Moses was buried on Mount Nebo in Moab and no one knows his burial place to this very day. It's the ultimate statement of Moses not seeking the limelight, not creating a monument to his legacy. The humility is there even in death. There is no place you can go to visit Moses grave. So I wanna leave plenty of time for questions to the dialogue, that's what I'm really looking forward to. Together with my new friend Imam Sudiada, I'll conclude by pointing out how our respective traditions both emphasize the virtue of humility. Maybe that was so we would be able to talk to one another because humility is the prerequisite to being able to hear another person. So, salam alaikum, shalom alaikum. It's all yours, you got the good one. Thank you, thank you, thank you. In bismillah, wassalam, ala Rasulullah. So I mean, what else can we say to Rabbi, he covered so much of it about Moses. And I think that coming up as a young, Muslim with half my family or more than half probably wasn't Muslim. So I would go to church when I would go to my grandmother's house and things like that. And one of the things that I learned as I got older was the message of the Holy Quran was definitely aimed at people who were familiar with the Torah and familiar with the gospel. And I think that we, even when we see the translations because so many of the translations of the Holy Quran, they weren't translated by people who really knew about, they was translated by Muslims. So, and I said this before, the brother, he said he saw me in San Jose, I'm like, I heard this already. But it's like the first chapter, or the second chapter of the Holy Quran or the bakrah, this is a story taken straight from the Hebrew Bible. Right? So this is God's way of sending down something that people will be familiar with when they heard it, not necessarily the Arabs. The Arabs didn't know anything about the sacrifice of the cow and the cow being a perfect hue. They wouldn't have known anything about that, but the Israelites who lived there, they would have known this story. And then we have Sultama'ita, which is about the Last Supper. But when it's translated, it's usually just translated to table spread. So, but if people from the United States knew that there was a chapter in the Holy Quran named the Last Supper, it would peak their interests. It's like a marketing technique, right?  You know what I'm saying? And then my favorite one, because I've been to the San Joaquin, does anybody know who San Joaquin is? Yes. Oh yeah, no, San Joaquin Valley, but the actual figure, San Joaquin, in the Holy Quran is named Emoron. And Emoron is the grandfather of Jesus Christ, right?  But if you translated the family of Joaquin, people would be like, okay, I heard of San Joaquin before, even if they just knew it was a place. You know what I'm saying? And of all of these kind of connections, the most connected figure in the Holy Quran is Moses, alayhi salatu wa salam. He's mentioned more times than any other figure in the Holy Quran. And so like when the rabbi was saying things like the speech impediment, you know, we know this in the Holy Quran when he sent the pharaoh, he says that he can't make his speech clear, almost exactly like the rabbi quoted from the Bible. So the Arabs of Arabia, they wouldn't have been familiar with these stories at all because they didn't have that kind of background. But going forward into the future, you know, the world is becoming more world, you know, where Christianity, Judaism and Islam make up a large portion of the earth, you know what I'm saying? And so we can see the importance of Moses by how many times he's mentioned. What he's, there's one story. So in Medina, there were three Jewish tribes and these Jewish tribes were, I think they call them Karaite, was the type of Jews that they were, non rabbinical, which is almost like, yeah. Like so they lived in Medina and when the prophet brought his message, the Qur'an said people to them to say, give me things that we could ask to find out, if he's telling the truth, because he should know, if he's saying he's sent from God, he should know these stories that you guys have. And so they told them, ask them about Joseph, right? They told them, ask them about the companions of the cave. They told them, ask them about the companion of Moses. And this story in social calf about Moses and his companion that he met with the two rivers meet, this makes up for almost the fundamental background of Islamic spirituality. Right, whenever you hear people talk about Islamic spirituality, they borrow a lot of the themes from this story because it talked about where the two rivers meet is the river of the law and the river of spiritualism. You know what I'm saying? Like, you can't be too legalistic and get through life and you can't be all spiritual with no boundaries and get, I mean, you can, but I'm saying like, it's best to try to have a balance. So when Moses who was a figure that brought the law, he met another figure who didn't follow the laws at all. Moses was confused by everything he did to finally Moses was like, look, if I ask you one more question, just let's just part ways. Because that means I'm stumped by your stuff. Now I'm saying, and so that whole story of Musa and Kither became the background for Islamic spirituality or to some people call it the soul wolf. And it's about how to understand that every question can be answered spiritually and every question can be answered legally, but you got to have a good balance. So like the rabbi, I didn't want to, I wanted to have more of a dialogue with everybody and I didn't want to just talk and plus, I'm thirsty, I'm fasting, so I'm willing to turn it over for questions and answers also. I'm here to chat. So who has something that you would like to ask? So I guess I'm just curious about what some other similar traditions and customs both faiths have, particularly during these holy months. I watched your talk. I got it. I got a second. I watched Imam Sudiada's talk when he was previously here. This is great, there's a moment where he says, when I go into the supermarket and I see guys looking at the ingredients, you know that they're Muslim and I go, well, they might be Jews, they might be looking to see if it's kosher. The truth is, a lot of times we can eat one another's food, which is, I mean, this is not theological. This is about practice. Deep buried behind the practice is a similar theology, I think. But there is one very clear area of similarity. Maybe in terms of values, I would say more importantly than our practice of halal food or kosher food, our values like in Judaism, tzidakah is righteousness, but it's in the form of giving charity. The meaning is righteousness, but it's in the form of giving charity. But this is, I think, identical to, is it zakah? You say tzidakah? I say tzidakah in Hebrew. You say tzadakah. Tzadakah, okay. So, right, I mean, it's really a core value that you're supposed to practice on. This is intrinsic to the practice of Judaism and Islam and I think that clearly we're rooted in a very similar set of values. I think one of the important, similar things is we both fast one day of the year, we call it, at first it's an optional fast, but it used to be, before Ramadan, it used to be the fast of the Muslims and it's yom ashura and that is actually yom kippur. And so when the Prophet said something, he saw that the Jews in Medina, when they migrated to Medina, they came in contact with those same three Jewish tribes, he saw them fast in his day, even though they had already been fastened in Mecca, he asked, why are they fastened in Medina? And they said, it's the day that the Moses and his people were freed from the Pharaoh. And I'm not exactly sure if that's the meaning of yom kippur, but. It isn't in Jewish tradition, but it's interesting it's linked up that way in Quran. Yeah, or this is just a hadith, this is a hadith. Yeah, so, and then he just told the Muslims to fast it. And so still to this day, on the 10th day of Muharram, we fast yom yom ashura and we link it with being the day that Moses and his people were freed from the Bani Israel or from the Egyptians. This is really interesting, I'm learning a lot here, because yom kippur is also on the 10th day of the Hebrew calendar, of the month on the Hebrew calendar. There's another similarity, which is, okay, if you're Muslim, do continually find yourself explaining to people why your holidays or occur at different times of the year.  And you'll say, no it isn't, it's right on time, right? So we have the same issue, why is that? That's because we both follow lunar calendars for our months. And those who are not Jewish or not Muslim do not follow lunar calendars. Their months have nothing to do with the moon, but ours do. The one difference in our calendar is that we have a correction built in for the solar year. So it's a lunar solar calendar, it's not a strictly lunar calendar. And as a consequence, our calendar rotates back and forth relative to the Gregorian calendar by a span of about four weeks. It just slides back and forth that the correction is achieved by inserting an extra month every two or three years, unlike the Muslim calendar, which is strictly lunar calendar, right? Yeah, so actually the Kur-Aids, the tribe of the prophet, they actually try to insert an extra month during the prophet's lifetime. And it was revealed in the Holy Quran that the number of months with God is 12. And so they took that 13 month out. So it was the same thing, the Kur-Aids did it so that the hot season would never be in the summer months. They wanted the hot, the pilgrimage season to kind of rotate, but never getting the really hot months. So they created a 13th month that was, like you said, just make it kind of a correction. And I think that the Chinese new year, the lunar new year might be similar. I think they might have added a 13th month, too. When you're once a year you do. Yeah, as-salamu alaikum. I know in Islam, a person can declare the Shahada and reward back to Islam or become a Muslim. Is the same practice allowed in Jewish religion? Do you want to talk about Shahada first and the specific question? Because I'd like to be informed better about this. Yeah, so basically the brother is saying that if somebody's born and they're not Muslim and they want to convert to Islam, the way that's achieved is that they would just announce or proclaim the testimony of faith that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger. Once that's done, the person, he's converted or some say reverted to the religion of Islam. And so he's saying in the Jewish tradition, is there a system where people can convert or revert to Judaism? Really, if you were born and your question is if you were born Jewish and you went away, is that correct? Oh, it's really about conversion. Yeah, ah, yes, the answer is yes. And here I think that this is a somewhat similar understanding. The person who wants to be Jewish can become Jewish. It is not as easy as reciting the Shahada, not as easy, which I presume actually to call that easy would not be fair. It wouldn't be respectful. Nobody's going to do that without understanding what they're getting into, right? Hopefully. You know, they're gonna, you know, they have to appreciate what they're committing themselves to. So Jewish tradition is a ritual for conversion. And I won't go through all the steps. I'll simply say among them is immersion in a pure body of water, but for most of us, for most rabbis, we only, we have to officiate at the conversion. A person doesn't do it themselves. It has to be under the authority of a rabbi who on behalf of the Jewish community says, and will convene a court, so to speak, of three rabbis before whom a convert can say, I wish to be Jewish and immerse themselves in water