms. Armstrong? Ms. Armstrong? Ms. Almeshleida? Ms. Jellyne? Ms. Fight? Ms. Fykes? Mr. Gretzky. Mr. Gretzky. Mr. Gates. Mr. Gates. Mr. French. Mr. French. The ayes are 75, the nays are 14. The ayes being 75, the nays being 14. I declare the motion carried. Meeting of the bill, 12-7-12, p. 8-11. The bill is resolved. The bill can now pass and be entitled as in the motion. We have a deferred vote on government orders number 457891011 and 12. Calling the members. This will be a five minute vote. On March 22nd 2017, the sandals move concurrence and supply for missing or finance all those of favor please rise one at a time be recognized by the clerk miss Sandals Mr. Knack Mr. Bradley Mr. Bradley Mr. Del Ducca Mr. Sousa Mrs. Winn Mr. Matthews Mr. Hoss Mr. Hosherelli Mr. Shirelli Mr. Duga Mr. Duga Mr. McCharles Mr. McMicke Mr. McMica Mr. Dakar Mr. Dakar Mr. Quinter Mr. Quinter Mr. Cole Mr. Cole Mr. Brardinetti Mr. Brardinetti Mr. Delaney Mr. Delaney Mr. Flynn. Madame Lalonde. Madame Lalonde. Mr. Codrell. Mr. Dixie. Mr. Dixon. Mr. Dixon. Miss Manga. Mr. Mangan. Mr. Crack. Miss Domderlund. Miss Dommerlund. Mrs. McGarry. Mr. McGarry. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Miss Jasek. Miss Jazimmer. Mrs. Albina. Ms. Albina. Ms. McMahon. Ms. McMahon. Mr. Ballard. Mr. Ballard. Ms. Nidu Harris. Ms. Nidu Harris. Ms. Wong. Ms. Wong. Mr. Frazer. Ms. Frazer. Mr. Anderson. Mr. Anderson. 38. The ayes being 53 and the nays being 38. I declare the motion carried. We have a deferred vote on the government order number five on March 22nd. Do I have to finish reading it? I have to finish reading it, sorry. Move the concurrence and supply for the minister of transportation including supplementaries. All those in favor of motion please rise one at a time and be recognized by the vote. Same vote. The ayes are 53, the nays are 38. The ayes being 53 and the nays being 38. I declare the motion carried. We have a deferred vote on the government order number seven on March 22nd, 2017. The sandals move concurrence and supply of the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs including supplementaries. Same vote. The ayes are 53, the nays are 38. The ayes being 53, the nays being 38. I declare the motion carried. We have a deferred vote on the government order number eight on March 22nd, Ms. Sandals moved concurrence and supply for Minister of Energy including supplementaries. Do we have same vote? Same vote. The ayes are 53, the nays are 38. The ayes being 53 and the nays being 38. I declare the motion carried. We have a deferred vote on government order nine. Ms. Sandals moved concurrence and supply for the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Same vote. The ayes are 53, the nays are 38. The ayes being 53 and the nays being 38. I declare the motion carried. The deferred vote on government order 10. Ms. Sandals moves concurrence on supply for the Ministry of Education on March 22nd. Same vote. I'm sorry. Same vote. Okay, sorry including supplementaries. Same vote. The ayes are 53, the nays are 38. Have to do it right. The ayes being 53 and the nays being 38 declare a motion carried. We have deferred vote on the government order number 11. On March 22nd, 2017, Ms. Sandals moved concurrence and supply for the Ministry of Children and Youth Services. Same vote. Same vote. The ayes are 53, the nays are 38. The ayes being 53 and the nays being 38. I declare the motion carried. With deferred vote on government order 12. On March 22nd, 2017, Ms. Sandals moved concurrence and supply for the Office of ああ、フランクフォンアフェアリス. Same vote. Same vote. The