It is now time for oral questions and I recognize the leader of Her Majesty's loyal opposition. Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, my first question today is for the Premier. Speaker, when families were losing their loved ones to COVID-19 and long-term care, the Premier promised that they would get the answers that they deserve through a commission that the government established. That commission heard from Dr. Williams on Monday and two days before his appearance, the commission received 217,000 documents and 2,000 pages of handwritten notes from Dr. Williams, two days before his testimony. The notes were heavily redacted and Dr. Williams' testimony was interfered with constantly by his lawyers who were trying to, I guess, protect Dr. Williams from providing the information that people deserve. So if the government and the Premier really wanted to get the answers for Ontarians, if they really respected them, why does this look like a stinking cover-up? I'm going to ask the leader of the opposition to withdraw. Withdraw, Speaker. Order. Order. The question has been placed. Minister of Health to reply. Thank you, Speaker. In fact, I would say the leader of the opposition quite the opposite. We set up and allowed the commission to operate because I know that there are many families that have inquiries. They were wondering what happened during the course of the COVID situation thus far and they want the answers and we want them to have the answers. This is a truly independent commission that is doing its work. Dr. Williams did appear before the commission. However, there were some concerns with respect to some of the entries and some of his documents related to cabinet decisions. That it was the impression of counsel that they needed to be protected and not released. However, the matter did go before a mediation. It was determined that all of Dr. Williams' documents should be submitted and they were. The supplementary question. Well, Speaker, unfortunately, Ontarians are going to keep wondering what really went wrong with the government's response to COVID-19 and long-term care because this commission is not getting the information in a timely fashion that they deserve. They were promised all information would be available. That's what the Premier promised. The Premier instead dumped 217,000 documents on the commission a couple of days before Dr. Williams' testimony. His notes have been heavily redacted. Lawyers have intervened at every moment of Dr. Williams' testimony. Why is this government trying to prevent this commission from doing the job that Ontarians want and need them to do? Minister of Health? Well, in fact, the commission has been provided with the documents. Dr. Williams' documents were not heavily redacted. They were provided in full. Dr. Williams provided his evidence. He has answered all of their questions. We have provided all of the documents that the commission has requested. Yes, there are 217,000 documents because a lot has happened in the last year as we've been dealing with COVID-19 across very many areas. And so that is something I know the commission is dealing with. But the reality is that we didn't sit on our hands in dealing with this. We took action on a number of fronts. There are many documents and they have all been produced. The final supplement. Everybody in Ontario has watched as this government has stonewalled this commission not providing documents in a timely fashion and now 217,000 documents all of a sudden being dumped on the commission. And the government refuses to expand the length of time this commission has to do its work. It is absolutely shameful. In fact, one of the commissioners, the commission lawyers said this. It is a gargantuan task, almost impossible to get through all those documents. Redacted notes from Dr. Williams. Lawyers surrounding Dr. Williams not giving him or giving the commission the opportunity to properly question him. What is this government trying to hide from the people of Ontario? Thank you, Speaker. Our government has been absolutely open and transparent with the people of Ontario since the day this pandemic started. Dr. Williams was given free rein to save whatever he wanted to say and he did in front of the commission and produced all of his documents. His documents were produced, not redacted. The commission has all of the information they need. Documents were presented quickly to the commission. There is a large volume of documents to deal with because a lot, as I said before, has been done. But we have been open and transparent. We have nothing to hide. We have had frequent representations by Dr. Williams and or Dr. Yaffe before the public and before the media twice a week. We have press conferences where Dr. Williams also appears. We have modeling that's presented by Dr. Brown and Dr. Sander. We have dashboards that we produce to the public on a regular basis online. We are producing everything that we have. Thank you very much. The next question, once again, the Leader of the Opposition. Thank you, Speaker. My next question is for the Premier. But I do have to say the only way that they can pull the knife out of the back of Ontarians is by extending the commission's timeframe and allowing them to do their work. But now I want to talk about yesterday. When we saw the Premier... I'm going to ask the member to withdraw that comment. Speaker, I want to talk a little bit about yesterday. As seniors in our province are anxiously awaiting their chance to get a vaccine, the Premier stood in his place yesterday and suggested that somehow we're leading the country when it comes to vaccinations. And I can tell you that that information is not actually accurate. In fact, today we see the Quebec portal opening and people are registering for their vaccines. Seniors are registering for their vaccines. And Alberta, of course, their portal opened yesterday. 25,000 Albertans were provided an appointment and they're getting their vaccines come next week. In fact, the information the Premier provided is not accurate. We're actually seventh out of all the provinces when it comes to the vaccine rollout. So I guess my question to the Premier is, is he prepared to correct his record, give people of Ontario the respect that they deserve? Thank you. Thank you. To reply to the Premier. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I know the challenges when it comes to math with the NDP, but there's a million tests all together. We've done 600,000. I think everyone that can do math on this side, that's 60%. We have 38% of the population. And I love how they compare it to other provinces here. First of all, I love the Premier of Alberta, J.C. Kennedy's working his back off. They have four and a half... Stop the clock. Order. We start the clock. Premier can conclude his answer. Half a million, we saw what happened out there. The system crashed down. My great friend, Francois Legault, which is one of the best Premier's out there, they haven't even done one single second dose. We've done over 250,000 second dose. We are leading the country in vaccinations, but Mr. Speaker, we're focusing on the most vulnerable. The long-term care patients, the seniors, the hard-working healthcare workers that are out there, we have to get them vaccinated first. Do you know what the problem is, Mr. Speaker? We need the vaccines. Thank you. The supplementary question. Speaker, across our country, it's a race. The race is on between vaccines and variants. In Ontario, in our province, the actual variants are winning. And that is something that is really troubling to the seniors of our province. In fact, when our vaccines are being slow-walked out the door, when the government can't seem to get it together, here's what Dr. Sameer Sine says. With variants of concern that are circulating around and becoming the dominant strain, we're really worried that we're going to lose a lot more older people along the way. So, does the government actually have any information about the numbers of seniors whose lives are at risk because this government has delayed the rollout of the vaccines until the middle of March? Are you here? Again, through you, Mr. Speaker. Thank goodness our government took action when it came to the airports where the variants were coming in by the truckloads. If it wasn't for us, there'd be more variants. So, thank goodness we stood out the testing at the airports. We made sure we worked hand-in-hand with the federal government, which we appreciate. But again, Mr. Speaker, when you don't have any ammunition, you can't go to war. The ammunition is the vaccine. We need the vaccines. As soon as we get more vaccines, we'll make sure that we get people vaccinated. We'll start with 80-plus, which some areas are going to be starting because of the great leadership in the public health units. The final supplement. Here's what matters to Ontarians. We have the highest number of COVID cases right now, 10,500. Ontario has the second highest number of deaths across the country, 6,893. And of course, tragically, 3,739 of those deaths were in long-term care. And here's the problem. 96% of COVID deaths are happening with people who... Please stop the clock. Come on. Restart the clock. Leader of the opposition. 96% of COVID deaths are with people over the age of 60, Speaker. They are most at risk of catching COVID-19 in the third wave. The variants are here. So, the question to the Premier, Speaker, is with the COVID-19 variants amongst us, with the fact that the Premier has reopened this province too quickly, with the fact that the vaccines have been delayed so egregiously, how is this government going to make sure that people get the vaccine that they need? Does he have a backup plan to ensure that people have the vaccines? Premier. Thank you for the question. Through you, Mr. Speaker. Those are some numbers from that side. Now I'm going to tell you the numbers here. So, the real numbers are we're leading North America, any jurisdiction our size with the lowest cases per 100,000. We're leading Canada to the exception of the small maritime provinces in the lowest cases. I'll read them out once again. Ontario is at 68. Those are staggering numbers. Canada's average is 80. My great pal over in Saskatchewan is 121 compared to our 68. Alberta, which you're talking about is 103 compared to our 68. Quebec is 93 compared to our 68. BC is 92. Manitoba is 87. Our great friends in Newfoundland are out there and they're doing very well considering the outbreak. They're at 67. Again, Mr. Speaker, outside of the smaller maritime provinces, we are leading North America in every category from testing to vaccinations. We are the leaders here in Ontario because the great work we're doing. Order. Opposition come to order. The next question, the member for Brampton Centre. Good morning, Speaker. My question is for the Premier. Yesterday the Premier told personal support workers in Ontario that he really hopes he could give them a raise. But at the end of the day that these things are just simply not up to him. We're going to see a rise in communities like Brampton are wondering when they're going to see a permanent pay increase. So, Speaker, if the Premier is not the one in charge, who is? Premier. Through you, Mr. Speaker, for the first time in Canadian history, we are hiring 8200 PSWs. For the first jurisdiction in North America, we're going to have four hours of care. We're going to continue building long-term care. We're going to make sure we enhance long-term care and improve the disaster we inherited from both the NDP and the Liberals. And we're going to end up hiring a total of 27,000 PSWs and nurses to fix the problem we inherited. We're going to continue building long-term care. We're going to continue building long-term care. We're going to continue building long-term care. We're going to continue building long-term care and improve the двух building long-term care and improve the disaster we inherited from both the NDP and the Liberals. So, Premier, I've heard it. Pbulkin. советico also said that he's being lobbied every single day by PSWs who are asking him to keep his promise and follow through with the raises that they've been promised for almost over a year now. But he still continues to say that's not up to him. So, Speaker, again, to the Premier. Since you're clearly not the one making the decisions over there, who is and when are these PSWs going to get the permanent pay raise they deserve? Actually, through you, Mr. Speaker, I'm going to correct that statement if I can. I'll be lobbying everyone on this side. Yes, it's up to us. But guess what? For 15 years they were underpaid, they never got a raise until we stepped up the plight and gave them a $3 an hour pay increase and we will keep that $3 an hour. Opposition has to come to order. Premier, conclude your camp. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Through you, Mr. Speaker, we were the ones after years of neglect, decades of neglect. We're the government that stood up and we're giving them $3 an hour pay increase and we will keep that. We will make sure they're properly paid until we can attract more people to the great profession and their absolute heroes. I've backed those PSWs and they all know it from day one. And maybe the opposition, leader of the opposition, might want to visit one of these long-term care homes and see the reaction I get when I go in there from the PSWs and the nurses. I love them and they love us. Certain members are completely ignoring my request to come to order. As if I wasn't here, I wasn't standing here at all, completely ignoring what I'm saying. We're going to move to warnings. The next question, the member for Sarnia Lantan. Through you, Mr. Speaker and through you to the Premier. Premier, I'm once again honored to rise in the legislature to speak to you about an important topic to my constituents and all Ontarians. In fact, the future of Line 5. The impact of Line 5 shutdown would be truly devastating, not only for Ontario, but for Michigan, Ohio, and Illinois, as well as Quebec. A Line 5 shutdown puts at least 15% of Northwest Ohio's fuel supply at risk, as well as more than half of the fuel, jet fuel supplies for the Detroit Metro Airport. Line 5 supplies 65% of the propane demand in Michigan's upper peninsula, and 55% of Michigan's statewide propane needs. The light crew, transported by Line 5, feeds refiners in the upper west, Midwest and eastern Canada. Speaker, can the Premier please share with my constituents and the House the importance of the Ontario-Michigan partnership and the need to continue to work together on Line 5 and energy infrastructure projects on both sides of this board? Thank you. The Premier. I want to thank a great member from Sarnia Lantan for continuing to fight on Line 5 issue. I first want to take the opportunity to highlight the positive aspects regarding our relationship with Michigan economically and the energy sector as well. Michigan is Ontario's largest export market in the U.S. and the largest source of imports, Mr. Speaker. It is Ontario's largest two-way trading partner in the U.S. with $82.3 billion in total two-way trade. Close to 600,000 jobs in Michigan depend on trade and investment with Canada. Michigan continues to be a major importer of Ontario electricity, Mr. Speaker. These are big numbers here. In 2020, close to half of Ontario's energy exports were sent to Michigan. That's 9,835 gigawatts compared to what we received off them, only 26 gigawatts. So that's good that we're exporting our energy down there. But Mr. Speaker, just one question. Thank you. Supplementary question. Thank you. Well thank you, Speaker, and my supplementary question is back to the Premier as well. Premier, as we have discussed, Enbridge Line 5 crossing at the Mackinac Straits, which is a line which has been in service about leaking since 1953. That is a track record of success and responsibility by everyone involved. For more than 65 years, Line 5 has delivered light oil and natural gas liquids that heat homes and businesses, fuel vehicles, and power industry in the Great Lake States. In May of 2016, during the Obama administration, the United States Pipeline and Hazardous Material Administration, the federal regulator in charge of pipeline safety commissioned an extensive safety review that found no serious problems with this operation. In June of 2020, a follow-up report concluded that a reported displaced anchor had placed no threat to the pipeline. If people know about these enhanced measures, would anyone favor a total cessation of Line 5 activities as opposed to, say, fortifying and potential weak points to further reduce the risk of leak? Speaker, can the Premier please share what impact the decision of closing Line 5 would have on the working people in my right and in the Great Lake States and Quebec and Ontario? I'd like to thank the member. The member is 100% right, Mr. Speaker, about the negative impacts and this decision will have on the working people of Ontario and Michigan. James Williamson, a steam-fitter in Sarnia, said the pipeline's potential closure could impact workplaces like his. It would essentially shut down not only his work, but all the reciprocal jobs around the region. And he also mentioned three of his brothers also work in the petrochemical industry and would be out of jobs on Line 5 if it's shut down, Mr. Speaker. It would require us to travel and move our families, lift their families up and move them out of the region to maintain income. Do you know what's amazing, Mr. Speaker? Never in the history of this province has the pendulum ever swung so far. We now are the representatives of the hard-working private sector unions. And thanks to the Minister of Labor, the relationship he's built up with the steel workers, the steam fitters, the drywallers, the... Thank you. Thank you very much. The next question, the number for Thunder Bay out of paper. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And my question is for the Premier. There are multiple serious outbreaks in Thunder Bay schools for so far and are now shifting back to virtual learning. Lakehead board trustees are voted to ask for all schools to go virtual. Teachers, education workers and many others have done everything they can, but the situation is getting worse by the day. Unfortunately, our warnings and suggestions have been ignored. Things like capping class size and more testing. When is this government going to start listening so we can keep Thunder Bay students safe and in school? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. There is a high rate of community transmission taking place within the community. We're going to follow the public health advice, the medical officer of health, the recommendation when it comes to keeping schools open. That is the mission of the government. But as we have said since before school reopened in September, I think what is a consensus I'd hope in this house, the risk within our community are reflected within our schools. It actually underscores the imperative keeping transmission down and keeping our guard up as a province as we deal with variants of concern. In the context of Thunder Bay, we have deployed additional investment over five million dollars for that board alone in the context of COVID from our hiring, from our staffing, from our cleaning. We've also mandated masking down to grade one requiring a stricter protocol before a child enters the school and likewise the staff in the context of their screening. And obviously asymptomatic testing is expanded and accessible within schools right across the north, including in Thunder Bay as we speak. We'll continue to be informed by the best medical advice to keep students safe, our staff safe, and keep the community rates down so we can keep our schools open. Supplementary question. Thank you, Speaker. And my question is again for the Premier. I'm glad you mentioned the minister mentioned about community spread because Thunder Bay advised this government a month ago that there is a state of emergency when it comes to COVID. But this government's lack of investment continues even to this day. This ignoring of the urgency in Thunder Bay affects all of Northern Ontario. When the Thunder Bay jail had an outbreak, there was very late response. This government failed. I have advised this government again and again about the limited capacity of our healthcare systems to handle this kind of crisis. Now, as my caucus colleague, the member from Kuwait, says the COVID outbreak in Thunder Bay is threatening the people of Nisqandiga who are battling crisis after crisis. What is this government doing for the people of Thunder Bay? This is an emergency. Why are we dragging our feet? Thank you very much, Speaker. And I can certainly assure the member opposite that we are watching the situation in Thunder Bay very carefully. We are aware that there is a significant community transmission. We have put extra resources there. In fact, we've put over 20 more assigned provincial case managers and contact tracers. We are receiving the tests in accurate time frames, 97% of cases. We received the reports back within 24 hours. We have already invested over $2.7 million to the Thunder Bay Hospital to create 30 more beds. And we are watching the situation very carefully now. As a matter of fact, I spoke with Dr. Williams about it yesterday, who is in regular contact with Dr. Mill, the local public health manager. And that is something where we are receiving recommendations from Dr. Williams tomorrow upon receipt of data tonight to determine where it wants to be placed and whether the emergency break needs to be applied there or what else should happen. So we are watching the situation very, very carefully and supplying extra resources to help Thunder Bay deal with the situation. Thank you. The next question, Member for York Center. Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Premier. For a year, the government is saying that it is listening to the experts. It isn't. Speaking to practicing doctors off the record, the majority will tell you that broad lockdowns are a medical insanity. Focus protection is what's needed. Instead, the government is listening to public health, career politicians, public health doctors driven by ideology, bureaucrats, many of whom have not seen a life patient in decades, pretending that they're fully understand the predicament we're in, the same people that try to prevent the consumption of sugary drinks now with unlimited power, believing that they can reorder humankind, ruining millions of lives without impunity, with deadly implication. My question to the Premier, by now the Premier cannot deny that the lockdowns are deadly.  He knows it. Everyone in this house know it. So if it isn't about politics, if health and safety of Ontarians are his first priority, and since we now know that lockdowns are deadly, then why are we still in lockdown? The response, the government house leader. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I think the question really speaks for itself. We'll continue to listen to the advice of the medical officer of the province of Ontario. Those of the medical's officers of health and the 34 public health units across the province, we actually, unlike the member opposite, value their opinion. We value the hard work of our medical professionals, be it the nurses, PSWs, our doctors. They've done a great job, Mr. Speaker, and we'll continue to follow their advice. The government house leader is talking about public health experts, but how about privately, or in open letters in the post in May, or in the start in early June, or in the globe in July, and then in the sun in November? Dozens of practicing doctors wrote to the Premier publicly begging for a balanced approach. How does the Premier not hear the suffering of millions of people? Why is he tone deaf, especially now, that every day Ontarians are no longer afraid to speak? No longer afraid of the politically correct mob to say that the lockdown is deadly? Can the Premier hear the millions of Ontarians pleading for some sort of normalcy? Pleading to let their kids be kids again? Pleading that he lets them work again? Now that we can all admit how deadly the lockdown is, why isn't he listening? Why is he continuing to imprison us? And is it because of politics? Is it because ending the lockdown now would amount to a devastating admission that everything he knowingly did since the summer was a deadly mistake? Government House Leader. Thank you very much. Mr. Speaker, this is a member of the opposition who voted in favor of every single initiative that this government brought in with respect to battling the COVID pandemic in March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, and December. He and the opposition supported every single one of those measures. Unlike the member opposite, we value the work of our health care professionals. We'll be continued to be guided by them. That is why we have results that we have in the province of Ontario, and we are not going to let up fighting COVID-19 and keeping the people of the province of Ontario safe. Thank you. Thank you. The next question, the member for Sarnia Lamptons. Well, thank you, Speaker, and to you and to Associate Minister Walker. Mr. Speaker, I know that our government is working around the clock to help our economy recover from the unprecedented impacts of COVID-19, and as public health units across this province transition back to COVID-19 response framework, more Ontarians are going back to work. Unfortunately, tens of thousands of workers in my writings and across this province face uncertainty because of a decision made by the Governor of Michigan to threaten to shut down Enbridge's Line 5 pipeline. Can the Associate Minister of Energy please tell this House what this government is doing to defend these energy jobs in my right and across this province? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the member, hardworking member, from Sarnia Lamptons for that important question and his leadership on this critical file. Last week, our government heard from concerned stakeholders in the Sarnia Lamptons area during a roundtable discussion about the potential impacts of the Line 5 closure. Mr. Speaker, one of them, Ross Tyas from Local 663 of the Plumbers, Pipe Fitters and Welders Union told us, and I quote, the lifestyle of local 663 members would be drastically changed. On average, this industry and its construction partners put $300 to $500 million per year into the local economy. With Nova Chemical's $2 billion investment here, Line 5 is critical to keeping the Sarnia Lamptons community going. Mr. Speaker, as the hardworking member of the Sarnia Lamptons said, 30,000 interns and their families depend on the continued safe operation of this pipeline. I'm proud that our government, under Premier Ford's leadership, is fighting them every step of the way. Mr. Speaker, and thank you to the minister for that answer. I appreciate the minister's efforts and this government to support the hardworking people of my community. Mr. Speaker, Line 5 is absolutely critical to our local economy and also critical to the energy security of our province and this country. Preventing this shutdown between it requires a Team Canada and in fact a Team North America approach. I'm grateful that the Premier Ministers have been working with the federal government and with their neighbors across the border to resolve this issue. Could the minister further expand and tell us how important it is for us to be in this together? Thank you again for the question from the great member from Sarnia, Mr. Bob Bailey. Mr. Speaker, the member from Sarnia is absolutely right. For our government, the Line 5 issue is above politics. It's all about people. If the governor's decision to shut down Line 5 stands it's not just the people of Sarnia-Lampton that will feel the impact. People in businesses across Ontario, Quebec and Alberta and Michigan itself, Mr. Speaker, will suffer. That is why we all need to be working together. I hope that the official opposition will join us in expressing their support for the many unionized jobs and the non-unionized jobs that will be lost as a result of this decision. I encourage them to join us in speaking up for those workers in tomorrow's take note in today's take note debate but regardless I want to assure the member that even if they don't we will continue to do so on this side of the house. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'll remind members to refer to each other by their writing name or their ministerial title. The next question, the member for University Rowsdale. My question is to the Premier. Agnes von Maren lives at 103 Avenue Road in a building owned by corporate landlord, Holly Brun. In the last five years tenants at 103 Avenue have had to pay for two above guideline rent increases and now this corporate landlord has applied for another 11.3 percent increase largely for cosmetic renovations that not one renter asked for. Many low-income tenants live in this building including seniors who are on fixed income. They fear they'll be forced out of their homes and will have to struggle to find another affordable place to live in the most expensive city in Canada in the middle of a pandemic. The tenants at 103 Avenue Road want to know what is this government's plan to stop unfair rent hikes in the middle of a pandemic. The parliamentary system. Members from Wilson. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the member opposite for that question, Mr. Speaker. Since the very beginning of COVID-19 our government has called on landlords and tenants to come together and be reasonable with each other and landlords and tenants across the province have shown the interior is prepared by doing just that. In this that spirit, Mr. Speaker, our government is stabilizing rents for Ontario's 1.7 million rental households so the vast majority of families wouldn't see a rent increase this year. We thank the many landlords and tenants who have been cooperating through this challenging times, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. And the supplementary question. Back to the Premier. Today's report from Renovictions TO found that above guideline increase applications have gone up 250% in the last six years and over 84% of these applications are made by corporate landlords intent on maximizing their profit. Many renters across Ontario are already having a very hard time paying rent because they've lost their job through no fault of their own during COVID-19. Continuing to allow massive rent increases in a pandemic will result in economic evictions. It will force people to crash with friends, to look for another home or even risk homelessness. This will increase the spread of COVID-19 and it will lead to more preventable deaths. When will this government start helping struggling renters instead of corporate landlords intent on making profit in the middle of a pandemic? The Member for Milton. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. From the onset of COVID-19 our government has introduced a number of measures to protect and support tenants and any suggestion otherwise Mr. Speaker is completely false. Last summer we passed the Protecting Tenants and Strengthening Community Housing Act which mandates the Landlord and Tenant Board LTB to consider whether a landlord attempted to negotiate a repayment agreement with tenants before resorting to an eviction for non-payment of rent during COVID-19. This measure promotes repayment agreement over evictions for non-payment of rent and aims to maintain tenancies. Last October we introduced a rent freeze so the vast majority of Ontario's 1.7 million tenants will not see a rent increase in 2021. This is in effect from January to December of this year Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Thank you. The next question member for Ottawa Ben. Thank you Mr. Speaker my question in French for the minute. My question to the Minister of Education. Last June the Supreme Court of Canada said that the right to education in French is protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights. However there is a lack of French speaking teachers and teachers are not being taught in French even though it is their right. The situation is an emergency in the middle of this pandemic. The context is difficult but now we are in a crisis. In September the government said that they would increase a number of French speaking teachers in the province. So my question is could we get an update on what has been done and how it helped with the approach of French speaking teachers. The question member opposite appreciating that the challenge of French language educators has been has been with the province for well over a decade but this government has resolved to fix it. That's why we through the negotiations with the teacher unions and AFO the French teacher union we agreed to create a working group of boards of union the Ministry of Education that group has concluded their work. I've just received the report which provides a series of recommendations on how we can strengthen the hiring both from the retention of French language educators in the province of Ontario and the recruitment of them both internationally and domestically through the college of through various colleges of education in the province of Ontario. We know this is an issue it's a multi-pronged approach working in collaboration with the Minister of Francophone Affairs as well as the Minister of Colleges and Universities to incent more individuals to teach within our schools. We're very proud when it comes to the funding of French language education is the highest levels ever recorded in the history under this government and that will continue under Premier Doug Ford. Supplementary question. The French language councils will need hundreds of additional teachers and the School Districts Association have raised flags here. We need we have a good history of French education but we need enough teachers. There is a growth an impressive growth in the number of people who want to learn in French. It's about 110,000 students and their families who risk their French language education if the government doesn't act. The working group mentioned by the minister has tabled its recommendations to answer to the call of for French language education is the government going to fund the putting in place of those recommendations. Thank you speaker. We will keep our work with our French partners to continue to support French language education. The member is right. We do see growth. 