and then they have to make a public declaration of their faith. In that sense, there is a similarity because there is a public aspect to it. But a person who's not Jewish can become Jewish. A person who is born to Jewish parents, however, is automatically Jewish, so they don't have to do anything. They're considered Jewish if they were born to Jewish parents. Most of us would expect a person who wants to convert to study Judaism for an extended period of time before their conversion. We would not take somebody who simply walks in the door and says, I wanna convert. We want to ensure the integrity of their choice and that it's not for any ulterior purpose, but solely an expression of their faith and their desire to attach themselves to the Jewish people. So I'll just say this, we do, it is recommended when somebody takes a holiday that they bathe also. So that's, that's an, and then, you know, I say that, I think that a lot, just being around a lot, long time, a lot of our conversions have to do with marriage. We'd be like, when's the wedding? No, I'm sorry. Yes, I take this. Salam alaikum everyone and Habir Ramadan. Thank you so much for a brilliant speech. I really appreciate that. So my question is from Sarah Ruby that like in Bible, I know that there was mentioned about Prophet Muhammad as Ahmed and they have some like a sort of definition about him. Like who is he or like who is coming as a last prophet? So what's your opinion? Like, is there any verse in the Torah that mentioned about last prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him? If you could give us some of the examples, maybe? Or yeah, thank you. I mean, I think that Brother Ali Atayee, if you guys know him, if you guys just Google anything he does about Muhammad in the Bible, he does a lot of excellent stuff. I think that any verse or, you know, any source material that you have, the interpreter of that material is gonna come away with different things. You know what I'm saying? So definitely a lot of the things that are in the Bible that when I read it, I say, oh, this is talking about the Prophet Muhammad. Somebody else is gonna read it and says like, that's talking about Jesus. And somebody else would really say, oh, well that's talking about Elijah. You know what I'm saying? So it's really the interpreter is gonna read and that's even what any of the religion is about the sources, but it's also about how it's interpreted. So like, that's why we don't tell people just open up a hadith book or open up the Holy Quran and just start pilling things out. You wanna go with the interpretation of the scholars to live before us and even present day scholars or well-versed and just, you know, when we read it on our own, it's more just an act of worship than trying to get legislation from it. But I would say one thing I'll say about the verse is that sometimes, so in the verse, it says that Jesus came and he told about, he said that he has the tour which he's a proof for and he's come to tell about a prophet to come after him. And he says ismuhu Ahmed, which means two things in the Arabic language. Ismuhu Ahmed might mean which most people take it as his name is Ahmed, right? And so that's one of the names of the prophet Muhammad. But then the other way it could be read, ismuhu Ahmed means his name will be the most praised and a lot of the scholars say that it's not saying that his name is Ahmed, even though that was one of the names of the prophet Muhammad, but his name Ahmed will be, or his name will be Ahmed, meaning it'll be the most praised name. So every time you hear the prophet Muhammad, Allah's name and his ad, you hear the prophet Muhammad's name right after. Just everywhere you go, even in America, because you would never thought Muhammad would be a big name in America. But it's one of the most widely used names for babies even in the United States. And so they say that Jesus was foretelling that the prophet Muhammad would come and his name will become so praised among people that that would be one of the miracles of the prophet. But you can take either way. You can say his name is Ahmed and that's one of the names of prophet Muhammad, or you can say his name is the most praised, which we see just as Muslims, we all see the prophet Muhammad's name. If you meet somebody and they name Muhammad, you like, right on, bro. Shout out to your parents. I actually met a non-Muslim with non-Muslim parents in Berkeley and his name was Muhammad. And I was like, right on, man. Know what I'm saying?  Yeah, you raised an interesting challenge to interface dialogue, which is what if you interpret the same text differently? What, how do we get to a common understanding when we read the same passage, but we derive different meanings from it? And it's inevitable because it's not just Islam or Christianity that are interpretive traditions interpreting the Bible in a way that's consistent with their respective faiths. Jews do the same thing. We are also an interpretive tradition. So we also have this long, this large body of literature reading the Bible and saying, oh, I think it means this. Even though it doesn't say that specifically in the Bible, that's part of our interpretive tradition. So when I hear alternative understandings coming from a different faith, I say, I get it. I understand what they're doing. I understand the process of interpretation that's involved there because we do the same thing. So specifically about profits.  You've got the Torah, that's the first five books, but our Bible actually consists of 39 books. We divide it in three sections. Torah, prophets, writings. Writings is a collection of random books like Psalms. Christians call our Bible the Old Testament. We don't call it the Old Testament because we don't have a new one, but it's the same thing. Slightly different order of the books, but it's the same books. Okay, our Bible has only a small number of people who are referred to as prophets in the Torah, but the books of the prophets have a lot of people who are called prophets. And they extended over a period of several centuries. And the last one chronologically speaking is a guy named Malachi, and he lived in the fourth century before the common era at a time when Persians ruled over Judea. And that's it. After him, there's a few more books in the Bible that were written after that, but there's nobody else called a prophet in the Bible after that. The rabbis in the post biblical period said, yeah, he was the last one. It stopped with him. Now we can understand why they would say prophets, he stopped with him because the intent of the rabbis was to normalize the religion. If you have people coming along saying, yeah, well, God talked to me, and now we could do this or we could do that or we shouldn't do this. And it's different from what we said before. It undermines the stability of the faith. Well, faiths go through growth periods and stabilizing periods. The rabbis wanted to stabilize Judaism. They didn't want to keep seeing a change. They wanted to normalize it. And so they said, no more prophecy. And so Jews don't have any prophets after the last one mentioned in the Bible. That's about as far as I could go. I can't actually comment about anything about Muhammad in the Bible because it's not part of our interpretive tradition. So you said Malachi was when? He's a fourth century BCE. BCE, so this Persian period. After Alexander the, I'm sorry, before Alexander the Great, after the Babylonian empire falls, Cyrus comes along, defeats the Babylonians, and then you've got Persian rule for about 200 years. Thank you. Thank you for your time. I appreciate it. As someone who's new to the Korean or the Tanakh, the Hebrew Bible, what English translation would you recommend for both books? I want to hear what's the English translation for Quran. You said, he said for the Bible too, right? He said both, yeah. You know, for the Holy Quran, I just, most of the translations, I feel like are pretty consistent. I go usually, I just grew up with Yusef Ali. So that's the one that I always tell people about, but it's going to be a lot of people, a lot of people go and say, Yusef Ali, don't read that one. Do any other, what do you guys say? Yusef Ali, Yusef Ali. Then there's a Mohammed, Marmaduke, Pictor, but we don't understand that these are kind of the older translations. There are some newer translations where it's not written in like thou, thus, this wizard type stuff. You might want to check out one of those. They got one called the clear Quran, and I see that everywhere. I've never read it myself, but I know that that's like permeating a lot of places. And I think that's one of the most up-to-date translations. I feel like a lot of people get stuck with the old English, which I feel like as a Muslim, you know, the one thing about the Holy Quran, even though it was written on a high standard of Arabic, it was written in a way, it was revealed in a way that common Arabs at the time understood what the Prophet was talking about when he recited it. Even though they knew the Arabic itself is a high standard, but it was, it's very clear. And I feel like if you just translate it in an older English, it's not always clear what you gotta kind of read it with a dictionary. So I think that's why books like the clear Quran, they try to make it by the name of it. The clear Quran, just so it's easier to read. But the best thing, study Arabic, man. That's the best thing. Like once you get a little grounding in the Arabic language, it's gonna open up the book. You're gonna just be like, man, I feel like I was walking around surrounded by water.  That's what Arabic will do for you. Once you start to know the Arabic language, the Quran will speak to you in ways that you didn't even, you'll be in Tahrir Wee and you won't even be feel like it's long because you understand what's going on. It's a humbling life. Man, this is exactly where I was going. I can't, you said the exact thing I was gonna say. Of course translations are useful. Translations help us a lot. But I'm always surprised when I hear people talk about certain English Bibles as, yeah, well that's God's word. Folks, it wasn't written in that language. So we have the exact same, not just the riches of knowing Hebrew to be able to read the original, but also the same challenge. It's not the language that most Jews speak. So Israelis have it much easier because they can open up the Bible and read it straight and they have no problem, but American Jews, you know, it's a struggle to learn a foreign language and of course, Americans were really bad about foreign languages, let's admit it. Best translation, this one is easy though for us because there is one that is the overwhelmingly popular translation. It's the Jewish Publication Society. Jewish Publication Society is the largest distributor of English language Bibles. Their translation is the most scholarly. So it's not a single person's idea. It represents a consensus of a scholarly community and it's also the basis for many of the Bible commentaries that people use in synagogues. Now, I don't actually recommend, just like what you said, I don't recommend just simply getting a Bible and reading it cold. I recommend reading with commentary because it's too difficult. The stuff is ancient, it's ancient literature and what's more is people, a lot of people say, hey, I'm gonna read the Bible. I never read the Bible, I'm gonna read it. They start out and the beginning's great, you know? And it's got lots of action and you got family dynamics and families arguing with one another and you got floods and all. It's fun, you get through the end of Genesis. Sorry, this is good, you get to Exodus and okay, we still got a pretty good story through the first half of Exodus. Moses getting the Israelites out of Egypt