ayes are 53, the nays are 38. Ayes being 53 and the nays being 38. I declare the motion carried. We have a deferred vote on the motion to close her motion of the second reading of bill 68. Let me read that again. Let me read that again. We have a deferred vote on the motion for closure, on the motion for second reading of bill 68. Same vote. I heard a no. Calling the members, this will be a five-minute bill. On November 29th, 2016, Mr. Morrill moved second reading of Bill 68, an act to amend various acts in relation to municipalities. Mr. Coteau has moved that the question be now put. All those in favor, Mr. Coteau's motion and people to rise one at a time be recognized by the clerk. Mr. Nacken. Mr. Bradley. Mr. Bradley. Mr. Del Duca. Mr. Del Duca. Mr. Sandals. Mr. Sandals. Mr. Sousa. Mr. Sousa. Ms. Wynne. Ms. Matthews. Ms. Matthews. Mr. Hoskins. Mr. Hoskins. Mr. McMeekin. Mr. McMeekin. Mr. Takar. Mr. Takar. Mr. Quinter. Mr. Quinter. Mr. Cole. Mr. Cole. Mr. Barardinetti. Mr. Barardinetti. Mr. Delaney. Mr. Delaney. Mr. Dillon. Mr. Dillon. Mr. Dillon. Mr. Murray. Mr. Murray. Mr. Chan. Mr. Chan. Mr. Morridi. Mr. Morridi. Mr. Coteau. Mr. Coteau. Ms. Hunter. Ms. Hunter. Mr. Leo. Mr. Leo. Mr. Flynn. Mr. Flynn. Mr. Clark. Mr. Fidele. Mr. Fidele. Mr. Jacob Buske. Mr. Iacoboske. Mr. Hillywood. Mr. Hillywood. Mr. Miller Perry Salmons Coak. Mr. Miller Perry Salmons Coak. Mr. McDonnell. Mr. McNaughton. Mr. Thompson. Mr. Maro. Mr. Monroe. Mr. Uri. Mr. Über. Mr. Bailey. Mr. Bailey. Mr. Sroes mmr. Mr. Ostrich. Mr. Walker. Mr. Walker. Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith. Mr. Harris. Mr. Harris. Mr. Nicholls. Mr. Nicholls. Mrs. Martelles. Mr. Novo, Mr. Miller Hamilton, East Stony Creek, Mr. Miller Hamilton, East Stony Creek, Ms. Sather, Ms. Taylor, Ms. Taylor, Ms. Armstrong, Ms. Armstrong, Ms. Armstrong, Ms. Angelina, Ms. Fife, Ms. Fife, Ms. Yamonta, Ms. Yamonta, Mr. Hatfield, Ms. Gretzky, Ms. Gretzky, Mr. Gates, Mr. Gates, Ms. French, Ms. French. The ayes are 53, the nays are 38. The ayes being 53, and the nays being 38, I declare the motion carried. Mr. Monroe has moved second reading of Bill 68 in act amended various acts in relation to municipalities. The pleasure of the House of the Motion, carry. I heard a no. All those in favor, please say aye. All those opposed, please say nay. In my opinion, the ayes have it. Calling the members, this will be a five minute meeting. Mr. Monroe has moved second reading of Bill 68 in act amended various acts in relation to municipalities. All those in favor, the motion please rise one at a time to be recognized by the clerk. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Morrow. Mr. Bailer Mr. Baler Mr. Fraiser Mr. Anderson Mr. Baker Mr. D nozzle Mr. Hogan Ms. Hohgar Ms. Koala Ms. Moley Ms. Mollie Ms. Martin Mr. Miltcher Mr. Miltcher Mr. Potts Mr. Pots Mr. Luanaldi Mr. Berniel Mr. Verneau M. Andere contemporary Mr. Hatfield Mr. Hatfield Mr. Bissonne Mr. Bissonne Mr. Vantosh Mr. Wach. Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith. Mr. Harris. Mr. Harris. Mr. Nichols. Mr. Nichols. Mr. Marteau. Mr. Mictanel. Mr. Mictanel. Mr. Pettipies. Mr. Pettipies. Mr. Koe. Mr. Koe. Mr. Koe. Mr. Koe. Mr. Koe. The ayes are 67, the nays are 24. The ayes being 67 and the nays being 24 declare the motion carried. Bill does the next read. Do we have a second reading? Shall the bill be ordered for third reading? Minister? Is that the bill be referred to the standing committee on social policy? I was thinking about... There are no further deferred votes. This house stands recess until 1pm this afternoon.


