It is now time for Question Period, the leader of Her Majesty's royal opposition. Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier. I'd like to run down some of the headlines from yesterday. From the CBC, Liberals stonewalling Ontario's fiscal watchdog. From the Toronto Star, Budget Watchdog says the Liberals hiding data from him. The Canadian Press, the FAO says Liberals block his access to info. Mr. Speaker, we all know the Liberals don't know how to even spell the words open government, but you think they'd actually be able to practice it. Simple question for the Premier, Mr. Speaker. What are the Liberals hiding from the Financial Accountability Office? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Absolutely nothing, Mr. Speaker. We appreciate the independent and valuable analysis that the FAO does of the state of the province's finances, Mr. Speaker. Ministries continue to meet with the Financial Accountability Officer and his team to share information and answer questions. And we expect ministries to work closely with the Financial Accountability Officer, Mr. Speaker, as is enshrined in the legislation. Government officials have recently reached out to follow up on some of the issues that the FAO outlined in his press conference yesterday, Mr. Speaker. And as the Minister of Finance said yesterday, there is another government-wide directive going across. Government, Mr. Speaker, to make sure that offices within the ministries are responding to the FAO in a consistent and timely manner. I would just remind members opposite, Mr. Speaker, that we are working within legislation that was drafted and we worked on with the opposition. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, back to the Premier. And the government likes to insist that they're open and transparent. But the FAO would have had to have a press conference to plead for openness and transparency if that was the case. So let me quote the FAO. Stephen LeClaire said yesterday, from day one the Liberals have claimed cabinet confidences on almost any future projection. There is clearly political interference and ministries are being directed by the corner office to obstruct and block the FAO. LeClaire added, I believe this is political direction. And based on the Globe and Mail article, we already know the Premier feels that she needs to run all the ministries and pick up their slack. So Mr. Speaker, my question for the Premier is will she instruct all the Liberal ministers to be transparent and open just like you promised? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And just to be clear, requests for information from the Financial Accountability Officer are responded to by non-partisan officials. I know the members opposite don't want to hear the answer. It's not the clock, please. I tried to see if you were going to do this on your own, and I think I'll have to help. If it continues, I'll go straight to naming, not naming, sorry. I'll go straight to warnings and then naming. Keep it down. Carry on, please. Mr. Speaker, it is not the politicians who respond to the request from the Financial Accountability Officer. It is the officials, Mr. Speaker, who are non-partisan. The member from Nipissing and the member from Leeds-Grendel come to order. Minister of Finance, come to order. Premier. Oh, given that it is non-partisan officials who respond to the Financial Accountability Officer, Mr. Speaker, I go back to the statement of the Minister of Finance yesterday, which there is a directive going across government to ensure that all of those officials understand that we are operating within legislation. That was put together, Mr. Speaker, as a result of the conversation with the opposition parties in a minority parliament, Mr. Speaker, and is consistent with the parameters of the parliament and the government officer in the federal government, Mr. Speaker. Final supplementary. Mr. Speaker, again to the Premier, that's clearly not what the FAO said. The FAO said it's political direction that is causing this blocking. You know, the Minister of Finance has said that the Liberals will be sending a government-wide directive to all offices to ensure the officers are responding to the FAO in a consistent and timely manner. But if you do a Google translation changing English to Liberals' talking points, what comes up is the government's instructing all ministers to invoke cabinet confidentiality and block the FAO's access as quickly as possible. You know, this isn't acceptable. You say one thing and the reality of your actions are completely different. Mr. Speaker, will the Premier start finding a line cabinet confidentiality? Mr. Speaker, if you're not transparent and open, Madam Premier, one of your disgruntled cabinet ministers is going to leak it anyway. Just do the right thing. Be transparent. Be open. You can get yourself in trouble even when I ask you to sit. And I would direct my recommendations to speak to the chair, please. Premier. Finance. Sir, Finance. Mr. Speaker, the province of