and there's plagues and there's departing of the sea and then there's Mount Sinai. And then you hit the laws and the laws start to get really dense and after the first year you get 10 commandments, okay, I can handle 10 commandments, oh, there's more and then there's more and then there's building, the Tabernacle. What's a Tabernacle? And then if you manage to get through the book of Exodus, you get to Leviticus and this is where the eyes start to glaze over because the first seven chapters of Leviticus are all about sacrifices, how you sacrifice animals and this is where people give up. They just throw in the towel. Of course this is important stuff. Of course this is meaningful to us but it's too hard without commentary. So even though there is a very good English translation Jewish Publication Society, most people should start reading with one of the various versions that have commentary in them and of course there's a lot more out there. Salamu alaikum, shalom alaikum. I am going to ask if each of you can comment on the different books that have been mentioned. You have the Quran and you have the Hadiths. And then also I would like to know about the Torah and the Talmud. Those two different, you have two different books that I just. So the Quran, when we talk about the Quran, that's looked at as being God's word. And then when we talk about the Hadith, the Hadith is a collection of statements that are either what the Prophet peace repart him, what he said, what he did, what was done around him and he didn't say don't do that, what they call tacit approvals. That's a lot of times what the Hadith is looked at. And so when it comes to usul ufik, which is like the foundations of law, the Quran would be looked at as being what they call Qut'i or definitive, a definitive source, meaning it's unquestionable. And then the Hadith is looked at as being Zunni, which is a speculative source, meaning each one of these statements have to be graded. You can't just take a Hadith, you gotta say okay, you gotta look at the chain and their rations, you gotta look at the text. It's the science in itself. And so they're two separate sources, but when they come together, that's when people say that's the Quran and Zunni. So if somebody was to say, I don't accept this Hadith, that wouldn't be that problematic because it's a speculative source. But if somebody would say, I don't accept this verse from the Holy Quran, that would be like a statement of heresy because it's a definitive source, which means now you're denying that God revealed it, and that's part of the beliefs of the religion is that God revealed the Holy Quran. And so does that answer the question? Oh, I'm sorry, I should have been a little bit more clearer. So whenever somebody says Hadith, there be this is what somebody reported that the Prophet Muhammad said or he did, but it's not a part of the Holy Quran. But it's very, very important. Even I don't wanna say speculative just so some of those statements have been rigorously authenticated. So they're called what they call authentic. Some of those statements are graded as being Hassan, which is like good. Some of those statements are graded as being weak, da'if. Some of my favorite Hadith are weak though. Like when I'm telling my kids to do stuff, it's from weak Hadith all day. You know what I'm saying? As long as it's telling them that as long as the Hadith is you telling them to do something good, then a weak Hadith is perfect. You know what I'm saying? And then some of the Hadith are called da'if jiddan, which is very weak. And most of these Hadith in certain circumstances, they could get a promotion. So a Hadith could be weak, but if it's similar to another Hadith that's good, it'd be classified good, be guided by something else. And a Hadith could just be good and it could go up to authentic by something else.  Or if something is just fabricated, then it's not gonna be used at all. So that's the Hadith. I'm very interested in Torah and Talmud. Just clarify something for me. Is Hadith one specific collection of rulings or is there a body of literature in anything that group of literature is regarded as Hadith? Yeah, so the Hadith is just a massive body and it's been collected by different collectors. So like the one is most used by Sunni Muslims is gonna be called Sahih Bukhari. So this is his collection of Hadith that he graded all of them as being authentic. I'm saying he graded more Hadith but he only collected the ones he says authentic in this particular collection. Then there's another one, Sahih Muslim. And then there's Hadith that's in both of those books which are agreed upon. And so those are agreed upon between Bukhari Muslim, those are some of the strongest Hadith, but you got like Nassai, Ibn Madjah, you got a whole lot of collections. Most of those are just called Sunni which means they just collect Hadith on the topic and they'll tell you the grade of the Hadith. Like so Imam of Tirmidhi, all of his Hadiths aren't gonna be authentic. You have to gonna have to read. Oh, he said that this Hadith is weak. You know what I'm saying? And some of the Hadith can be classified weak. Most of them are gonna be classified by their chain and narrations. I mean, who said what to who? Did these even match up? These guys never, one died before the other one was born. That's gonna throw the Hadith, it's gonna be weak. But then there's also a Hadith could be, it can have an internal in its actual, and this is what most Muslims, a lot of Muslims don't understand. If the Hadith has an internal problem in the actual, the metin, which is like the, what you actually read, the parts you read, the subject, scholars can classify it as weak. So some scholars might read a Hadith and say, well, this Hadith goes against the principles of what the Prophet taught. So it's shad or it has an illa. So we're gonna say it's weak, we're not gonna accept it. So sometimes I can comment for Muslim like me, I'll be like, this Hadith is authentic and I'll try to wrap a whole thing around it. And then I'll meet somebody who knows something and he'll be like, man, that Hadith is weak. So Hadith is his own science, but it's not, it's not, like it's just, it was millions of Hadith and the scholars over the years try to sort through them. And that is really helpful to me. Thank you. So the question was about Torah and Talmud. So Torah is the first section of the Jewish Bible. It's just the five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, okay? That the Torah, most of the Torah, Torah is a combination of narrative and legal passages. Most people are familiar with the narrative passages, but there's more legal material than narrative material in the Torah. When was the Torah compiled? We, from a scholarly perspective, we would guess somewhere around between 550 BCE. That the material is much older than that. The material may go back all the way to 1000 BCE, but its final form, the form we've got it today was probably edited back then, fifth century BCE. Talmud is entirely a rabbinic body of literature. So it's both biblical. And it collects the rulings of rabbis from approximately 200 of the common era up to somewhere around 500 of the common areas. About three centuries of rulings by rabbis. It is not people mistaken for being a commentary on the Bible, it is not a commentary on the Bible. It's a law book. The vast majority of the Talmud is case law. If this happens, then one should do this. And it's rabbis arguing with one another frequently. It often records a majority and minority opinion. It doesn't have the same, like you were saying, the same authority as the Torah. It has authority, but a weaker authority. And one of the reasons for recording the minority opinion is so that in some future generations, some other rabbi might come along and say, but actually that was the stronger argument, and we should follow that rabbis' ruling. It is a legal tradition in that sense. It's very much like Islam. Having said that, I belong to the reform movement of Jews. It's the most liberal of the three major movements of Judaism, reform, conservative, and orthodox. And we are not bound by, reform Jews did not consider themselves bound by Jewish law. It is our tradition, it's our heritage. It informs our choices, unlike the more traditional movements that see themselves as following Jewish law. So we all share this literature. It's part of our heritage. We looked at the literature for guidance and inspiration and to establish basic values of Judaism, though we might not consider it legally binding the way a more traditional Jew would. So that's, I think, a general explanation about Talmud. I wanna be sensitive at the time. Looks like we have time for probably another question. First, thank you so much for the opportunity to listen and learn. I wanna return to Moses for a minute. So in Christianity, or in some corners of Christianity, we have what we call liberation theology, which was really birthed among people who were historically oppressed.  And though it's theology, it's really practice driven and speaks to us on how to address the world today. And I'm just wondering if you could speak to how your respective traditions see the story of Moses as a call to action today. Thanks for bringing us back to the text. And the whole point of telling the story of the Exodus at Passover is it says in the Haggadah, our script, every generation should view themselves as if they personally had gone out of Egypt. We have to remember that we were slaves. If you remember that you were a slave, that it affects the way you view the world. You cannot be indifferent because your family went through that. You cannot ignore the oppression of people today who are not free for whatever reason. And so there is a sense of ethical obligation that comes out of retelling the story of the Exodus that we need to be participants in bringing about redemption. Redemption was not meant for us. Redemption was meant for the world. And because we were freed, we now have an obligation. And that obligation is to pursue that redemption because that is the fulfillment of creation itself. So that's, I think, without focusing on Moses, more focusing on the story, the story of the Exodus, that's the mandate that comes out of telling the story. So I'll just end, it's a ayat in sort of cusses where Allah says, what we redo in the moon and the dina, study, fulfill, art, while it's Elohim, a imma, while it's Elohim a water theme. And so when it comes to liberation theology, I think that this ayat where God says he wanted to show a preference to those who are oppressed in the land. And he wanted to make them the leaders and he wanted to make them the inheritors.  I don't care who they are, what land it is, the oppressed and the marginalized. And you can take that. It's a black person from America. Everything cool in America is black. Like the dress, the music, cause God said he's gonna make those who are oppressed into the leaders and he's gonna make those who are oppressed into the inheritors. So even though they're being locked out of certain things, people are still gonna be like, this is what's groovy, or this is what's hip, or this is what's cool. Know what I'm saying? And so that is, to me, that's the basis for me of liberation theology, which I feel like the Bay Area, we all practice liberation theology to some extent, know what I'm saying? And I know that my daughter keeps texting me. I was like, she should not have brought her phone. She's like, hum the Lord, when are we breaking this fast? I think that's a good cue for us to go into the fellowship hall, the banquet hall, and get ready for our meal, inshallah. So thank you all for coming out. A big round of applause for our presenters. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.