Dark matter is a hypothetical form of matter that is thought to account for approximately 85% of the matter in the universe, and about a quarter of its total energy density. The majority of dark matter is thought to be non-barionic in nature, possibly being composed of some as yet undiscovered subatomic particles.Note one its presence is implied in a variety of astrophysical observations, including gravitational effects that cannot be explained unless more matter is present than can be seen. For this reason, most experts think dark matter to be ubiquitous in the universe and to have had a strong influence on its structure and evolution. The name dark matter refers to the fact that it does not appear to interact with observable electromagnetic radiation, such as light, and is thus invisible or dark to the entire electromagnetic spectrum, making it extremely difficult to detect using usual astronomical equipment. The primary evidence for dark matter is that calculations show that many galaxies would fly apart instead of rotating, or would not have formed or moved as they do, if they did not contain a large amount of unseen matter.Two other lines of evidence include observations in gravitational lensing, from the cosmic microwave background, from astronomical observations of the observable universe's current structure, from that formation and evolution of galaxies, from mass location during galactic collisions for and from the motion of galaxies within galaxy clusters. In the Standard Lambda CDM model of cosmology, the total mass energy of the universe contains 4.9% ordinary matter and energy, 26.8% dark matter and 68.3% of an unknown form of energy known as dark energy. Thus, dark matter constitutes 84.5% note to of total mass, while dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95.1% of total mass energy content. Because dark matter has not yet been observed directly, it must barely interact with ordinary baryonic matter and radiation. The primary candidate for dark matter is some new kind of elementary particle that has not yet been discovered, in particular, weakly interacting mass of particle swamps or gravitationally interacting mass of particles gimps.Thirteen many experiments to directly detect and study dark matter particles are being actively undertaken, but none has yet succeeded.Dark matter is classified as cold, warm, or hot according to its velocity more precisely, its free streaming length. Dark model favor a cold dark matter scenario, in which structures emerge by gradual accumulation of particles. Although the existence of dark matter is generally accepted by the scientific community, some astrophysicists 15 intrigued by certain observations that do not fit the dark matter theory 16 argue for various modifications of the standard laws of general relativity, such as Mondt, T's, or entropic gravity. These model attempt to account for all observations without invoking supplemental non-baryonic matter.


to Texas Heart Institute educational programs on innovative technologists and techniques. The topic of today's presentation is artificial intelligence, current status and future applications. My name is Juan Recrecia. I'm an international cardiologist at Texas Heart Institute and Baylor St. Luke's Medical Center in Houston, Texas. Join me today for this program is Dr. Ben Azzang He's a Abricovir Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering and also director at Rice Neuro-Engineering Initiative at Rice University in Houston, Texas. And also Dr. Mehdi Rezavi and he's a director of Electrophysiology Clinical Research and Innovations at Texas Heart Institute. And he's a cardiologist and electrophysiologist at Texas Heart Institute and CHI Health, Baylor St. Luke's Medical Center in Houston, as well as the adjunct professor of bioengineering at Rice University. Welcome gentlemen to this program. Here are our disclosures. So Dr. Azzang, what is artificial intelligence? As you see from the slides, it's a subfield within computer science. And basically the idea is to learn how humans make decisions and how they exercise their intelligence and try to do that with machines, basically. And the kind of tasks out there are visual perception and speech recognition, decision making and many tasks of the sort that we would like to build machines that could carry out these tasks for us. So can you give us a broader perspective on artificial intelligence? Yes, indeed. From my perspective, not being a computer scientist, there is a broader perspective here. And that is try to understand how humans make decisions. And we, as we all know, we make decisions based on learning and we learn from our experiences over the years. Dr. Azzang, please tell us about the history of artificial intelligence. The history of artificial intelligence goes way back in the 40s. And we got to remember that in the 40s and even earlier, scientists were always interested in how humans make decisions. And then computers were coming along and computing devices were coming along. And then the idea of how computers could mimic human decision making was very intriguing. And you, but as you would imagine that that's not easy task because we didn't have that much data and to learn from. And also that as engineers, we always look at the problem and we try to model the problem and they make decisions based on the model. You can imagine that coming up with models of these kind of engineering problems