Ontario is the first and only province in Canada that has instituted a financial accountability officer. It's been modeled after the parliamentary budget officer, which a member opposite knows all too well. He's making accusations, Mr. Speaker, that aren't what Ontario is doing. We have acted in accordance with the legislation that has been passed. It may very well be that in Ottawa... A member from Dufford County didn't come to order. The member from Leeds Granville Second Time. Finish, please. It may well be that in Ottawa, that's how this member operated with his counterparts in regards to the accountability officer. It's not what we're doing in Ontario. We've assessed the situation. We want to work collaboratively with the financial accountability officer for the benefit of open and being more transparent in the regards to the work that we do. That's exactly what is happening, Mr. Speaker. We took and heard what the financial accountability officer had to say. We are working with him to ensure he gets the information necessary. Thank you. Mr. Bush, the leader of the opposition. Mr. Speaker, again to the Premier, since the government doesn't want to talk about their culture of secrecy and obstruction, let's talk about something else. Let's talk about the disgruntled cabinet minister that leaked the global mail, a copy of the climate change action plan. Action number 13 of the leak cabinet... I'm not going to accept that. And if it happens again, the member will be warned. Carry on. Action number 13 of the leak cabinet document said, set targets for updating the building codes so that new homes and small buildings built by 2030 are not relying on fossil fuels for heating and cooling. Expand this requirement to all buildings before 2050. Mr. Speaker, will the government be taking this action? Will they be amending the building code to limit natural gas? And if they're not taking this action, are they stating here in the legislature that the document that was leaked to the global mail? Entitled Cabinet Confidentiality is actually a falsified document. Thank you, Premier. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And again, I will say to the member opposite. And I made it clear when I was in Alberta that we are not banning natural gas. We're not doing those things that the member opposite wants to stir up issues around, Mr. Speaker, because he doesn't want to talk about climate change. And as I said yesterday, like his former colleague in Alberta in the Wild Rose Party, Mr. Speaker, he does not want to talk about climate change. He does not want to talk about the reality that we have to tackle this threat to humanity, this threat to the globe, Mr. Speaker. And we have to do it in a responsible way, which is why we will be bringing out the Climate Action Plan, Mr. Speaker. And of course, there are working documents that government uses in the run-up to the release of a plan, Mr. Speaker. And we will be talking more fully about the plan in the coming days. Thank you, Mr. Prime Minister. Mr. Speaker, again to the Premier, and I would note that there was no answer on whether that document was accurate. There was no answer whether that document was falsified. And you know, frankly, Mr. Speaker, if I'm going to believe the Premier or the global mail, well, the global mail has got a much better track record. You know, in terms of the Hydro-1 fire sale, it was the global mail that exposed it. The Minister of Education's secret payouts, it was the global mail that exposed it. And once again on the cap and trade plan, it was the global mail that exposed it. The Liberals say they're not going to ban natural gas, but they can't refute the story in the global mail. The Liberals claim they're not going to expand natural gas, yet they actually haven't provided a single dollar for that expansion. If the Premier was truly committed to natural gas and Ontario, she'd be spending money to expand it, not simply saying it might happen sometime in the future. Mr. Speaker, when will the Premier actually spend a single dollar to expand natural gas in the province of Ontario? Thank you. Senator, please. Thank you. Very much, Mr. Speaker. Well, we've been clear that expanding the use of natural gas, and in fact, I use that as the example of, and the evidence that we were not interested in banning natural gas, Mr. Speaker. There's $230 million in the budget to expand access to natural gas in our northern and rural communities, Mr. Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition knows that perfectly well. He also should know that the agriculture community came forward with that specific ask, Mr. Speaker, and made it clear that that was something that needed to happen. We've responded to that, Mr. Speaker. That process is underway, and that expansion will happen. But I think fundamentally, Mr. Speaker, people need to understand that the Leader of the Opposition wants to talk about process. He wants to talk about distractions because he does not want to talk about nor support any change that would lead to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, Mr. Speaker. He doesn't believe in climate change action, and he's not supportive of the actions that we're... Thank you. Final supplementary. Mr. Speaker, back to the Premier. The people and businesses of Ontario don't deserve to be strung along. The Environmental Defense wrote to the Ontario Energy Board asking for the natural gas expansion to be halted because they know that's exactly where the Liberals are headed. Mr. Finance, second time. No company would pay millions of dollars to expand natural gas, only to be told they're no longer going to have customers. So once again, I'm going to go back to the same question I've asked three times to the Premier. Mr. Speaker, was that document labeled cabinet confidential, was that document accurate, or is that a falsified document? We would like an answer. Thank you. Member from Renfrew, come to order. Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, come to order. And I'll pick you off one at a time with you. Minister of the Environment, come to order. And now I'm moving to warnings. Thank you. Despite what the opposition says, we're not forcing anyone off natural gas. We announced in 2015 $230 million to expand natural gas for Northern and rural communities. Mr. Speaker, this is not a laughing matter. The reality is that climate change is affecting the globe. Climate change is affecting every part of the globe, Mr. Speaker. We have a responsibility to put in place a responsible plan. When that plan is finalized, Mr. Speaker, and it comes into the public realm after it's been through cabinet, I look forward to the opposition having a reasonable conversation with us, Mr. Speaker, because this is something that will affect all of us, and it will even more profoundly affect our children and our grandchildren and our great-grandchildren, Mr. Speaker. So the opposition party is not interested in taking action on this front. We are moving forward. We are going to invest in innovation. We are going to develop technology that will be good and used here in Ontario and around the globe, Mr. Speaker. We think they should be working with us on that. Thank you. New question. A member from Nickel Belt. Thank you, Mr. President. My question is for the Premier. Right here right now in Ontario, we have hospital that face the risk of imminent breakdowns. But the Liberal government won't release which hospital needs that work. The Premier seems more concerned about avoiding bad PR than she is with giving Ontario the confidence that their hospital are being properly maintained. Speaker, this is just one more sign of a healthcare system in crisis. Nurses are being laid off, beds are being closed, and the Minister of Health seems to be making things up as he goes along. When will the Premier finally look at the facts and admit there is a silent crisis in healthcare and its patients that are paying the price? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It is very important that we address the deferred maintenance issues in hospitals across the province, but we have to do that in a responsible way on top of building new hospitals, the $12 billion that is in place to build new and renovate hospitals, the $100 million a year for deferred maintenance. All of that goes to address the challenges that hospitals face in terms of maintenance. But Mr. Speaker, that is the reality of having a large set of assets that have to be maintained on a regular basis. Whether it is schools, whether it is hospitals, there needs to be money that on a regular basis is used to address those challenges. That is the reason that we have to increase the amount of money available to hospitals to tackle that deferred maintenance. We are doing that in a responsible way, Mr. Speaker, and I know that we are working closely with the hospitals in order to make those steps. Thank you, Speaker. Well, the Health Minister says that he won't tell Ontarian what hospitals need maintenance work because, and I quote, it would give contractor an unfair advantage if they knew, in advance of their bid, what the hospital or ministry had estimated the cost. But that is not what the ministry told us. The ministry told us, and again, I quote, concerns are that contractor currently engaged by hospital would lose confidence in the facility's ability or intention to pay on current contractual obligation. Either the minister isn't accurate or the ministry is not accurate. Is the Premier okay with our minister making things up as he goes? Mr. Health, long-term care? Mr. Health, long-term care. Well, Mr. Speaker, imagine if you were renovating your house. Would you tell the contractor the amount of money that you're going to be paying them? Or would you actually ask the contractor to assess it and negotiate with that contractor? This is precisely the same issue. So why would we identify hospitals and the amount of money that we believe is required to renovate or maintain? We would actually create a transparent, appropriate bidding process where contractors would bid on the replacement or bid on the repairs. It's no different than what you would do for your own house. Let alone the fact that when we look at deferred maintenance, what we're talking about is what would be required to restore those hospital facilities to their brand-new status. In fact, almost all of the hospitals, because they do this on a go-forward basis, it may be that at some time in the future they need to repair the generator. It may be that they have to replace a building that suits a different need. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, these are the sorts of things we're looking at. Thank you. Final supplementary? Speaker, the data that we have is about health and safety. It is about cold compliance. It is about imminent breakdown. But yet, although we have the amount, we have no idea which hospital we're talking about. The government-owned data shows that hospitals are overcrowded. The government-owned data shows that hospitals are in desperate need of repair. It's 3.2 billion worth of repairs. And the government-owned budget shows that hospital funding is not keeping up with inflation, is not keeping up with growing population. And yesterday, the Ontario Health Coalition reported that 94,000 people took the time to call on the Liberal government to stop cutting hospital care. When will the Premier listen to Ontario and stop the cuts to our hospitals? Thank you, Minister. Doing precisely what they're asking, we are increasing funding to our hospitals. $345 million this year. The third party voted against our budget, which had that allocation. They voted against our budget that allocated $1 billion more to the health care budget. $52 billion that we invest, Mr. Speaker. They voted against the provision in the budget that doubles the amount that we allocate to deferred maintenance from $50 million a year to $100 million a year. If this was such an important issue to them, Mr. Speaker, if it wasn't just some political partisan spin that they're trying to use here, if it was so important, why didn't they support it in the budget when it doubled the amount of money they had? Thank you. New question, a member from Toronto, Dan Ford. Thank you, Speaker. My question to the Premier. Saying that the sell-off of Hydro-1 will build transit isn't true. And anyone who says so is more interested in political spin than facts. Will the Premier stop the sell-off of Hydro-1? Thank you. We've been very clear that building infrastructure, including transit, but transportation infrastructure around the province, Mr. Speaker, is a priority. It's a cornerstone of our economic plan, Mr. Speaker. That building is happening. And part of that, Mr. Speaker, which we ran on, was looking at the assets that are owned by the people of Ontario and leveraging those assets to invest in new assets, Mr. Speaker. That's what we're doing with Hydro-1. And those investments are going to benefit people across the province, including the people in the riding that the member represents. Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, yesterday was Hydro-1's first private annual general meeting. The sell-off of Hydro-1 slashes provincial revenue. It will cause the deficit to skyrocket. It will mean hydro rates will go up. When the Liberals try and suggest otherwise, they're insulting the intelligence of everyone in this province. Will the Premier stop the sell-off of Hydro-1? I honestly think what insults the intelligence of people in this province is a party that suggests that they can do everything, including building, transportation, infrastructure, and no way to fund it, Mr. Speaker. Absolutely no plan, absolutely no indication of how they would fund any of the things that they suggest, Mr. Speaker. No understanding of how business works, as the questions around the hospitals indicate, Mr. Speaker. No understanding of what it costs to build transit and transportation infrastructure in every corner of this province. That insults the intelligence of people in this province, Mr. Speaker. What we brought forward is a realistic plan that actually gets shoveled in the ground, rail on the roads, Mr. Speaker, and expands transportation across this province. Can you see it, please? Can you see it, please? Thank you. Final supplementary. Speaker, selling Hydro-1 is about one thing and one thing only. It's about the Premier getting a one-time check from shareholders so the books will look good in the next provincial election. That's what it's about. The energy policy, it's bad environmental policy, it's bad economic policy, and everybody knows it. Speaker, will the government admit that they have made a mistake? Will they recognize that they've made a mess of the energy system in this province, and will they stop the sell-off of Hydro-1? Can you see it, please? The reminder you're going to get is not going to be helpful. Premier. I said minister of finance. Minister of finance. Premier, thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's