This paper examines the relationship between serum cystitin C levels and both diabetes and mortality among three different ethnicities. It found that higher levels of cystitin C are associated with increased risk of developing diabetes regardless of ethnicity. Additionally, it found that higher levels of cystitin C are also associated with increased risk of mortality again regardless of ethnicity. This suggests that cystitin C may be a useful marker for identifying those at risk for diabetes and mortality. This article was authored by Kevin Iganzales, Arianna M. Stickel, Sonia S. and others.


It is now time for oral questions. I recognize the leader of the official office. Thank you, Speaker. My first question is to the Deputy Premier. Late yesterday evening, after reporters headed home for the day, the government dropped a bombshell on three communities in the GTA. For years, Milton, Markham and Brampton have been planning for university campuses in their communities to provide opportunity for their children and to train a future workforce for their growing economies. Last night, this government pulled the plug on those dreams in the dead of the night. What justification can they offer for this decision? Deputy Premier. We promised the people of Ontario to restore accountability and trust in Ontario's finances. And part of that process fell projects across Ontario. Our government is being forced to clean up the irresponsible and reckless financial decisions of the previous Liberal government. We know now, thanks to the Independent Commission of Inquiry, the depths of the waste and mismanagement of the previous Liberal government. To describe the previous government's actions, the Auditor General used words like conceal, bogus, deceptive and unreliable. In an election year, they made promises, empty promises to Ontarians for programs and projects they knew they could not afford, leading to a $15 billion deficit while hiding the cost from the public. The Liberals have shattered the trust of Ontarians. Thank you. We start the supplementary. Well, I want to quote one local expert on the importance of these campuses. Speaking of the New York University campus in Markham, he said, and I quote, there are just a few numbers of the impact of the new campus will make. 200 students will have access to teaching, learning and research. 400 plus on-campus jobs, 500 million in economic benefits. The campus will benefit many residents of Markham and York Region, allowing them to gain the skills and knowledge in order for them to be part of the 21st century economy of Ontario. That expert was PCMPP Billy Pang, the member for Markham Union Vils, who was speaking in this House just weeks ago. Why is this government depriving these communities of economic investment and opportunity for their kids? Minister. Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the member opposite for the question. Our government was elected to restore accountability and trust in Ontario's finances, and that's exactly what we're doing. Due to the Independent Commission of Inquiry, the depths of the waste and mismanagement of the previous Liberal government are now clear. In an election year, the Liberals made empty political promises to Ontarians for programs and projects they knew the province could not afford, hiding the costs from the public and creating $15 billion deficit that Ontario has today. The Liberals shattered the trust of Ontarians and our focus is on cleaning up the irresponsible and reckless financial decisions of the previous government and restoring trust and accountability in Ontario's finances. Final supplementary. Well, the former government may have shattered people's trust, and I agree with that, but this government's shattering their dreams, Speaker, shattered communities that deserve post-secondary opportunities for their kids. But now that the votes are counted, this government seems to think that they're second class. PC candidates spent the last campaign promising that these campuses would go ahead. During the campaign, the MPP for Milton said, and I quote, we will do everything we can to make this project a reality, whether it takes $90 million or there's more we need to do. The MPP for Markham actually went to the groundbreaking ceremony of the new Markham campus. I guess this truly is a case of promises made, promises broken. Why did the government break their word to the parents and students in these communities who were promised a university? Minister. Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the member opposite for that question. And quite frankly, I reject the premise of the question. Government is committed to enhancing the financial accountability and transparency. The previous Liberal government propped up by the MPP, who supported them on 97% of their votes and made empty promises in an election year for programs and projects that they knew they could not afford, leading to a $15 billion deficit while hiding the cost from the public. The Liberals shattered the trust of Ontarians and our focus is on restoring trust and accountability in Ontario's finances. That is what we will do. Thank you, Speaker. My next question is for the Deputy Premier. Working people in Ontario are finding it harder and harder to make ends meet. They find too many of today's jobs are unreliable and underpaid. They're looking to their government to ensure that they have their basic benefits and that they get an honest pay for an honest day's work. Instead of providing that, this government announced their plans yesterday to take basic benefits away. Can you explain why a woman working full-time on the minimum wage should have her wages frozen? Deputy Premier. For economic development. Speaker, and thank you for the question. As the Honourable Member will know, we promised to make Ontario open for business and yesterday was a great big step in the right direction to do just that. While the party opposite is concentrating, as the Liberals did for 15 years, propped up by the NDP, concentrating on propping up a minimum wage economy. Mr. Speaker, we need to get beyond that. We need to get better jobs, better paying jobs. We can't give up on our manufacturing sector. They gave up on our manufacturing sector. Premier Ford, I, our caucus, our party, we're going to revive those jobs in manufacturing in our industrial sector. To do that, we need to get rid of them. Order. Order. Supplementary. Well, Speaker, working people aren't asking for luxuries. They're asking for the bare minimum basics, Speaker. To take a sick day without having to lose a day's pay. To enjoy their day off without being ordered to show up for a shift for fear of losing their job. To make a living wage of $15 an hour. Most employers that I meet are happy to extend these basic benefits to their staff. Why is the government rolling back these basic benefits? Mr. Economic Development? Speaker, we're not rolling back the basic benefits so that an employer wants to extend those benefits. So they're perfectly happy to do so. And a lot of employers are. Most employers are by far. Most employers aren't paying minimum wage. They can't get help at minimum wage. So the fact of the matter is what we did yesterday in the Making Ontario Open for Business Act is absolutely the right way to go. To get our economy moving again. When Bill 148 was brought in, we lost 52,000 jobs in January. In August, we lost over 80,000 jobs. And most of those for the first time in my 28 years were part-time jobs. Why? Because of the equal pay provisions in Bill 148. You had to have a part-timer paid the same as the person that's worked for you for 25 years. Businesses can't afford that. They laid people off and drove. Ordered 80,000 people. Take your seats. Order. Order. Member for Niagara West, come to order. Final supplementary. Well, Speaker, it's obvious that this government has no understanding that the value of a person's labour is the same regardless of that person, whether they're a part-time worker or not. And then when the Deputy Premier needs a day off, she doesn't lose a day's pay, Speaker. Government benches come on. And we know that this government is more than comfortable handing conservative insiders million-dollar pay packets. But we know that this government has a million-dollar pay packet. But when it comes to average working people, those standards don't apply.  Why does the government think that that's acceptable, Speaker? Minister? Thank you, Speaker. And to the Honourable Member, I say what isn't acceptable is 80,000 people losing their jobs in August, 52,000 in January. What part of this don't you get? What part of going in the wrong direction don't you get? And why do you keep propping up as the Liberals, where the directions of the Liberals took this province? They took this province down the sewer and you're helping them. Once again, keep this province. Members to make their comments and their questions and their responses through the chair. Order. Next question. Leader of the Opposition. Thank you, Speaker. My next question's also to the Deputy Premier, but I'm going to state in this House what I've stated many times before.  It means losing a day's pay. And that can make a huge difference when it comes to paying the bills at the end of the month. The Deputy Premier doesn't lose a day's pay when she takes a sick day. Why must other workers, Speaker? Deputy Premier. Minister of Labor. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, yesterday's announcement was a great announcement. To the world. The message that other Ontario is open for business. Absolutely, Mr. Speaker. And the greatest benefit we can give to workers is reducing red tape to help create jobs in the province of Ontario so they have better paying jobs, Mr. Speaker. That increases to inflation, not politics, economics. That's what those increases are increasing. The post-working people are just trying to make ends meet. And this feels to them like another cut they just can't afford. One woman working four different minimum wage jobs was on the radio this morning and she said that it felt like getting hit in the gut. The government seems quite happy taking away people's pay hikes or docking them a day's pay just because they get sick. Would the Deputy Premier be willing to dock her paycheck when she gets sick or better yet to try living on the $14 minimum wage, Speaker? Here, here. Mr. Speaker, in the recent election in which we received a large mandate from the province of Ontario and the people of the province of Ontario, they wanted life to be more affordable, Mr. Speaker. So we're making life more affordable. We're decreasing their cost of living. We're decreasing their hydro. We're decreasing their gas bills. We're increasing their home heating. Opposition come to order. We are providing an environment and many businesses are here today so that they can provide more jobs and better paying jobs to those people so they can afford to live in the province of Ontario. They can afford their groceries. They can afford their electric bills. That's what the people of the province of Ontario said in June. Make our lives more affordable. Give us better paying jobs. And that's exactly what the key speaker is. Next question. Member for Oakville North Burlington. Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade. Yesterday the Minister introduced the Making Ontario Open for Business Act. For the last 15 years, the previous Liberal government created unnecessary red tape. The hard truth is that the previous Liberal government was fixated on job regulation instead of job creation. During our government's consultations across the province, businesses told us loud and clear that the regulatory burden is getting worse every year. This comes at a time when our largest competitor, the United States, is reducing the cost of business in a historic way. Could the Minister please inform this legislature of how Ontario fell behind under the previous Liberal government? Good question. Minister of Economic Development. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, to the honorable colleague for the question. Ontario has slid rather badly. You know, we're used to thinking ourselves, Mr. Speaker, as being up there in the same league as New York and California, but a very disturbing report, recent report using 2016 figures. A good measure of your economy is your GDP per capita, your production per capita, of the 64 jurisdictions in North America, so that's the 50 states, District of Columbia, 13 provinces. Out of that ranking of 64, New York was third, California was ninth, and we were 46, Mr. Speaker. We used to be right up there with New York and California. We were 46. That's how badly the Liberal government brought us down. They didn't care about jobs. They brought in every regulation a piece of red tape they could. There wasn't a piece of red tape they didn't like, Mr. Speaker. They brought it in. They piled it up, piled it up, piled it up, and our job creators are going elsewhere. They're absolutely leaving, and our productivity's gone to the bottom third of all of North America, Mr. Speaker. Supplementary. Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the Minister for his response. Ontario was once the economic engine of Confederation, but that was before the opposition voted with the wind Liberals 97% of the time. When the previous government introduced Bill 148, they drowned Ontario in a tsunami of new regulations that imposed unnecessary costs on businesses. For Ontario job creators, it was too much too soon. I'm proud of our government for the people for taking concrete measures to open Ontario for business and help create and protect good jobs in Ontario. Could the Minister please inform this legislature how the Making Ontario Open for Business Act will once again make Ontario a top-tier destination for job creation, investment, entrepreneurship, and growth? Minister. Mr. Speaker, I mentioned Ontario's GDP to per capita statistic, and across the way they're saying, why are you putting down Ontario? We need to be realistic and transparent with the people of Ontario. They have their heads in the sand over there, Mr. Speaker, just like the Liberals did for 15 years. We're sliding badly. Jobs are going every day to Ohio and Michigan, to Quebec. Other promises are doing. We're lagging for other promises. We used to be, as the Honourable Member said, the economic engine of Canada. The Making Ontario Open for Business Act and getting rid of the job-killing parts of Bill 148 and opening up our trade sector and changing the ratios, those are all good things for good jobs and better jobs in the province of Ontario, and we need to do it. We need to do it now. Start the clock. Next question. Member for Spadina, Fort York. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Training Colleges and Universities. The communities of Brampton, Markham, and Milton eagerly anticipating a new university campus. These campuses were an opportunity for young people to get a world-class education closer to home, and they were going to be centres of innovation that would grow the economies of these already fast-going communities in the GTA. Years of tireless effort went into making these campuses a reality, but last night this government snatched that away without a word of warning. Is the Minister prepared to reconsider this callous and short-sighted decision? Mr. Training Colleges and Universities. Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the member opposite for the question. I will repeat that we promised the people of Ontario to restore accountability and trust in Ontario's finances, and part of that process means making tough decisions about projects across Ontario. Our government is being forced to clean up the irresponsible and reckless financial mess and decisions of the previous liberal government. We know, thanks to the Independent Commission of Inquiry, that the depths of the waste and mismanagement of the previous liberal government have caused this situation. The Liberals have shattered the trust of Ontarians and our focus is on restoring trust. And I remind everyone that it is the NDP who supported the Liberals on 97% of their votes. Supplementary. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the Minister of Training Colleges and Universities, Markham, Milton and Brampton are some of the fastest growing cities in Canada. But they tend to be taken for granted by the government at Queens Park. They are the only communities with over a million people in North America that do not have a university. These campuses were investments in the smart future to make these communities centres of the next generation of research and development and to create 21st century jobs. They are the promise to make that investment to these communities. Minister. Thank you again for that question and thank you, Speaker. Well, I think we need to understand that the financial situation that we are in and we were elected to restore accountability and trust in Ontario's finances. In an election year, the Liberals made empty political promises all across Ontario for programs and projects they knew that we could not afford. And hiding the costs from the public. Creating a $15 billion deficit that Ontario is reeling from today. They shattered the trust of Ontarians and our focus is on cleaning up the irresponsible and reckless financial decisions of the previous government. We are working on restoring trust and accountability in Ontario's finances and our future. Order. Let's start the clock. Next question, the member for York Centre. Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Economic Development, Job, Creation and Trade. Minister, October is Manufacturing Month. It serves as an opportunity for government to come together with industry, labour, chambers of commerce, professional associations and educational institutions to recognize the vital role this sector plays in day-to-day lives of Ontarians. The manufacturing sector employs around 760,000 people in Ontario and makes up about 12% of our province's GDP. It is safe to say that the manufacturer industry is an important driver in our province's prosperity. Could the Minister please tell the legislature of what our government for the people is doing to stand up for manufacturing jobs in Ontario? Minister of Economic Development. Thank you. Thank you. As all members know, manufacturing took quite ahead over the last few years under the previous Liberal government. 320,000 manufacturing jobs, good-paying jobs were lost between 2003-2009 and since that date, we've seen a steady decline and we're still counting how many more jobs we've lost in the manufacturing sector. I've had numerous opportunities along with colleagues in my capacity as Minister to tour a number of our great manufacturers that are still here in the province like General Motors, Linnimar, Ford, Toyota, Honda in my own riding and yesterday, Minister Scott and Fullerton and I visited Leyland Industries. We want to thank them for their hospitality. All of these businesses told us we needed to get rid of the job-killing parts of the 141 that they weren't able to hire new people. They couldn't find apprentices. They needed the College of Trades ended. That's what we're doing through the Making Ontario Open for Business Act and we're very proud to be doing that supplementary. Thank you, Speaker. And thank you to the Minister for his response. Back to the Minister. Ontario is North America's manufacturing heartland and a world-class producer of automobiles, information technology, communications, biotech pharmaceuticals, medical devices and many more goods. Ontario alone is the largest sub-national automotive assembly jurisdiction in North America. Yesterday, our government for the people announced a key piece of legislation to support our manufacturing industry and encourage companies to stay right here in Ontario. If passed, this legislation will help businesses create jobs and expand. Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the Honourable Minister, what is the government's message to companies like Leyland and the entire automotive industry? Mr. Thank you for the question. Our message to the automotive industry and to all of our job creators in the province, large or small help is on the way. Ontario is open for business, Mr. Speaker. Not only is our government standing up for the manufacturing industry by reducing burdensome red tape. Our government has scrapped the Liberal Cap and Trade Scheme. We've scrapped the Green Energy Act. We promised to clean up the mess left behind at Hydro. The Liberals left behind. We're lowering taxes. And we're fighting the worst tax of all, the job-killing Trudeau carbon tax, the federal carbon tax. That will be a death now for the factory and this province. That will undo all the good things we're trying to do through our Making Ontario Open for Business Act. Shame on the federal government. They need to rethink this punishing tax. It's not only punishing families. It's punishing jobs and our job creators. It's absolutely the wrong way to go. Next question. Start the clock. Member for Brampton Centre. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Mr. Speaker, in my community of Brampton, parents, students and even senior citizens were eagerly anticipating a new university campus. We were excited for this opportunity because we were finally being recognized as a fast growing and world-class city that can provide educational opportunity focused on innovation, job creation, cyber security for the next generation. Years of tireless effort has gone into making this campus a reality. But in a blink of an eye, the work and planning has all been thrown out the window. Speaker, why is this government cancelling investments that are critical to our growth in Brampton? Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to the member opposite to that question. This is on. We promise the people of Ontario to restore accountability and trust in Ontario's finances. And part of what it says means making tough decisions about projects across Ontario. Our government is being forced to clean up the irresponsible and reckless financial decisions of the previous Liberal Government. And we know now, thanks to the Independent Commission of Inquiry, the depths of the waste and mismanagement of the previous Liberal Government. To describe the previous Government's actions, we need to consider the general use of words like concealed, bogus, deceptive and unreliable. In an election year, they made empty promises to Ontarians for programs and projects they knew they could not afford to a billion. Thank you. Supplementary. Thank you very much for your time. Millions of dollars have already gone into planning this university and our affiliated centre for innovation. Not to mention the wasted time and effort from all of those involved in the project. These campuses were investments in boosting Brampton's economy, creating good-paying jobs and opportunities for our young people closer to home. In fact, this was something that members on the Brampton side of the government benches actually like a second-class city. Thank you to the members opposite for that question. We've been clear that this Government is committed to enhancing financial accountability and transparency. We owe our children a positive future. The previous Liberal Government propped up by NDP who supported the Liberals on 97% of their votes, made empty promises in an election year for programs and projects that they knew they could not afford, leading to a $15 billion deficit and hiding that from the public. The Liberals shattered the trust of Ontarians and the NDP propped them up on their votes and our focus is on restoring trust and accountability in Ontario's finances. That is important for our future. Thank you, Speaker. Next question, the member for Guelph. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Deputy Premier. Market economies have shown a remarkable ability to support innovation and adapt to changing circumstances. Just think of a shift from horse to car travel a century ago. Market prices guide the decision that people and businesses make, influencing what items they choose to buy, produce and sell. Does the Ford governments believe in markets and the importance of market based solutions? Deputy Premier. The Minister of Economic Development. Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker, but I sense a bit of a trap here from the Honourable Member trying to figure out what you're up to over there, Michael. The Honourable Member, I should say. So perhaps I'll just wait for the supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Supplementary. I believe, Mr. Speaker, given the response I heard in questions around Bill 148 that the government does believe in market solutions. So if that's the case, why is the Premier wasting taxpayer dollars to fight a lawsuit against the federal government to bring in a market based solution to address the climate crisis? Here's the bottom line, Mr. Speaker. If something is free, people will do more of it. If pollution is free, people will pollute more. It's basic economic supported by Nobel Prize winning economists. Even conservative policy analysts have shown that putting a price on pollution will reduce pollution and put more back in the pockets of hardworking people in Ontario so they can even save more by reducing the amount of pollution. So I ask one... Minister. Environment, Conservation and Parks. To the environment and to the Minister of Economic Development. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, through you to the Member from Guelph, we do know where the Member from Guelph stands. The Member for Guelph and the Green Party of Ontario are in favor of $150 a ton carbon tax. Even Justin Trudeau who is willing to put 11 cents on a liter of gas isn't willing to put 35 cents on a liter of gas. But to give credit, that is where the Member and his party are coming from. We understand the problem of climate change and we understand and need solutions. We will be addressing those plans that balances the economy and the environment. But what we won't be doing is putting a 35 cent a liter charge on a liter of gasoline as the Green Party advocates. Next question, the Member for Berry, Springwater or Midonte. Thank you Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Environment, Conservation and Parks. Yesterday the country tuned in while Justin Trudeau announced he was fully prepared to impose a carbon tax on provinces without a carbon pricing system. Trudeau conceded that a carbon tax will put a burden on the people of Ontario. He stated quote, Liberals will help Canadians adjust to this new reality. And in turn he promised all residents that Liberals would then return funds back to them to ensure they would not be impacted by the increased cost. This sounds too good to be true. I've never heard of a tax that puts more money back in people's pockets. Can the Minister please tell us the truth about Justin Trudeau's tax? Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. Mr. Speaker and I thank through you the Member from Berry, Springwater or Midonte for his insightful question. Justin Trudeau's carbon tax is going to have an impact on people who drive cars. Justin Trudeau's carbon tax is going to have an impact on people who have to heat their homes. His carbon tax is going to have an impact and going to hurt families. It's going to hurt businesses and make them think twice of employing another employee. The President of the Canadian Federation gave warning that the outcome for small business, whether it's textile businesses, pizza businesses or other businesses is dire. It is not good for job creators. Mr. Speaker this is not about a climate plan this is about a tax. Mr. Speaker, the FAO made it clear last week. $648 per family by 2022 and anyone Mr. Speaker agreeing with the Member anyone who hears a politician say increase your taxes and give you more money should think twice. Thank you, supplementary. Thank you Mr. Speaker and I thank the minister for his answer. I'm so proud to be part of a government that does not submit and is ready to do what it takes to fight against this imposition of a carbon tax. We made it crystal clear we believe man-made climate change is real and our province is being threatened because of it. We've seen extreme weather cause floods, fires, wind damage and other much more. Our government has been clear that our environment is a priority and we're ready to take action to minimize the effects. Trudeau claims his carbon tax is a proven method to minimize the symptoms of climate change. The Trudeau carbon tax will start at $20 per ton in January and rise to $50 per ton in 2022. Can the minister tell us will this really make a difference? Minister Mr. Speaker the member raises an excellent point the Trudeau carbon tax will go to $150 per ton that's the $648 per family but as the leader of the Green Party would agree that's not an effective level for a carbon tax if it's not $150 a ton causing a 35% increase in gas then economists who think a carbon tax is a good idea would agree we don't agree Mr. Speaker when Justin Trudeau talks about a polluter what he's talking about is a commuter he's talking about moms and dads who have to drive their kids to hockey who have to drive their kids to school that's why we've been clear we will fight the Trudeau carbon tax we will join provinces like Saskatchewan join six provinces now that disagree with the Trudeau carbon plan and fight this carbon tax we will fight it in the courts we will all use the resources in our power to stand against this tax that hurts families and hurts Ontario job creators next question very much Mr. Speaker my question is to the minister of labour yesterday the government announced their plan for doctors to get a doctor's note to prove that they're sick but for years doctors with the Ontario Medical Association have been very clear that when you're sick you should be staying home not dragging yourself into work to avoid losing a day's pay and definitely not dragging yourself into the doctor's office to get a note so you don't have to drag yourself into work our healthcare system is already stretched and this will only give doctors more work what is the justification for this move minister of labour well thank you very much for the question and we realise that the doctors are stressed we realise the medical system is stressed I want to point out in the legislation it says a medical note a health practitioner a qualified health practitioner note so there's certainly flexibility but there also has to be accountability now not every not every employer is going to ask for an employee for a medical note this is very much up to the employee but we found we've spoken across the province heard feedback across the province that there has to be some accountability when asked for by an employer we said broadly a medical health practitioner's note so Mr Speaker I hope that answers the question it seems very reasonable on this side of the house Mr Speaker Mr Speaker that response actually leaves us with more questions and to add onto this mess the government isn't just taking away paid sick days under the proposed changes the Employment Standards Act people will now have fewer days off to deal with family tragedies when a loved one passes away the last thing anyone wants to worry about is whether they can take time off to attend their funeral and employer can demand proof in situations of bereavement is this government seriously proposing that people have to produce a death certificate for their mother before they're allowed to go to her funeral in the province of Ontario Minister Mr Speaker it's very disappointing that the opposition is demonizing businesses in the province of Ontario and making them look to me that they don't care about their employees not what is going on in the province of Ontario we have eight job positions days for employees similar to other provinces across the country we have dozens of people when we're protecting every worker in the province of Ontario with those job protected days so I know the members opposite are upset that we brought in a piece of legislation that puts Ontario open for businesses and makes workers gives workers the opportunity to have better employment start the clock next question the member for Etobicoke morning Mr Speaker and thank you Mr Speaker my question is for the Minister of Environment Conservation and Parks we often hear pleas from the opposition in the House the opposition call for help to help the people of Ontario on June 7th the people of this province voted for a change and our government intends to deliver to Ontarians Ontarians are tired of dealing with years of mismanagement and government who wasn't listening now they have a government who cares can the Minister of Environment tell the members of this legislature how we intend to ensure the people of Etobicoke Lakeshore and this province how this government will continue to fight for them the Minister of the Environment Conservation and Parks Mr Speaker and through you to the member from Etobicoke Lakeshore yesterday we did hear about Justin Trudeau's plan a plan that as I've talked about will impose a $50 $50 ton $648 a year charge on Ontario families by 2022 Mr Speaker at the same time like the leader of the Green Party members of the opposition members of the NDP have talked about $150 a ton charge that charge $0.35 a leader on gasoline for the 73% of Ontarians Mr Speaker who heat their homes with natural gas that's $263 a month more in natural gas charges Ontario families just cannot afford that and that's why Mr Speaker as we promise during the campaign we will be standing up to the federal government joining other provinces joining Saskatchewan joining the other provinces against the carbon plan against the federal government against this unconstitutional regressive job killing carbon tax start the clock supplementary thank you Mr Speaker I appreciate knowing we have such a passionate minister heading the fight alongside our Ontario voted for a government that would put their needs and their concerns first our government is holding true to our province promise and making sure that the people of Ontario are first in our thoughts in all decisions we make our friends are far too smart to believe that Trudeau's rebates are anything more than a temporary vote buying strategy that will be just started once the election is over I'm confident that our efforts