is very, very challenging. And the models are often either intractable or insufficient. That's why you could say that over the last 70 or 80 years it took 70, 80 years to make progress at this level. The reason is that many different fields had to come together and make advances so that we'd be in a position to have a lot of data, to learn from the data and make decisions based on what we learn from the data. So it looks like those early scientists, Warren McCullough and also Walter Pitts, tried to do exactly what you mentioned there to mimic the human brain and design the computer to think using something similar to neural networks. I guess this was the essential step to move forward with this technology. Is that correct? That's correct. But it was basically what I'm trying to say that it was impossible to get it done back then because many different fields had to come together. Many theories and many models have to be built for it to be accomplished. And back in the 40s, it was just a great idea, a guide idea that inspired many, many people to work in this area. And many things had to come together. Many fields had to make advances to be able to accomplish what we have. Basically, as you all know, Turing came up with the idea of computation. Shannon came up with the idea of information theory, how to quantify information. And Wiener came up with many different ideas of this sort. All of that had to happen for this to realize, but obviously it hasn't fully been realized yet, but we've made great progress over the last 10, 20 years. As I mentioned before, many different disciplines had to come together and make advances to bring us to a point that we are today, that we can build systems that can mimic human intelligence. And the steps that we needed to go through were developing integrated circuits, building sensors, building devices, understanding how signals carry information, process the data, and go from data to control. And many, many disciplines had to advance to bring us to a point that we can say today that we have made progress. We are beginning to build artificial intelligence systems. So you already mentioned to us that it took close to 77 years from the original description in the 40s of artificial intelligence until the present times. And you mentioned that all those technologies had to merge and we had to gain advances. And we had to also have a power to record this information. And at that time, the computers were really not designed to that degree to be able to store all this data on a larger scale basis. Not only store, but actually process, right? They had to collect the information, collect the data. They had to store the data. We had to process the data and get key features from the data to be able to mathematically formulate the problem, solve, and then further implement and carry out experiments. All of these fields, all of these disciplines had to come together and make great strides to bring us to a point that we are today. Right, so you did mention that several things had to happen. And of course, one of the things is to figure out the algorithms that are going to work well in computer science for artificial intelligence to work well, but also to implement logic and mimic the neural network function. All of those things are very, very important. And now we have so many algorithms that we're using that did not exist way back when this initiated originally. Absolutely, originally it was a brilliant idea, brilliant concept that was not time to implement. I think we needed to make all of these advances over the last 77 years or so to come to a point that we have now some ideas, we have some ideas that have already been implemented and we can identify a cat from a dog and all of those examples that we talk about. Dr. Azan, can you tell us a little bit more about machine learning and what are the essential components for machine learning to be effective as far as artificial intelligence is concerned? Absolutely, I consider machine learning as a subfield within the broad term of artificial intelligence. That's my personal angle to this. Basically how a computer, a machine can learn from data. Basically, that's basically what it means. How can it effectively learn from data? And the data is now available, the data doesn't come with the model and the model has to come from the data and has to be extracted from the data. Turns out that we have tremendous amount of data today and we can learn from the data through these machines and then make decisions, make predictions, make the classifications and many other tasks of this sort. And they have come a long, long way. So give us some examples how machine learning works. The examples are right on the screen, right? Basically, we've been always very sort of intrigued by images and the question is that if you look at an image, which is basically now there's a digital image and is all data and can you tell whether this is a picture of a cat or a dog? And there is no real simple model of a cat. There is no simple model of a dog. Therefore, the system has to learn features from the data that help it identify that this is a cat and learn features from the data that helps it identify is a dog and then run these algorithms and make a decision whether this is a cat or a dog. And this has been an interesting research problem for 70, 50, 70 years. And now we have made tremendous stride in that area and there are algorithms and