2021 estimates 1.6% enrollment growth for French language education which I think underscores the value proposition that French language education is often to the province. They've really been ahead of the curve when it comes to digital pedagogy, online learning and quality education. So we're proud of that. It's why this government increased investments in French language education by 4%. The largest increase noted to date in the province. It's also why we convene the working group. And I assure the member who I know in good faith is very committed and very concerned about the matter that we will be able to hire more French language educators working with their international partners. The parliamentary assistant I've met with a variety of customers internationally to understand how we can create a pipeline of recruitment to fix this problem once and for all and ensure French language students have access to quality teachers in Ontario. The next question the member for Sarnia Lampton Thank you. It's a three P. It's a three quarter. Well thank you Speaker and thank you for acknowledging me. And this question is to the Minister Associate Minister of Energy. Last week several U.S. states were forced to declare states of emergency in the midst of this winter's cold snap. For example the governor of Michigan declared a state of emergency on February 22nd citing get this a propane shortage. Similar propane shortages in 2014 resulted in widespread price gouging and safety concerns both in this province and in Michigan. But the governor's decision to shut down line five pipeline can only make things worse. Many Ontarians in rural areas rely on propane to heat their homes in the winter dry their crops in the summer. Can the Associate Minister please assure this House that ensuring energy security for this province and Michigan is the top of mind for our government. Associate Minister of Energy. Thank you very much Mr. Speaker and I want to thank the member for Sarnia Lampen a.k.a. PMB Bob for the question and his great leadership on this very critical important file. Members may not know that line five supplies all of this feedstock to the Plains midstream facility in Sarnia. Shutting down line five would shut down that critical facility as well as the Plains facilities in Michigan leading to price hikes and massive propane and butane shortages on both sides of the border. We want to avoid this potential crisis and this is one of the key reasons that our government has been so focused on this issue. We continue to meet with industry stakeholders union leaders representatives from the state of Michigan and others to advocate for the continued safe operation of Andbridge's line five pipeline. I can assure the member from Sarnia Lampen that protecting our energy security is top of mind and that we will never stop fighting for the hardworking people of Ontario. Thank you speaker. Not your question. Well thank you speaker and thank you to the associate minister for that. Mr. Speaker the minister mentioned that the closure of line five would leave the supply issues that would result in every day Ontarians paying more for home heating oil more for gas in their cars and more at the grocery store for groceries delivered by truck. Can the associate minister please tell us more about the specific ways in which a line five closure would negatively impact affordability for Ontarians. Thank you. Again the associate Mr. Brangie replied. Thank you again to the hardworking member and without a shout of a doubt I can assure him that we will do everything in our power. Propane is the only one of the products produced in Sarnia's refineries that insurance use every single day. Line five provides raw fuel to Sarnia's refineries that produce gasoline diesel jet fuel plastics and chemicals. In fact line five delivers 53% of Ontario's crude oil supply and 2 thirds of Quebec's oil supply. When Ontario businesses are forced to absorb increased costs for products like gasoline these costs are passed on to the consumer. Mr. Speaker this is unacceptable. Hundreds of thousands of families are already dealing with the negative economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The closure of line five would deepen these negative economic impacts and would be felt in every corner of the province and frankly across our great country. Mr. Speaker our government will continue to fight for our energy workers and material families by defending the continued safe operation of the line five pipeline. Thank you Speaker. The next question the member for Scarborough Southwest. Thank you Speaker. Mr. Speaker doctors have called Scarborough ground zero for COVID-19. Scarborough is home to many frontline essential workers many of whom are low income racialized and facing increased risk of COVID due to the nature of their work. Constituents are writing to us every day worried about the government's slow and confusing vaccine rollout. Mr. Speaker despite the despite the fact that doctors have the ability in Scarborough to administer thousands of vaccines per day but due to the lack of supplies they're not able to. Why has this government not allocated an equitable amount of vaccines to the heart heat regions like Scarborough. Thank you Speaker. Minister of Health. Well thank you very much Speaker and as the member opposite knows very well there have been limitations in the supplies of both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines over the last several weeks that have in fact slowed down somewhat our vaccination efforts but we're ready to go as soon as we receive them we're ready to go in terms of mass vaccination clinics clinics that local health care practitioners can have in their offices in pharmacies in every every possible way forward but we need that supply of vaccines. We expect the supplies are going to increase significantly within the next few weeks and we will then be able to proceed but we are allocating vaccines according to populations across the province. Each area is receiving their equitable volume of supply but we are putting extra resources into some communities to allow for greater response to allow for greater response and so we hope that very well within the next few weeks we will be able to ramp up quite rapidly our vaccination efforts to do 40 you. Thank you. The supplementary question. Speaker with all the respect a number of our vaccines were stuck in the freezers for weeks and weeks and a number of the allocated ones that were given to Scarborough were actually sent off away from Scarborough to other regions that were not hit the same way as Scarborough was. Scarborough has experienced record high positivity rates throughout this crisis recently almost half of the province's ICU cases were in our community but despite the fact that Scarborough is still COVID hotspot and despite the fact that families and workers in our region continue to be at bigger risk of the third wave yesterday's announcement about the vaccine rollout was and not was a confirmed was is a confirmation of our worst fears really the province still doesn't have a plan to keep our communities and our families safe. Mr. Speaker my question to the Premier is will the Premier commit to an equitable vaccination strategy that takes into account hard hit communities and regions like ours in Scarborough. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And just I think it is important to stick to the facts and the facts are Speaker that there has been no vaccines are sitting in freezers anywhere they are being put into people's arms as quickly as possible and in fact we have had over 620,000 vaccines administered to date not withstanding the supply issues that we're having so we have made sure that every part of the province is receiving an equitable amount based upon their populations and as part of the vaccine task force I can assure the member opposite that there is a bioethics table that has been reviewed that has gone through the framework that is making sure that it is fair and equitable to every community within Ontario and I can also indicate that we have already set up launched and implemented our high priority community strategy which is providing 12.5 million dollars to lead local agencies to work in partnership with Ontario public health units and all of the other supply providers thank you thank you very much the next question member for Don Valley East thank you very much Mr. Speaker my question is to the minister responsible for children Speaker Ontarians are so disappointed in this government's handling of autism services for children but this disappointment was brought to a all-time low a few weeks ago when the minister announced a new plan families were completely shocked speaker to find out that under the minister's new plan people assessing the needs and services of children with autism would would be someone with literally one day of training previously this was completed by a psychologist or a behavioral analysis with years of training and education speaker through you to the minister how does the minister believe that someone with one day of training is qualified to assess the complex needs and services of children with autism minister for children community and social services thanks very much and it's great to get a question on the autism program and I'm really really pleased to stand here today and talk about the progress that we're making on the new needs-based program here in Ontario in just a week or so we'll be bringing 600 children into the new needs-based program Mr. Speaker and we'll be using all of the tools that have been designed by our expert panel we had a folks who worked over the summer of 2019 on the autism advisory panel bringing forward recommendations over 100 recommendations in that very substantial document Mr. Speaker one of the recommendations was that we have an implementation working group which is made up of clinical experts and those who are research experts as well as well as those with lived experience Mr. Speaker so for the first time in the province's history we've actually gone to the community to design a program for the autism community I'm really proud of the recommendations that have been brought forward Mr. Speaker we're following all of those recommendations including the care coordinator that the member opposite is speaking about and I look forward to answering more and the supplementary question Mr. Speaker I don't know if if you notice Mr. Speaker but the member didn't answer the question it was a very simple question but this minister like his predecessor continued to make promises and these promises are not kept perhaps the minister is too distracted for ways to looking to make cuts to social services during a pandemic I'm not sure but Mr. Speaker when it comes to autism services this government has let families down every step of the way they promised to eliminate the waitlist they doubled it they promised to fund the program to 660 million they didn't reach that target and the minister said that by April of last year not this year last year he would actually have a needs-based program so he made reference to 600 kids getting services Speaker there are literally one percent in that program one percent of the kids on the waitlist are actually going to get service through his new plan so can the minister please tell me why can't he take this this file seriously and put in place a program to help children in this province because we're missing an entire generation because of his lack of effort question the minister of children and the social services Mr. Speaker when this minister or this member was the minister on this file less than a third of the children in the province of Ontario we're receiving any support from the province of Ontario Mr. Speaker we have doubled the amount of funding in the Ontario autism program from 300 million Order member for Don Valley East come to order the member for Northumberland Peterborough South come to order the minister of children community social services respond thank you Mr. Speaker for the first time in the provinces history Mr. Speaker every child that is registered with the Ontario autism program is receiving funding from that program Mr. Speaker that's something to be celebrated when this member was the minister on this file less than a third of the children were receiving support we brought in all kinds of different programs Mr. Speaker family foundational services are now available to every family in the province as soon as they get their diagnosis Mr. Speaker we're creating an urgent response crisis program Mr. Speaker that will be there for families when they find themselves in crisis this is going to be the gold standard Rotkin thank you the premier my community of York southwestern is very disturbed by the news that a new slaughterhouse is opening up in this talk yard district our office has inderted with emails and calls objecting to this facility the previous slaughterhouse was closed and had it is licensed revoked to many health and environmental violations and environmental compliance approval was granted to the farmer owners despite nearly 100 complaints in public consultations in 2018 how did this new facility get approved and why was the community not consulted the government house leader thank you very much Mr. Speaker well i'm not specifically aware of the the file the member is talking about I can say that obviously agriculture is an incredibly important part of of the economy in the province of Ontario there are tremendous amount of farmers including those in my writing quite frankly that are responsible for hundreds of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars worth of economic activity and we will continue to support them obviously the Canada Food Inspection Agency has a big role to play when it comes to slaughterhouses and the regulation of those and