we put in place will rid this province of the cap and trade carbon tax and ensure the Trudeau carbon tax is never imposed following the removal of the cap and trade tax can the minister please update the house to check the environment for future generations in Etobicoke Lakeshore and the rest of the province Mr Speaker through you to the member from Etobicoke Lakeshore I share her confidence that Ontarians will see through the sham of a government that's going to tax you more and put more money in your pockets but she is also correct that we have to do our bit Ontario has been a leader on the environmental front and will continue to be so that's why we will bring forward a plan for the economy and the environment and made an Ontario solution that understands the importance of Ontario's job creators but also the importance of the environment and make sure that the environment is protected we are in the middle of a extensive consultation process now for those who want to share their thoughts I'd encourage them to do so at www.ontario.ca backslash climate change where we're gathering thousands of inputs and I will look forward to presenting a plan that families can count on to protect the environment and also not attack their ability to live lives they want to do put more money back in their pockets a plan that supports Ontario families and the environment thank you next question the member for Sudbury question is to the minister of labour now more than ever workers in the province want to join a union so it's not surprising the government is going to make that more difficult tens of thousands of workers won the right to a simple car check system in place for decades in the province where the previous conservative government took the right away card certification for workers in the building service sector the temp agency sector and home care sector became a reality just last year new democrats argued that it should extend to every sector the majority of workers sign a union card you should have a union it's making it harder to join a union what this labour minister represents very much Mr. Speaker yes we did take back the card based certification for two for the three sectors that were put into bill 148 and you know we restored it with the secret ballot which is a pretty good sign for democracy democracy workers will still have a choice secret ballot is a good democratic choice and we hope the member supports us on that order start the car supplementary thank you speaker back to the minister of employers Mr. Labour don't join unions people join unions because they want to be treated fairly and they want to work safely this government is right near the province backwards the government's side has to come to order he's right there and I can't hear the member for Sudbury put you in question as yelling as loud as I could to be heard I apologize for their behaviour people join unions because they want to be treated fairly and work safe safely making this province backwards limited rights to first contract arbitration recently one by Labour will be repealed first contract arbitration is often the only way to avoid disruption once workplaces unionize what does the minister of Labour have to say to the millions of unionized workers in need of protections now more than ever since the government is about to roll back their rights in a race to the bottom Mr. Speaker yesterday's announcement was a good news announcement for workers and employers remove the worst burdens on Ontario businesses and while we're still preserving real benefits for Ontario workers they still have rights we're not taking those rights away Mr. Speaker businesses have the confidence to succeed and they're going to expand and we're going to have better paying jobs in the province of Ontario and safe places to work Mr. Speaker this was a good news announcement yesterday for employers and the NDP should embrace those announcements Mr. Speaker thank you Mr. Speaker my question is to the minister of training colleges and universities Mr. Speaker many employees and job seekers are concerned about the burden of unnecessary and duplicative red tape and an addressed skill gap particularly in the skilled trades this is why I'm pleased to hear that the government is moving forward with modernizing the Ontario college of trades businesses and trades people has expressed to me face to face their frustration with the college and the fact that the previous Liberal government they're not there failed to address the skill gap Speaker through you can the minister tell us how modernize the Ontario college of trade will deliver our government promise to create good jobs make Ontario open for business again thank you Minister of training colleges and universities thank you Speaker and thank you to the member opposite for the question and their strong advocacy for the people of Markham Unionville we've heard loud and clear from employers and trades people that the Ontario College of trades is not delivering as it's currently structured take example of Alberta despite being a third the size of Ontario Alberta has 50,000 apprentices while Ontario has only 70,000 meanwhile the Canadian Federation of Independent businesses has said there are 154,000 unfilled private sector jobs in Ontario we need a system that gets Ontario's economy moving and fills the skills gap we know people are prepared to work and they deserve a shot at the job Speaker we promise the people of Ontario to create good jobs in Ontario I'm going to remind the member from Markham Unionville and all members that it's inappropriate to make reference to the absence of any member at any time supplementary Thank you Mr Minister through you Mr Speaker for your hard work in making Ontario open for business and modernizing the Ontario College of trades I'm proud that unlike the previous Liberal government that we are focused on creating better jobs and filling the skills gap under the previous Liberal government which was propped up by the NDP Ontario lost 300,000 good manufacturing jobs and the previous Liberal government heed the true size of Ontario's deficit living our province the most step of sub-national government in the world and a 15 billion deficit Speaker through you can the minister tell us more about our government legislature if past will increase access to trades and reduce the red tape on business and job seeker we start the clock response minister our legislation if past will wind down the Ontario College of trades and work to find efficiencies to reduce red tape and duplication that exists in the current system the current system is not working for the economy employers and trades people employers that many of the roles and responsibilities are overly burdensome for example apprentices must be registered in two separate systems one with the ministry and one with the college we know people are prepared to do the work and they deserve a shot at the job we were elected on a promise to reduce red tape and create good jobs in Ontario speaker promise made promise to reduce red tape number for London fan shop speaker my questions to the minister of health and long-term care the crisis in Ontario's health care has been growing after decades of conservative and liberal mismanagement the quality of care has declined and wait lists are getting bigger every day while people's health suffer waiting for the care they need across Ontario home care has been hit the hardest patients and workers are doing the very best they can but many have low wages do not have protections and their work schedule is unpredictable families are asking what is this government doing to address the needs of their loved ones who are waiting for home care very much for the question I do agree with her that there has been a crisis that has developed in terms of resorting to hallway health care as a result of 15 years of inaction by the previous liberal mismanagement but we got elected to change that we got elected to end hallway health care and we started action on that right now we made an announcement several weeks ago about injecting an additional 90 million dollars into the system to create 1100 new spaces to get us through flu season while we are developing a long-term capacity plan we are working on that right away we also know that some of the reasons for wait times are because people are not aware that they don't have anywhere to go we know that we need to build more long-term care beds we have already announced 6000 of them are in production but we know that home care is an increasingly important aspect of home care because most people want to go home when they are able to leave hospital home care provides those supports with the nurses with the PSW's and the supports that people need we are going to continue to build on that to make sure that this government is successful. The situation in home care needs to be fixed and this government is not helping by taking things from bad to worse cuts and deregulating will not provide Ontarians with the quality care they deserve seniors in my riding of London are suffering while this government hesitates to continue the care and provide the home care services that people most vulnerable are waiting for when this government take the crisis in health care seriously and commit to providing the care that all Ontarians deserve and are expecting from this government. Thank you. Members in this legislature to note as well as anyone who is watching these activities that what we are doing is increasing health care in Ontario. We have indicated that for the investments that are happening across the board the $3.8 billion that is going to be spent both federally and provincially to create a comprehensive and coordinated mental health and addiction system because right now what we have is bits and pieces all over that don't connect with each other. I think it is really important to note that we want to augment our health care services because we know we have a rapidly aging population. We have new medications that are coming on board to combat rare diseases which is wonderful. We are going to make sure that we have those resources for people when they need them. That is our priority and patient safety and patient concerns are a top priority for us on this side and it's something that I work on every day in the ministry. Thank you. Next question. Member for Peterborough. Mr. Speaker, through you to the Minister of Education each day on my way into work I stop and usually see at least one school bus stopping to pick up young students in my riding. On occasion I've been stopped behind these school buses as I see a lineup of students eagerly waiting to get on the bus to head into school to learn. They're always greeted by a smile and parents are often they're waving goodbye. Mr. Speaker today is school bus driver appreciation day part of school bus safety awareness week. On this day I can't help but remember the many bus drivers that shaped my life growing up. I think of Keith, Wendy. These men and women end up leaving a lasting impression on young students' lives. Can the Minister of Education please tell me about how the government of Ontario plans to support these men and women who are crucial parts of our education system? Thank you very much Mr. Speaker and I would like to also thank the great member from Northumberland, Peterborough South. He's doing a great job on behalf of that riding. I stand to share our sincere appreciation on behalf of the Ontario PC government and Premier Doug Ford I would like