there are ways to do this thing today that you could look at many, many pictures of a cat and many, many pictures of a dog and decide what are the important features and then decide whether this was a cat or a dog or a bird as an example. It can be done today. So this is just one of the algorithm. Of course, there are many, many other algorithms that we could use. And here is another example of artificial intelligence. Can you tell us a little bit about the neural network? This is closer to your area of expertise. Basically, a neural network is a circuit, basically, is a network that was inspired, that was designed and built and inspired by human brain. And it was just inspiration. Nobody is suggesting that this is exactly how our brain works. This is actually not how our brain works, but it is our brain inspired us to build deep neural networks of this sort and use data to train the various weights of these circuit and then train the network so that it could identify some features of a cat, features of a dog, features of a bird. And then at the end, as you see, the end of it has only one layer. And at the end, if it is a zero, then it's a cat, if it's a one, it's a dog. And basically, this is an example of a machine learning methodology that can help us learn and differentiate between a dog and a cat. From my perspective, a deep neural network like that is one of the many examples of machine learning methodologies out there. And it's very powerful, it's very effective, and in many, many, many cases, it works beautifully. Just that it needs training, it needs a lot of data, and it can identify features of a cat and features of a dog and make decisions that this was a cat or dog. Basically, if you think of it, AI is the big picture in building artificial intelligence. Machine learning is a subfield of that that basically tries to learn from the data. And neural network is an example of a machine learning technology methodology that actually is a circuit, actually can be built, can be programmed, and in many, many, many cases, it works very, very well. So this is one of the simpler description of a neural network, how they work. Here we have only two hidden layers, layer one and layer two. Actually human brain and neurons are connected close to maybe 15 or 20 hidden layers, so-called hidden layers. If not more, yeah, if not more. If not more, which we didn't get to that point yet with computers, but that is obviously our goal, right? Absolutely. We would like to be able to give enough degrees of freedom and have enough layers and enough nodes in the layers so that the network could focus on features and at the end come up with a decision based on many, many features that it identifies. This was the inspiration. And it works, as I said before, it works quite well in many, many, many cases. So yeah, this is true. The aviation industry has embraced artificial intelligence and simulation earlier than any other field that also includes medicine as well. And obviously this had to be developed as the technologies and computer science evolved, but autopilot uses standard sensors that are present in different locations on the airplane, whether it's the wings or what is the engine, what is the hydraulics and many other parameters. So the pilot in early stages of aviation industry provided the commands that computer would execute and then later the autopilots and computer technology became so sophisticated that it no longer needed pilot's assistance to identify certain things. And actually autopilot and computer technology can detect and monitor whether conditions better than a pilot or track fuel consumption better than a pilot and also address issues and problems with air turbulence, wind share, and many other problems that could occur during the flight. So it is true that until relatively recently, autopilot was able to do the job well, but still humans were trusted more and we thought that humans can do it better, particularly in very complex scenarios and it was up to the pilot to make that final decision what are the best option in certain scenarios. As you see here, examples are Siri, examples are temperature control at home, automatic automated driving cars, there are tons of examples and we are there, we can rely on them, it is because of our experience with them and when you tell Amazon Echo to set the temperature at 78, it does it, it is no doubt about it and we are beginning to trust that and drones, there are tons of examples of practical machine learning, artificial intelligence systems that actually are in our day-to-day life and we don't notice them anymore. Many, so tell us a little bit about driverless cars and here are some examples, we know Tesla and several other ones are at this point. Do you think that this will become a reality in very near future? Yes, I think that it will become a reality, I think that it will actually probably end up being safer than what we have right now and so I think it's going to solve a lot of problems in terms of fatalities and things of that nature but of course there can be some other problems, newer problems associated with it but I think that driverless cars are actually probably one of the shining examples of how things, how quickly the field has evolved. So this is a perfect example where deep learning and machine learning and also the neural networks that we are using in this technology can achieve what we were only dreaming about a