the inspections of those Mr. Speaker but look this is a very important industry that is important to to the economy and it's obviously important to to all Ontarians and I would hope the member would would welcome the jobs in his community and we will make sure of course working with the Canada Food Inspection Agency that it remains a safe place to the business thank you member if you'd like to ask a question supplementary thank you Mr. Speaker the community is not against jobs they want to be consulted and the rules are followed in 2019 this government announced it would no longer be enforcing environmental standards related to noise and order from facilities like this new slaughterhouse and downloaded those responsibilities to municipalities when is this government going to lead by taking action to ensure a new environmental employer compliance approval takes place before the new facility opens in March and why are they downloading noise and environmental order complaints to municipalities government house leader thank you very much Mr. Speaker look Mr. Speaker the food processing is an extraordinarily important to activity our farmers do a tremendous a tremendous job in helping to ensure that we all have food on our table we work very closely with the Canada Food Inspection Agency to make sure that these types of facilities are monitored and work in the in a safe humane way this is a is an opportunity to bring hundreds of jobs to a community that I know this gentleman works this member works very hard for and advocates for he's had brought a number of bills before this house to advocate for his community here's an opportunity to bring more jobs into this community to expose the community to the good work of our of our hardworking farmers I hope he would encourage this type of job creation in his riding I'm always excited when we hear of new opportunities in communities and I like to celebrate the hard work of our farmers and I hope he would do the same thing the next question the member for Scarborough Guildwood thank you speaker this question is for the premier last week the FAO released its latest report on Ontario's labour market Ontario lost three hundred and fifty five thousand three hundred jobs in 2020 the largest decline on record youth unemployment dropped to its lowest level in 20 years while their sort of youth employment dropped to its lowest level in 20 years while their unemployment rate skyrocketed to 22 percent the highest on record statistics Canada's labour force survey to no surprise shows that the most impacted groups are black indigenous and people of colour women and youth the K recovery in Ontario is a direct result of this government's inaction as each month goes by in this pandemic all of Ontario's youth can expect that they are further and further behind in this economic recession with no relief in sight a poor economic strength is our people speaker my question is in the budget coming up will this government reverse its cuts to OSAP for post-secondary education and free tuition thank you to respond the minister of labour training and skills development thank you very much and I know the parliamentary assistant to colleges and university will want to speak to this as well but Mr Speaker one of the things that we can all be proud of in Ontario is the government's commitment to getting young people into the skilled trades Mr Speaker there are literally hundreds of thousands of opportunities over the next 10 years for people in the skilled trades I'm really proud of our government's historic investments into pre-apprenticeship programs to the member that asked this question a pre-apprenticeship program gives an opportunity to young people to try the trades for a period of 12 weeks to get a work placement and Mr Speaker I'm really excited to share with this house that on Sunday night I had a great call from a young lady in Toronto Natisha in her words Mr Speaker she was on month she was a single mum she got an opportunity to join the trades she is now an iron worker and Mr Speaker she is earning 44 dollars and 8 cents an hour and she has pension and benefits we didn't hear an answer because this government is not prioritizing the needs of youth last week's FAO report highlighted another troubling trend when it comes to women in this province women experienced a 5.8 percent job loss compared to men at 3.9 percent the she session continues to deepen with a large amount of job losses for women happening in the cultural and recreational sectors all the service sectors Speaker are hardest hit by this pandemic and these jobs are not coming back soon if this government does not start to value the work women are doing in the workforce in Ontario we will see more women drop out of the job market all together we need to start to value women and the contribution that they make the care economy which includes health care elder care are more importantly staffed by women and require more supports like early learning and child care Speaker will this government tell us where on the list of priorities is the investment going to be made in this budget into the care economy so that women can have equal economic opportunity and can recover fully from thank you minister of labor Mr. Speaker thank you to the member opposite for this very important question Mr. Speaker our government every day is working to spread hope and opportunity across the province more widely and fairly we know that good meaningful jobs change lives they strengthen families and all of our communities Mr. Speaker I'm proud of our redesigned second career program that we launched back late last year $77 million investment to really focus on those that have been impacted by the pandemic Mr. Speaker you know I have many young people many women come up to me and they say that in Ontario because of previous governments neglecting the apprenticeship system they'll say to me you know Monty I know to become a teacher I know to become a lawyer but I have no idea how to get it into the trades and Mr. Speaker it's up to all of us to tell the young people the opportunities available in the skilled trades there's 144 to choose from and our government is investing records amounts of money to get quite a conversation going down down into the chamber and I'd ask you to wait a few minutes and maybe take it outside the next question start the clock member for Niagara Falls thank you Mr. Speaker my question is to the Premier Niagara has the third oldest population by average in the entire country and our seniors are at greater risk of getting COVID-19 given the over 200 outbreaks and more than 360 deaths we've had across the region Niagara is a high-risk zone it makes sense that we'd be given our fair share of all available COVID vaccines yet in early January we found out that 5,500 doses of life-saving Moderna vaccine promised to public health was sent elsewhere at the expense of health care workers and seniors Mr. Speaker my question is the same question that our doctors public health Niagara health health care workers and the residents are asking this Premier where were our vaccines sent and why were they diverted and will he immediately send Niagara its fair share of both vaccines Government health leader sorry Mr. Speaker the member will know that that actually is not the case as the Minister of Health highlighted the other day all regions are getting their fair share of vaccines there was a obviously in our in our vaccination plan we highlighted or focused on congregate care settings long-term care homes retirement homes and we were making sure that the vaccines were in place to cover all of those people on that in those settings including health care workers Mr. Speaker there was a switch between Moderna vaccine and Pfizer vaccines but at no time was that was Hamilton or was Niagara a short change of any vaccines Mr. Speaker and I I completely reject what the member is saying it is a dangerous thing for the member to be saying we should be all working together to make sure that we all get vaccines and and respond help in defeat COVID-19 not spreading false allegations Mr. Speaker member to withdraw supplementary question thank you Mr. Speaker and it is absolutely accurate yesterday in this house the Minister of Health said when referring to COVID-19 vaccines I can assure the member opposite that Niagara did receive its fair share Niagara doctors disagree and a letter to the Premier asked for our and I quote fair share of vaccines is the Minister saying our health care workers aren't being honest the doctors also said our teams are burnt out people are worried for their loved one they need hope and hope was the vaccine that offered it doesn't make sense that life-saving doses of vaccines were diverted from the Niagara region in one month a hundreds of seniors died in Niagara and there is a death every 3.5 hours over a seven day period because we didn't get our vaccines when will this government be open and transparent with the people of Niagara and let them know where the much needed vaccines were diverted to and it is accurate Mr. Speaker I think today we've we've seen the the opposition reach really a new level what we're seeing is opposition members pitting region against region when it comes to the the fight against COVID-19 we've heard it from we've heard it from the Liberal Minister we're now we're hearing from this member no region was short changed Mr. Speaker the vaccines that they were doing you've heard the Minister of Health say that it was based on population but it was also based Mr. Speaker on what we were doing with respect to order initial vaccinations in congregate care settings long-term care homes is what we were focusing on retirement homes is what we were focusing on health care workers is what we were focusing on the very same people who references for Niagara Falls come door the very first people that we were focusing on with respect to the vaccinations Mr. Speaker we will continue to work on behalf of all of the people of the province of Ontario member for Don Valley he's come door order minister children children social services services come door order concludes our question period order government house leader will come door the member for Windsor West will come door member for Niagara Falls will come door okay member for Niagara Falls has warned government house leader has warned we have a deferred vote on the motion for second reading of bill 238 an act to amend the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act 1997 the bells will ring for 30 minutes during which time members may cast their votes I'll ask the clerks to prepare the lobbies