to thank school bus drivers across this province because we all know the important job that they take on twice a day on behalf of all of us as they make sure that their students get to school back and forth in a very safe manner. You know it's interesting every day school bus drivers focus is ensuring nearly 800,000 students from across Ontario they're getting to school every day as I said two times a day and their role is particularly critical in rural and northern Ontario and I'd like to share with you speaker that we recognize how important their job is and in fact I'm pleased to say that by the end of this month eligible school bus drivers will be receiving funding from the school bus redriver retention program. That's a thank you and it's recognition for the important role. Supplementary. Thank you to the minister for that excellent answer. Thank you to the minister for that excellent answer. I know that parents and families across my riding appreciate the hard-working men and women school bus drivers that get their children to school on a day-to-day basis. Can the minister of transportation update this house on how many students rely on these services and what is being done to make sure that our most precious assets are able to complete their journey each day from home to the classroom and back. Thank you to my colleague for the question. As with every file that my ministry works on safety is paramount especially when it comes to our children. Our school bus drivers across the province do an excellent job of ensuring the safety of our students. Approximately 800,000 students in Ontario are transported back and forth to school every day and our bus drivers travel 1.8 million kilometres each and every school day. I'm pleased to inform the house that school buses continue to be one of the safest ways for our children to get to and from school. Students are about 70 times more likely to get to school safely than by traveling on a school bus than by traveling in a car. On school bus driver appreciation day I would like to take this opportunity to thank our school bus drivers and remind all drivers in Ontario of the importance of paying attention, leaving space and being alert whenever they are approaching or passing a school bus. Thank you very much. Next question member for York Southwest. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Finance. This Government recently allowed the Financial Services Commission of Ontario to increase auto insurance rates by as much as 11.6%. This is unacceptable and will hurt fairness in my community of York Southwestern who are already being gorged in their auto insurance rates just because of where they live. Why don't this government stand up to insurance companies, stop the rate increases and finally end postal discrimination in auto insurance? Minister of Finance. Well I want to thank the member for that question and once again it gives me a great opportunity to stand here and congratulate the MPP from Milton for his very very hard work on this file. Member from Milton has proposed an initiative that is a great way to combat discrimination in our auto system. Now that the member's legislation is tabled we truly look forward to working with him and industry stakeholders to ensure our auto insurance system meets the needs of Ontario's 10 million drivers. Speaker, the member from Milton has done the right thing the right way. He consulted with stakeholders right across the province and will help you bring relief to families across all areas of Ontario. Supplementary. Thank you Mr. Speaker. I'll ask again through you Speaker, I'll ask the Minister of Finance. Drivers in my community are being gorged by insurance companies and it is about time that this government takes action. This is the fourth quarter in a role that the government has allowed auto insurance rates to increase. Shame. One step this government could take is to bring fairness back to auto insurance rates is to end postal code discrimination in premiums that penalizes good drivers just because of where they live. Will this government again and I'll ask directly the Minister of Finance finally stand up to insurance companies and support the NDP's bill that will end postal code discrimination in auto insurance rates. Minister. Well I think the member from York Southwestern should realize I realize you are new here but you should know the history is that the insurance proposal from the Liberals was part of a deal made with the NDP. So this is exactly why we are where we are. It was a stretch goal in her own words that the former Premier made. So we'll certainly not be taking any insurance lessons from the NDP. In the meantime our Premier Doug Ford has made it very very clear that our government is committed to ensuring fairness in rates setting, ending discriminatory practices and working forward towards a system that puts the driver first. Unlike the member from Brampton East the NDP member from Brampton East he wants rates to go up right across the rest of Ontario. We'll have none of that. Question period for today. Point of order the member from London Fanshawe. Introduce some guests of the legislature from Home Care Ontario. Sue Vanderbent the CEO of the organization as well as this afternoon I'll be meeting with Sally Harding, Nightingale Nursing, Stephanie Hayes from One to One Rehab and Bruce Mahoney from Home Instead Senior Care. So I'm welcome to the legislature. I look forward to meeting with you this afternoon. Point of order to the member for Bramford Brandt. Yes, thank you Mr. Speaker. I just wanted to take a moment to introduce my long-suffering wife and my oldest daughter Joanie and Laina sitting up in the public gallery on the east side. Order to the member for London. Thank you, Speaker. I just briefly wanted to introduce Rob Murphy, John Chapman, Chuck Sandley and Brian Crow who are from the Independent School Bus Drivers of Ontario Association. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to introduce my good friend, Dasvinder Singh-Camboch who's joining us here today. He'll actually be leaving this weekend for Alberta. For Sue and to Standing Order 38A, the member for London Fanshawe has given notice of her dissatisfaction with the answer to her question given by the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care concerning Home Care. This matter will be debated today at 6 p.m. We have a deferred vote on Government Notice of Motion number 13 relating to the allocation of time on Bill 34, an act to appeal the Green Energy Act 2009 and to amend the Electricity Act 1998, the Environmental Protection Act, the Planning Act and various other statutes. Call on the members. This will be a five-minute bill. Members, please take their seats. On October 23rd, 2018, Mr. Smith, Bay of Quinty moved Government Notice of Motion number 13 relating to the allocation of time on Bill 34. All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the clerk. Mr. Smith, Bay of Quinty. Mr. Walker. Mr. Wauker. Mr. Thompson. Mr. Thompson. Mr. Bethan Fowler. Mr. Fidelli. Mr. Fidelli. Ms. Elliott. Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson. Ms. Mulroney. Ms. Mulroney. Ms. McLeod. Ms. McLeod. Mr. Clark. Mr. Clark. Ms. Giacobusky. Giacobusky. Mr. Hardim. Mr. Hardim. Mr. Tbolo. Mr. Tbolo. Mr. Barrett. Mr. Barrett. Mr. Pettipies. Mr. Pettipies. Mr. Maynard. Mr. Barrett. Mr. Barret. Mr. Barrett. Mr. Barret Mr. Father Feris. Mr. Barret. Mr. Bash Prem. Mr. manifested in reverting theWill,and Mr. Doki,ofle will be honored. Mr.cji capture. Mr. F oppos of the servicord of orders of theoking Norbert medley B. Ms. Linda. Ms. Armstrong. Ms. Armstrong. Mr. Kernaghan. Mr. Pernaghan. Mr. West. Mr. West. Ms. Stevens. Mr. Stevens. Mr. Gates. Mr. Gates. Ms. Gretzky. Ms. Andrew. Ms. Andrew. Mr. Hatfield. Ms. Hatfield. Ms. Taylor. Ms. Taylor. Ms. Burns McGowan. Ms. Burns McGowan. Mr. Arthur. Mr. Arthur. Mr. Borguan. Mr. Borguan. Ms. Bell. Mr. Bell. Mr. Glover. Mr. Glover. Ms. Morrison. Ms. Hunter. Ms. Hunter. Ms. Mderosea. Ms. Mderosea. Mr. Shrine. Mr. Shrine. The ayes are 71. The nays are 37. The ayes being 71. And the nays being 37. I declare the motion carried. This House stands in recess until 3 p.m. this afternoon.


Rwy'n cael ei ddweud y cwestiynau ymddangos, mae'r Ffonsion 2895 yn y ffonsion hwmzae Yusif, ond y transvaginal mesh remuvel Costry Ymddangos, ysgolodd Bill B, yn ymdegi, ac mae'n gweithio'r ffonsion i'r gwaith. Ymddangos ymddangos. Mae wirionedd pethau mewn gwaith hyn o bosion 2895 yn y fath gael Humsu Yousif, dda. Mae yna 120, mwy o wawr. 85 yn cynnwys. Mae'r Lewis Moeaghau yn bwysig wedi'u eu cyfrifio gan i. Mae'r Transfoginail Mishtromuvel Imbруscolans Gwlllwn Sgoldd yng Nghymru iawn yn adeilad. Mae'r ydw i gefnogiadau'n 2934 am y mewn gwaith George Adam, on behalf of the parliamentary bureau on committee membership be agreed? Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed. That concludes decision time and will now move on to members' business. Point of order, Emma Harper. I wish to make a point of order in relation to 7.3.2 and 7.4.7 of the MSP code of conduct as it refers to members' conduct in committees. I seek the advice on a situation that has occurred in which Sandesh Galhany MSP has misrepresented in the press the intent of the committee's proposed inquiry into alternative pathways and made comment in the media which has promulgated misinformation, undermined the committee's work and disrespected the convener and other colleagues. Yesterday Dr Galhany gave comment to a newspaper which appears to uphold a false intention of an inquiry agreed by all colleagues across parties into the availability, capacity and public uptake of alternative health pathways in community settings. An agreed press release went out from the committee quoting the convener. A newspaper has decided to willfully misinterpret that intent and has reported it as the Government wanting to curtail access to general practitioners, as specifically our convener has been cited as wishing this result. As the Presiding Officer understands, as most members of this chamber understand, committee inquiries and scrutiny is not government work. It is not government policy design and the comments of any convener are not representative of any party or government position. I am certain that all committee conveners pride themselves in upholding this important standard by failing to challenge the false assertion of our committee's work and, in fact, upholding the false assertion on our inquiry being an SNP policy move. It is my belief that Dr Galhany has undermined the committee's work, falsely preempted any committee recommendations and deviated from an agreed committee purpose with intent with regard to this inquiry. As a result of Dr Galhany's actions, several of my colleagues have repeated the false assertions online, which I believe has been the cause of targeted abuse, and phone calls to constituency offices, including mine and I believe the conveners. I would be grateful for the Presiding Officer's guidance on how this deviation from the MSP's code of conduct can be addressed. I thank the member. However, the matter that the member raises is not a point of order, and in terms of the code of conduct, conduct at committees is in the first instance a matter for the convener of the relevant committee. If a member wishes to raise a concern under the code of conduct, then the code of conduct sets out how to do that. We will now move on to members' business, and I would ask members who are leaving the chamber to do so quietly.