decade before or whatever. It's amazing how fast this field is moving. Many, what do you think about, let's say 10 or 15 years from now, do you envision that all of the vehicles on the freeway will be driverless, they will have sensors and will be able to identify the other cars that are near them and avoid problems, collision and so on or do you think this is still a very futuristic thought? I think that it's going to probably happen before that period of time. Right now, for example, I drive a car that is already doing half of these functionalities without it being labeled as using artificial intelligence and so I think it's even gonna be sooner than that and my feeling is that the acceleration it's just going to be logarithmic how quickly things evolve. I think within three to five years, we will have quite a few percentage of these driverless car or self-driving cars. Now, if you think about what are the current challenges with the AI, we can point to accidents that happened when the car was a driverless car but we got to keep in mind that accidents happened with cars with human drivers every day and thousands and thousands of them, right? And then when AI-controlled driverless car has an accident that makes the news but then many, many accidents on a daily basis do not make the news. Could you give us some other examples of AI algorithms going astray? So, and they were more powerful. So the plane ascended and descended faster but also there was a requirement to change the angle of attack in a takeoff and in landing and to make sure that there is no stall occurring at those points, the Boeing engineers thought that artificial intelligence computer can manage the takeoff and landing much better than the pilot would be able in this type of a scenario. So what happens is that if you leave this plane on autopilot from the early beginning and then you try to correct it because you think that something is incorrect, then the autopilot will override you and take control and this is where the disasters and problems happen. So obviously it's not necessarily AI's fault. It's a fault of not educating pilots how to use this particular system and also freedom for the pilot to disengage the autopilot if the pilot thinks that something went wrong. But obviously a human being and artificial intelligence have to communicate and be able to interact with each other rather than just taking over fully control where the computers are running the show and you as a human being have nothing in your control to do it. So Dr. Zung, tell us a little bit about the past, the present and future growth of artificial intelligence. Of course, we know that artificial intelligence is growing by leaps and bounds but let's look at some of the numbers. What do they show us? As you see in these numbers, they show us tremendous potential for growth and then the growth has been ongoing and it will continue to grow as we improve the systems, as we find more applications and more industries and more businesses that artificial intelligence can penetrate and the future for AI machine learning is very, very bright. So we can see here from the projections that there is really exponential growth as far as revenues and investment is concerned in the AI in comparison, for instance, from 2016 to 2025, from investments of five billion in 2016 to it's estimate is gonna be 37 billion in 2025, which is a tremendous, tremendous growth and we look at the number of devices, six billion devices in 2018 were available using AI in applications, which is really a staggering number. Now, what do you think about, I would like to ask both of you and that is obviously of concern to all of us. Well, for that particular reason, AI replace a significant number of jobs in the United States. Is there a concern about it and what can we do about it? Definitely there is concern, but then one way to turn this question around would be to see how AI could generate new businesses, new jobs and how could it expand its application base and how can it create jobs, right? And you mentioned in these slides that AI is moving into the medical field into education into many, many different fields and then when it expands it requires building system, it requires designing system, requires engineers, it requires computer scientists, requires many, many people from many, many disciplines to make that happen. I think as it eliminates jobs, it creates new jobs as well. Maybe you can give us a conclusion of all the important things related to artificial intelligence and machine learning. So what does the future look like? I think the future is brighter than some people may be fearing. I look in my own practice and right now I'm using techniques in the EP lab that honestly are replacing our expertise in the sense of looking at morphologies and shapes of circuit, different arrhythmic circuits. Does that mean that I fear for my job? No, in all honesty it has actually increased the number of patients and cases that we do because with AI as a tool you take on challenges and you can take on things that had a level of difficulty for example that prior we would say, well we can't do this surgery, it's just that the circuitry, things of that nature or the success rates are just too low. But now if you have AI and honestly it does improve, we see this day to day in the EP lab, it does improve and give us a tool to improve our outcomes. Then you take on more complex, more sicker