Hello, I'm here with Eric Montero with Sunlife at the Collision Conference. Eric, you just got off the stage and you spoke to a group about transformation and how Sunlife has been transforming. Transformation is a challenge for many organizations and it's one that you readily took on in the insurance industry. Can you talk a little bit about what you were trying to achieve with your transformation? Yeah, for sure, thank you. It's also a challenge for us, by the way, but we're working through it. We're really trying to achieve three main objectives. The first one is to really digitize a lot of our existing processes. Actually, I should start with where we're trying to achieve is our purpose, which is to help clients achieve life and financial security and live healthier lives. And we realize we needed a digital transformation to get there. So within that, there are three main objectives. The first one is this idea of digitizing existing processes. As a 150-year-old company, we have lots of them and many of them aren't what they should be. They aren't what clients expect them to be. So really chipping away at every one of them and digitizing those moments is the first one. The second one is to be much more personalized and proactive with clients. So we realize clients appreciate and value that we know them and react as if we know them and understand what they're going through. And the third one is to find new business models. It's an industry that's going through a lot of change as all fintech. And we realize we needed to have some of those new business models in place. Yes. I'm sure that there were some challenges through that whole process.  So can you share a little bit about the lessons learned and some of the challenges that you saw going through the transformation? For sure. I'll start with the challenges and I'll talk a little bit about lessons learned because really that's part of the solution to the challenges. The first one is we have a lot of legacy. We have legacy on our platforms. We have legacy on our systems. We have legacy on our processes. We have legacy on our talent. And overcoming some of that has been a challenge throughout and one that we're still working through. The second big challenge is prioritization and funding. It's not like most industries that has lots of resources laying around and so to really drive a digital transformation you have to prioritize resources from other parts of the business and kind of getting through that. In fact we believe that one of the things that we've done well is actually be able to reallocate resources. Now some of the lessons learned I'd say that help us get there. The first one and honestly the most important one is start with a client. Transforming for the sake of transforming just isn't going to get us the outcomes we expect and we would have ran out of steam in the digital transformation. If you start with a client and particularly in our case our purpose with clients you really energize the organization. It's much easier to prioritize those particular initiatives because they go straight at the heart of what we're here to do with our clients and for our clients. The second one is to work much closer with the IT organization. So the reality is IT needs to be a part of the solution otherwise they're going to be a part of the problem. And given our legacy platforms infrastructure systems they need to be a part of the solution. And we've developed I think what I'd say is a very good partnership between the business and IT. In fact in many of those initiatives you can't tell who's who. The shift to Agile, the shift to a much more digital approach to running some of those initiatives. You get into an Agile room and I do a lot and you go to a scrum to see what's going on. You can't quite tell who's on the business, who's on IT and that's perfect. And I say the third lesson learned is a lot of testing learned. We can't and we try to basically define a roadmap for five years out and say what is it going to look like and try to get all the tees dotted and the eyes crossed and the eyes dotted ahead of time and you just can't. You have to test and learn. A good example of that and you were just commenting on this a little bit earlier. When we started with this insight that clients have a bigger need than just getting the claims paid on the health space. You know they have a lot of needs that happened before. We don't know that, right? And therefore we had to actually go and test and try it out. Same thing when we launched Ella. We didn't really know what clients were going to feel. How is it going to feel to them to have a digital coach? Tell them what they should be doing. And so instead of actually going off and doing a five-year rule and mafriela and deploying all that, we said, let's just launch it. Let's launch a minimal what we can now call a minimal lovable product. That's right. So let's just define and launch a minimal lovable product and then learn from it and then evolve. Excellent. Excellent. You know it's interesting you also talked about LUMINO and how that product is in the marketplace. You have a lot of partners that you're working with in that collaboration and really looking at, you looked at where you played but recognized from a customer perspective you needed to go back in terms of what clients really needed before the actual reimbursement process to be able to really understand how they were making their decisions and recognizing that they needed help in that regard. Can you talk a little bit about that? Of course. And you're absolutely right. And this is a great example of what I say start with a client. That's what I mean. We call them clients not customers. Because client is a vision of client for life whereas customer tends to be a more transactional thing for us. So we're starting with a client. It's a distinction by the way. Yeah, because we want them to be clients for life. And for us, it started with a client meant we actually talked to a lot of clients. We had a lot of design thinking work where it wasn't just research and surveys, but we actually sat down with clients and talked to them not only what do they do but what are they feeling? What are they going through? How do they make decisions? And it became very clear to us that getting paid for the claim is important but they had lots of angst and confusion and questions when they were trying to decide what should they do. If they have call it a diabetes problem or a wealth management problem or a mental health issue, they're very confused about what to do. And once they figured out how to get help then deciding where do I go, which provider, which one is better, which one is worse, what can I afford, what can't I afford and then we helped them with that and so on and so forth. So we realized that we could play a much bigger role for them if we started much earlier in the journey. But again, it came straight from clients. Excellent, excellent. So I want to thank you Eric for taking the time and thanking Sun Long to be able to better enable clients moving forward. Thank you for the time. Thank you. Perfect.


cooperation. I mean there are different levels of strategic leads and different like perspectives toward final stages of tri-lateral cooperation and many different like issues we have to tackle now. And policy makers and also should have been more skillful at pursuing the tri-lateral cooperation efforts and also when they got a sale that issue to particularly political leaders. So for example like when the US and Japan announced their revised defense guidelines the policy makers in three countries US Korea Japan they spoke out one voice that Japan will seek an agreement as to when it will exercise its military within South Korean territory. To me I don't understand why they were focused on sovereign matter which should not be infringed. I know some of the South Korean policy makers they are they were trying to calm down some public concerns whether it was wrong although it was wrong. But if that is the reason for South Korean policy makers to take that action that reflects like there are more serious problem with South Korean policy makers views to deal with the tri-lateral issues. That's very interesting. I don't know Mr. Kim you are a businessman but do you are Japanese? Well when we do have a lot of problems in the businesses sometimes externally but also internally when we need more coordination cooperation among different business units and different functions and one of the practical solutions that we use really not joking is to bring everybody in one room and lock them up and have them talk to each other all the time until they find a solution and that really works and I don't think I can or anybody can bring Korean Japanese and US officials into one room and lock them up but if we can create more conversation discussions at the working level that would definitely do some good work to tri-lateral cooperation and also I think I agree with Professor easily which is that leadership should do no harm to they kind of cooperate the spirit at the working level. As I mentioned when we try to create partnership what is really important is of course self-interest is important but shared interest is also important but shared value compared to shared interest is very very important but between these three countries I see shared values at the end of the day and trust maybe achievable and if that is case then the working level people if they're given the opportunity to talk to each other and work out a solution to any problems or challenges I am pretty confident that they can work out a solution but the leadership should do no harm to that kind of cooperative spirit. That's right so with the political signal Abe and the President Park I call IC Queen and then the very strange emotional nationalist to get together and saying that we overcome the past that signal and they get together. I had actually experience in 1997 working for the Curt Campbell Assistant Secretary of Inside Pentagon. We had a T-Cog meeting to manage North Korean depot on a new crisis and Curt asked me we have to manage Korean and Japanese sit down together to help I said no problem. We will meet in Seoul so I said the first thing is that put them in the karaoke room with lots of whiskey. They really bonded smoke, drink and sang and the next morning the meeting was beautiful so in that sense I definitely agree with Mr. Kim. Now let me let me move a slightly away from whatever Japan, US and Korea centric question. I think the Korea has made the great contributions to global conflicts. I don't know how much you are aware of it but Iraq, Afghanistan and the oldest the East Timor and the Koreans and even in the North of the Aden. Yeah that all the its Koreans the Korean reputation of the Korean forces are really formidable and even in Africa and the contribution were great but there will be more potentially skirmishes and hot-flesh points not far away in the like Iraq and Afghanistan but maybe in East China Sea and South China Sea and it's a very sensitive area. Somebody I think in the previous panel mentioned Korea is a very Korean Peninsula centric world view. That's not our issue but in this kind of area if Korea has to play more role so-called partnership particularly let's say Korean Navy ship somehow ended up to be in the middle of the ocean where the conflict is occurring and US ships stranded and maybe somehow they have an engineering problem so in that case somehow that partnership means that you help each other because it's an ally's duty so I'm expecting more of this kind of role is requested by the US particularly. That's the actually the real partnership in terms of a conflict management so do you have any taking on this question is Korea will do well or Korea will avoid it or Korea will be in Beijing or Korea will be Gungho to help? Let's start with Mr. Kim. I think it depends really what kind of action Korea is asked to take on. Korea has its own set of diplomatic goals foreign policy goals and there are actions that Korea can easily take there are actions that Korea cannot really take not because we disagree with partnership but because the circumstances under which Korea is placed may make Korea to fill in more burdensome or complicated so for example certain action that the US might ask Japan to take on can be very difficult for Korea to take on but it doesn't mean that Korea doesn't want to share the burden or take partnership seriously so there should be I think a ongoing dialogue once again we should lock them up and figure out what Korea can really do to advance the partnership. If each party is not really sensitive to the needs and hearts of the other party then it is not a true partnership. Thank you how about Mr. Ba? Yeah I fully agree with his opinions and in following up from different perspectives I mean like the best thing is not to get involved in those like the situation we do not want but it depends on case by case. I think the the Korea is not accustomed to manage its relationship with neighboring countries or some countries might have some some strategic stake on the Korean Peninsula. Diplomatic flexibility should be maintained so that our partners even our allies can view South Korea's diplomatic stance as a valuable not a constant element so in some sense there should be nothing taken for granted from their perspective not from our perspective. So right now like the Park Geon-hae administration like a pursue so-called middle power diplomacy I mean there couldn't be many things we have to pursue to become real middle power the one of things like I can say is okay we