patients and so yes, it's true that in the course of the case it may be replacing some of the functionalities that we would but when you take a look at it at a bigger picture it actually increases the amount of benefit that these procedures could have, the number of patients that qualify for these procedures. And I think at the end of the day, as Dr. Ajang said, the technologies themselves will require support systems and will require still having that human touch if you will. I also think that to say I know exactly how this is going to affect the job market is inaccurate. Anyone who says that in my opinion doesn't really know what they're talking about but I find solace in looking back at history and every time there's been shifts or paradigm shifts that have been of concern in terms of what their long-term projections will be industrial revolution, things of that nature it always ends up being that there are jobs created that you are not expecting. And so I think that we're gonna be in a good place. To conclude, I would say that machines understand verbal commands, they distinguish pictures they can drive cars, airplanes and all they may argue how well do they do it? Increasingly they're doing it as well if not potentially better than humans. They can certainly do complex calculations better than us and play games better than we do. The question that you have right now how much longer will it be before they walk among us? That's a great question. How much longer? Not too long hopefully. But as we all talk about, we need to adjust. I think when we were a farming society for centuries and then when industrial revolution happened we adjusted and we became manufacturers and all that. And now with AI and artificial machine learning and some of these tools we need to make another adjustment in creating jobs, in doing things better and differently. It's just all a matter of adjustments. So in reality the robots, machines are already with us they're here, they're not necessarily walking on the street but for all practical purposes we use them on daily basis. So this is really nothing new. I would like to complete this presentation with this quote from Sondar Pichai who's a CEO of Google. And he gave this very profound statement when he was asked about AI. He said AI is one of the most important things humanity is working on. It is more profound than electricity or fire. That is truly very optimistic and ambitious statement but we are all optimistic and let's hope that we can gain a lot of benefits from AI and not only in industry or any other field but also in cardiovascular medicine because we are at least Dr. Rosave and myself we're physicians practicing on daily basis on very complex scenarios. And we certainly would welcome AI in our fields to offer our patients safer and better outcomes and also to be able to reduce the cost and expenses with all the procedures that we do and hospitalizations as well. Well gentlemen, it has been a tremendous pleasure to participate with you in this program and thank you once again for joining me for this recording of the Texas Heart Institute educational programs on technologies and techniques. And thank you once again and hope we'll be able to record another program with you in the near future. Thank you, thank you very much. Thank you for having us, we really appreciate this.


Hi everyone, Joe for Jaspy's CaseBreaks.com coming at you with 2021 Mosaic Football Cellopack Break number seven. Given away four of those immaculate division spots, we'll be coming up in the next video. Big thanks to this group for making it happen. There are the teams right here. We'll do the first dice roll for the break and then the second dice roll will be for the giveaway. Four and a four, eight times, eight the hard way, one, two, three, four. We've got another divisional case loaded up. Four and a four, eight times the teams, one, two, three, four, five, and eight. And we're going to do the same format. We're going to sell four divisions outright and do one of these filler packs. So if you want to get it on the next one, get in on it. Jaspy's CaseBreaks.com, it's the place to be. Brand new release day, hump day. It's the end of September. Thanks everyone for making things happen. There's the first half of the list right here and then the second half right over here. And let's alphabetize by team and let's just print and rip. And if September makes you sad, says Logan, yeah, summer is over. Logan, you can always come out to Southern California for the fall and winter. It's quite pleasant here during that time. I'm too crazy there. How about this, here's back here, Rodney Harrison, Trey Nixon, Russell Wilson, Seahawks edition. All right, nothing too crazy here, but let's flip back over here. Gather everybody's names and let's see who wins those division spots. So it'll be the top four after three and a four, seven times. Good luck. One, two, three, four, five, six, and final time. Now from five on down, it's going to be a lot of sad faces here. From five to 32, sad times. Jeff, very close, but not quite. Thanks though. Thanks everybody, appreciate it. Thanks for taking the risk. But only the top four can be happy. Aaron is happy. Sean is happy. Brian is happy. Oh, there you go, Jeff. You're in there. Jeff's happy. Frown turned upside down. I'm Joe for JaspiesCaseBreaks.com. I'll see you next time. I'll see you in the next video for the break, jaspiescasebreaks.com.