can say yes and we can say no not depending on not looking to others before making our own decision so that's the one thing and then like some like South China Sea and East China Sea that is you within our capacity I think the Korea should be able to speak up. That's a good statement. For respecting international norms and rules not for the interest of U.S. or China or other countries. I would agree that that's probably around the expectation that that many both inside and outside of Korea have for Korea's role. Your contingencies that you were alluding to I think are probably beyond expectations of what ROK forces would do. I don't think there are many who expect ROK forces to be involved regarding the Spratlys or Taiwan contingency but but it is important that as a middle power and as a U.S. ally that South Korea has its voice its voice with its interests regarding the defense of international norms and while some Korean friends may say well the South China Sea is far away and issues over other contingencies are far away I would say that Korea's voice on international norms is incredibly important because it has interests in that international normative system and ultimately while there may be concerns about offending other relevant powers that have importance to South Korea's primary security issue vis-a-vis North Korea when you look far down the road when South Korea will need international support on unification or Korean integration I think that international norms will be incredibly important so Korea's excellent record in contributing to international norms I think will be an asset not only to its own reputation and the forthcoming cooperation of partners but also in terms of holding various actors to a high standard in in their relations and their roles on the Korean Peninsula. Okay I actually I will skip a couple of small things but I have one last question to a certain extent U.S. was a part of the division of Korean Peninsula and the the legacy still continues and we are now talking about foundation of unification I hope that at least the basic foundation is done so I can visit my parents country in Pyongyang if I die by the way I'm not that very young age so I'm hoping that things are revolving fairly rapidly but nonetheless U.S. forces provided regardless of some anti-American sentiment or some sour situation really the anchor and foundation deterring the all the threats from North Korea providing the sense of stability and security to the Korean people and role is very still critically important when the disunification process and the preparation and some of the like let's say even a positive dialogue between North and South Korea is going on there got to be some unique role of U.S. forces and the role can be either positive or negative and it's a little bit stupid question but do you see the U.S. forces role either preparation stage transformation post unification what's the positive role and what's the potential negative role I think it's indisputably positive because the U.S. forces Korea will have a stabilizing role it'll have a partnership role it could have a logistical support role certainly contributing to stability on an integrating Korean Peninsula the copy out of course is that if at the time when we come to a stage of Korean integration that could lead to unification if at that time U.S.-China relations are strained then it would certainly be a concern on the part of Seoul that China's role in that process on the Korean Peninsula would not be as positive as it could or should be and so I think that's why you see South Korea having a very keen interest not only in strengthening the alliance with the United States but establishing an understanding in Beijing including trust but also an understanding that a Korean integration process led by Seoul would be beneficial to Chinese interest and that the U.S.-Korea alliance is is going to be ready to coordinate with China on shared interest in the region excellent excellent anybody taking I can see more I can see more of the positive aspects of the alliance and USFK less of the negative aspects of the alliance and USFK if there is any negative aspects of the alliance and USFK I think that's because of like a political leader's decision not by like a USFK or the roles and missions of the alliance and also the in there is Korean saying more haste less speed so like at the listen summit there is some statement to intensify high-level some strategic consultation to create favorable favorable environment for peaceful reunification it sounds good and it's not clear to me because back in 2009 there was also a statement between President Obama and at the time then President Lee Min Park and I mean although there is chain of the government change of government in South Korea some working-level officials from both governments they do not do what they are supposed to do in following up the statement agreed by the leaders of Korea and the US that's why like what's being said at the recent statement intensify something strategic consultation it does not clear to me so I think more in South Korea but also in the Washington every administration is trying to have its own policy and particularly in South Korea like the president is trying to have some like his or her own some policy legacy on like the North Korean issues so from that perspective rather than intensify and strengthen what we are doing we have to focus on maintaining and keeping up some strategic consistency until we need North Korea excellent now the lack the room businessman watch your final word I think there's no doubt that USFK serves as a sort of tangible physical touchable guarantee of the stability in the Korean Peninsula there is no question about that at the same time like everything else especially in business there will be cost-benefit analysis and we are making that analysis every time every day every hour in the business and it cannot be in the foreign policy diplomatic area as well it cannot be just you know this absolutely positive all the time there is no such thing there will be cost-benefit analysis and as situations change we'll see different types of cost-benefit analysis and the policy makers in both countries should be able to sell this cost-benefit analysis to to the general public in a better way and in the US as you have seen there have been some comments about the need to maintain USFK in the presidential campaign and it's not going to be just one person asking that question we're going to whether or not speak loudly or just thinking in our own heads we're asking all those questions constantly and once again you know we are selling almost everything every day right I'm selling marriage to my wife every day whenever I go out of my house but unless we can do that better I think we are going to face a more serious cost-benefit excellent I think there was a very wise businessman's last word and we only have 15 minutes left I don't want to take away your pleasure to have a cocktail reception because you've been sitting in this stuffy room with such patience now I will open the floor to be very nice precisely say I'm James Brown I have one question no long statement please okay so let's open the floor ladies hand there right there yes my name is Bonnie Hiku I have one question the president Park's visit was accompanied by a huge business delegation nearly 100 businessmen having a meeting with American business people to build positive economic partnership and according to the Washington Post this delegation was formed because Korean economy was really bad and it shows us president Park's concern about the situation and my question is how especially the Samsung men how do you appraise President Park and her administration's ability to handle this frail economy and the outcome of that handling would have on international partnership and peace in that region thank you well this is you're asking me to make an assessment about President Park's domestic economic policy that is a dangerous territory that I don't want to get into I know there are two cameras right there so probably I should not make a comment about that but what I what I can tell you though is that in diplomacy everything it's not just dialogue between the two presidents it's not just dialogue between diplomats it's not just dialogue between government officials so on so forth but there are millions of other ways to build a stronger relationship and economic relationship is definitely an important aspect to it so having a larger economic delegation in the US I don't think it means that Korea is the Korean economy is in dire situation we want to get something out of the the trip right away but it I think it sends a signal to a lot of people having a economic delegation the US trying to build a stronger economic relationship sends signal to a lot of people around the world and for that purpose I think the delegation serve this purpose well and you probably know that the economic delegation coincided with what is called US Korea Business Council meeting in which both the US businessman and Korean businessman gathered together once again in a locked up room and talk about policy issues as well as business issues and that sort of stronger ties among business sectors really serves as a linchpin to building a stronger US-Korea relationship that's the reason why he's a Samsung president here so vice president now I have a blue lady here raise your hand so please who can take that well I think I I've said already that South Korea has a great interest in the international normative and international legal environment and I think as a middle power and a US ally it has a voice a very important voice to share on a number of these issues that doesn't mean that you know anyone including President Obama expects South Korea to raise some sort of anti-China banner I don't think that's the expectation whatsoever however I think Korea speaking out for international normative compliance is important and it allowed me to add that that sometimes actions speak louder than words and if South Korea determines that it's in its national interest to cooperate with United States in hosting THAAD batteries in South Korea then that's something that the South Korean government can come out and make a plan to do if if South Korea has concerns about Russia's role in Ukraine but feels some sensitivity about speaking about Russia in particular there are things that South Korea can do in terms of loan guarantees for Korean companies investment in Ukraine it can be very helpful for the Ukrainian economy without speaking out too loudly on on political issues that it finds sensitive and and on the maritime security issues there are things that South Korea can do like increased trilateral maritime cooperation with the United States and Japan starting with search and rescue and then perhaps going from there that can send an important signal about domain awareness about shared interests in sea lanes of communication and about freedom of navigation without having to speak out in some way that would be controversial for other interests that are important for South Korea and like it's already I said regardless of whether it is South Korea is U.S. ally or not South Korea should be able to speak up for respecting international rules and norms and I think the South Korea is working on it and might be like timing and manner might be different that if I just one add Mr. Kim you have a point no go ahead please so if I had one point that I've been dealing with the Chinese Japanese Korean Singaporean the Afghanis whatever you name it for the last three years with the Western Judeo-Christian the community or the civilization society speaking your mind is no problem but a lot of people kind of like if I speak up maybe I will not get a visa to visit China or stuff like that North Koreans as well but if you are very really truly believe that you are right and you are delivering the statement of justice and right statement you speaking one time I was worried that I may not be released from Shanghai to return to Korea but I was actually invited by Shanghai mayor because they thought that she was most nasty but at the same time honest critique of the Chinese policy so in a sense Korea not middle size small size entropy size not the size but if the Korea needs to do something as a sovereign state for the national interest that should be squeaking voice and raise the voice that's my policy anyway the gentleman there with the gray shirt you that's you yeah thank you I'm a science student I have a question about USFK so after unification do you think USFK should be maintained from both Korean and US perspective Mr Kim first to be honest I don't know once again we don't exactly know how reification will happen we don't know if it is going to be done under North Korean initiative or South Korean initiative even so I think it's premature for us to think about what we're going to do with USFK but they're having a history of discussions on what the USFK what kind of role it can play after reunification and there will be a basis for further discussion but I don't think I can make any comments for any of you I think if peacefully unification occurs on the Korean peninsula like whether it's going to stay or not that quite depends on some regional security environment but if it needs to stay with agreements between Korea and the US the term of like reference might be changed I think it's up to the interest of a sovereign Korea and the interest of the US Korea alliance but to be very frank with you I think that while we hope for a very gradual integration process with North Korea that's peaceful that elevates the human rights situation in the northern part of the peninsula that results in a democratic free and free trading Korean peninsula that gets along with all its neighbors to be very frank with you I think that it's not likely to see the current North Korean government decide to give up its control of half the peninsula through an integration process so in a situation where you start to talk about what's the role of the USFK after unification or during unification I think there aren't going to be many people saying Yankee go home because there'll be so many variables in flux changing the positioning on the stationing of USFK on the Korean peninsula is not going to be something that many people are going to think is wise I think that many Koreans are going to be looking for as much help from the USFK as they can get they're going to be looking for as much help from the Japanese they can get they're going to be looking for support from the World Bank ADB Europeans partners for their field and certainly Chinese friends so I don't think it's going to be an issue of is is the USFK going to be asked to to leave the peninsula during unification or anytime soon thereafter it is important however to the extent possible with Beijing to have conversations about what certain contingencies might look like so that we don't come to a historical situation of don't cross the the or don't approach the edge of the precipice kind of perception on the part of the Chinese and that involves of course various roles of forces in various contingencies and I think if if Chinese friends are willing to have that conversation it's better to have those conversations before a contingency rather than trying to figure it out on the fly thank you very wise answers all three and then this gentleman with the striped shirt with the white hair yes yeah you are right no I'm just designating so then that these helpers will have any trouble to find you thank you I actually don't have a new question I would like to answer to the previous question is that is that allowed oh well what is the previous question you are talking about yeah about whether USFK should stay in Korea after unification I have been thinking about that a lot and I have an answer to that we should declare at the early stage that US forces will leave a Korean Peninsula upon unification because we don't need US forces needed US alliance especially military alliance is needed because of a North Korean threat to take over South once we have united Korea we don't need we don't really need US to stand against across China you know China hates US forces across the Yellow River we don't have to have that so if we say that we are not going to stay I mean US will not stay after unification that will promote chances for unification which both you know South Korean US governments are seeking for China's help for peaceful unification thank you for your position you should write a paper and publish in the Washington Post but the lady with the glass is there I think maybe this will be the last one because I don't want to really make your tip toward on the on your time so please go ahead hi I'm okay I'm an intro with the Kato Institute I want to ask Mr Kim from your own personal view or the personal or the standpoint of your company do you like to see Korea joining TPP and also what are the obstacles for Korea to join TPP yeah of course as I I think previously mentioned in our closed sessions TPP is an important initiative that we would like to see as a company for example Samsung Electronics is a multinational company and it does businesses around the world and its supply chain exists in more than 30 countries around the world for example if you want to build a smartphone we create wafers in Texas Austin facility of ours then send it to Korea in Gihun where we make chips there may be modem chips or graphic chips but we create the chips and then we probably send it to China or Vietnam to assemble the smartphone so if that is the case as you can see the supply chain management becomes very complicated and the rules of origins and different rate of tariffs all makes this management of supply chain very complicated but if we can include Korea in the mix as you can see in the example that I gave US is included Vietnam is included but if Korea is left out then that creates some serious constraint on our ability to maintain our supply chain seamlessly so I definitely like to see Korea joining the TPP obstacles to that I don't really see a lot of obstacles practically the obstacles that I see is political so as you have seen trade international trade trade agreements have become a subject of political controversy maybe too much in both in Korea and in the United States and if that is the case and now Korea is separated from the original 12 founding members of the TPP and it will be under scrutiny by US industries and US Congress separately that can create a lot of political controversy and then maybe something that the political leaders of both countries should work together to resolve excellent with the globalization of the manufacturing process he revealed a little bit so the these three gentlemen really did a wonderful job in my opinion they all got so let's give a good hand thank you au revoir all done


Theodore, deserted by its people, devastated by a second, bigger flood. The coal-catalan cotton community is a ghost town. When the river peaked at 14.7 metres two days ago, the only people who saw it were police, who stayed behind to protect abandoned homes. You know the people and you know the homes you've been in solid and you know what devastation is going to be there. Battling brown snakes and rising water, such at Mark Baylin and his team, spent New Year's Eve moving cars to higher ground. They broke into a business or two to save stock. He said I don't care what you do Mark, he said just get him there, get the computer out, that's all we've got left. The damage is catastrophic. 148 out of 240 homes has had water through them. Theodore's 20 businesses were all inundated. The hospital just left before and sadly our doctor is surgery. He's had approximately 1.2 metres through the doctor's surgery. It's 300 residents Queensland's first to be evacuated are staying at Nara. In the mining camps mess hall, we showed them what they've been waiting to see. The lives they left behind. Thressed out since I left. All we want to do now is get home and have a look. And see what the damage is and start the big cleanup. I think it's pretty bad and mine was gone in the first. The first one that comes through and yes I'll have nothing left. No one knows when they'll be allowed back. When the water goes down, where do 148 families live? Theodore isn't just any community. Residents own the pub, the retirement village and when the Royal Flying Doctors refused to land here at night, they raised $60,000 to light the runway. Until residents return, their town is in good hands. In Theodore, Erin Edwards, 7 News.


Scott Pilgrim vs The World, the game, is back, and it's great, surprising no one. The game sold 25,000 copies on limited run in its first three hours on sale, and is likely sold many more on digital storefronts. Scott Pilgrim vs The World initially started as a tie-in for the movie of the same name, but is based more closely on the Scott Pilgrim comics by Canadian cartoonist Brian Leo Malley. The story of an unemployed, video game-obsessed bass guitarist who has to defeat his girlfriend's seven evil exes may sound ridiculous, but surprisingly enough it's actually based on a true story, sort of, bear with us. Not so long ago, in the mysterious land of Toronto, Canada, Brian Leo Malley was dating an American. Not just any American either. Hope Larson is herself an award-winning cartoonist, so she and Malley had a lot in common. Malley had a lot on his plate at this moment in time. He was wrapping up his first graphic novel, Lost at Sea, about a teenage girl who worries that her soul is inside a cat. He was also playing in his own band, Coupec, touring Toronto's many bars, such as The Rocket, which, fun fact, was a toilet. Basically, when I finished Lost at Sea, I showed it to my friends and it made them very uncomfortable because it's very emotional. So, yeah, I definitely wanted to make something that would make my friends happy, that would make them laugh. While talking casually with his girlfriend, Malley learned that, by complete coincidence, three of her ex-boyfriends were all named Matthew. He thought this was very funny. He started imagining a league of evil Matthews. What would that be like? What if he had to fight them? What if he had to defeat the League of Evil Matthews in order to date, Hope Larson? Suddenly, Malley had an idea for his next comic, one which, he hoped, would make his friends laugh more than the more serious Lost at Sea. From this, Malley simply started writing his own life. He was the protagonist. Larson was the girl of his dreams who was constantly roller-skating through his head. He said, The stand-in character that was based on himself, Scott Pilgrim, was named after a song by a band he had been obsessed with, Plum Tree. Scott even wears a Plum Tree t-shirt in the comic. Ramona's name was inspired by another song by a band called Black Francis, and her first haircut was based on a girl Malley had seen at a party one time. Scott Pilgrim's Precious Little Life debuted in 2004, and, says O'Malley, the next week I had to get a job because I was broke. Scott Pilgrim wasn't going anywhere. I was doing indie comics on a microscopic scale. I quietly went to work and started making stuff up for Volume 2. Little did O'Malley know that one of the earliest copies of Scott Pilgrim ever sold wound up travelling across the Atlantic, where it was read by up-and-coming director Edgar Wright. This, of course, led to a cult classic movie adaptation and a game by Ubisoft. Says O'Malley, I took some of my friends to the Scott Pilgrim premiere in Toronto and it was so awkward they left without saying anything at the end, no comments. It's a weird life making stories, especially with Scott Pilgrim because it was so close to our lives at the time. We all had different versions of the things we were experiencing, and to see my version on big screen it was very uncomfortable for some people. So what's the moral of this story? Probably that you shouldn't date anyone named Matthew. They can't be trusted. Whoa, hey there, Breton Stripes. Um, my name is Matthew. Yes? And including me, haven't you also dated three people called Matthew as well? Um, maybe?  There are enough of us already. And you're all evil.