all about creating greater value for the people of Ontario. The members opposite have failed to recognize that by enhancing the value of this corporation, which is now more valuable than it was before, we still retain at this point 70% ownership of that company. We made a commitment that we will always be the largest shareholder. Minister, please. We will always be the largest shareholder. We will not allow any other person or company to have more than 10%. The issue of foregone revenue that the member speaks of is the fact that we are reinvesting it in other projects and other assets to gain even greater value. Furthermore, the company is now going to produce even more value and greater dividends for the province, even with the lower ownership. Mr. Speaker, the people of Ontario continue to own this corporation, and the people of Ontario will benefit as we proceed forward. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Premier. Premier, last week I hosted a town hall on natural gas with over 150 residents and attendants. They want answers. Municipalities have stated they will mobilize against this radical agenda that the government wants to go ahead with its leaked plan. My writing of Chatham-Can-Essex and across the province, thousands of jobs depend on natural gas industry. They need and deserve certainty. So, Speaker, it's the Premier amending the building code, the phase out natural gas. Mr. Speaker, we've repeated often in this house, Mr. Speaker. We have in a 2016 budget $230 million to invest in expanding natural gas to rural communities, Mr. Speaker. We also have seen changes in the Ontario Energy Board regulatory framework, Mr. Speaker, to make it easier to expand natural gas, Mr. Speaker. Union Gas, at the present time, has five applications before the Ontario Energy Board to expand natural gas, Mr. Speaker. A member from here on, Bruce, is warned. Finish, please. Mr. Speaker, they have five applications before the Ontario Energy Board. They're working with over a dozen other rural municipalities, Mr. Speaker, to expand natural gas into rural communities, Mr. Speaker. So they just don't want to admit we are investing in rural communities like they never even thought of, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Speaker, back to the Premier. Speaker, the Premier's refusal to answer basic questions is a betrayal of the people she once swore to serve. As a matter of fact, Speaker, the people of Ontario worry about how the Premier is spending billions of their dollars to travel the world and build her own climate change legacy. Here's what the President of the Canadian Gas Association, Timothy Egan, said with regards to the Premier's agenda. And I quote, incredibly irresponsible.  Our offices get numerous calls each day about natural gas. People have been scared for weeks because this government is too scared to release the real details. MPPs can't do their jobs and provide answers. Mr. Speaker, why does the Premier, when continue to turn her back on rural Ontario, ignore their questions? Are you or are you not amending the building codes? Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, once again, the opposition don't want to accept the realities, Mr. Speaker. The reality that they're accepting, Mr. Speaker, is a draft document that was leaked to the media, Mr. Speaker. They accept it as fact, Mr. Speaker. So in the coming weeks, Mr. Speaker, there will be a fulsome climate change action plan in place, Mr. Speaker. And then they can respond, then we can have the conversation. Mr. Speaker, we have done more consultation with the gas sector probably than any other sector as we lead up to this over the last year and a half or two years, Mr. Speaker. They have an open door to... The member from Prince Edward Hastings is warned. Wrap up, please. Mr. Speaker, we're expanding natural gas, particularly into rural communities, Mr. Speaker. That's a reality they don't want to accept. Thank you. And it upsets them to see... Thank you. Thank you, Speaker, and my question is to the Premier. New Democrats support a strong public pension plan. We believe that all Ontarians should be able to retire with dignity. This government, however, has taken it upon itself to exclude thousands, if not millions of Ontarians and their families. This month, the provinces are set to discuss a potential increase to the Canada Pension Plan, a plan that leaves no Canadian behind. Speaker, even the federal government has expressed concerns at the Ontario Retirement Pension Plan, which currently leaves out thousands of workers, may prevent a future CPP enhancement. Premier, will the government support a universal enhancement to the Canada Pension Plan so that every Canadian can benefit? Premier. Associate Minister of Finance. Thank you, Speaker. And I want to thank the member opposite for her question. I know that she's been the critic on this particular file. And the member opposite knows full well that Ontario has provided strong leadership when it comes to retirement security in this province. And that leadership, Speaker, is something that is moving us forward as we look to implement the Ontario Retirement Pension Plan. Mr. Speaker, we have consulted very widely on this policy and we've received input from all sides, from business, from... The member from Hamilton East Stony Creek is warned. I would have gotten the message long ago. Minister. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we are creating a secure retirement savings floor for the people of Ontario so that when they retire, they can retire with dignity. Our Premier, our Minister of Finance, in fact, have led national conversations when it comes to the expansion of CPP, Mr. Speaker. And we are currently at the table. We remain at the table as we build a stronger retirement system here in Ontario. Thank you, Speaker. During committee this week, New Democrats called, as always, for a universal Ontario pension plan. But the government voted down each and every one of our amendments. This Liberal government believes that only some workers in Ontario should be allowed to participate in the ORPP. Canadians pride themselves in having a public health care system, a public education system and a public pension system that benefits us all. Speaker, it's part of who we are as Canadians. Now, however, it looks like the Liberals' design of the Ontario pension plan may jeopardize a future CPP enhancement. Premier, does this government actually believe that it has the mandate to redesign the CPP? Thank you, Minister. Well, Mr. Speaker, our government believes that after a lifetime of working, Ontarians deserve to retire with dignity and with security, with the implementation of the Ontario retirement pension plan, we are at the table as conversations are underway with the CPP expansion and those discussions, we've always said we'll take time and we're part of that conversation. Mr. Speaker, what is important is that when people retire, that they have a predictable stream of income in retirement and that is exactly what they will have with the Ontario pension plan. It will bring financial security. It will ensure that when people retire, Mr. Speaker, they can do so with dignity and that they have that lifetime income, Mr. Speaker. And that's to ensure that, in fact, when our young workers retire, that they will have retired security, that they don't have to. New question, the member from Ottawa south. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Labor. Today, June 1st marks the 33rd annual Injured Workers Day. And as the minister reminded us a few weeks ago in the House, despite our progress, too many people continue to lose their lives, suffer an injury or an illness, simply because they went to work. No job is worth a life. No job is worth an injury. I know every year the Minister of Labor addresses injured workers and their representatives when they assemble here. Mr. Speaker, can the minister please share with us what we're doing to improve the lives of injured workers and treating them with respect and dignity they deserve? Thank you, Minister of Labor. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And thanks to the honourable member for that excellent question. I want to also take this opportunity to thank all the groups that have come down to visit us here as they do on an annual basis at Queens Park. And, Speaker, on this issue, prevention is key. But when that prevention simply isn't working, Speaker, and injuries occur and fatalities occur, those that are injured need to know to be treated with respect. And, Speaker, we should be proud in the province of Ontario. We've come a long way. The province's annual rate of workplace injuries has dropped by more than 40% in the past decade. We should be proud of that, Speaker, but we shouldn't be satisfied for one minute with that. There's a long way to go, Speaker. We shouldn't rest as long as one person is injured on the job. Speaker, I'm proud of the government's record in this regard, but not satisfied, Speaker. We've come a long way to go. We've got a number of plans in place. I look forward to meeting the injured workers today. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And I'd like to thank the minister for that response. And I was pleased to join him earlier this year when we opened an office to assist injured workers in Ottawa. And we all know that many workplace incidents can be prevented. Workplace injuries should never just be seen as a cost of doing business. It's important that Ontario has a workplace culture that protects workers and prevents injuries from happening in the first place. Mr. Speaker, through you to the minister, what steps are we taking to ensure that our loved ones and friends return home safe after a day of work? Thank you. Thank you once again to the member for that excellent question. We're working very hard at the ministry with partners right around this province to keep the injury numbers down and to eliminate deaths. We've almost doubled the number of workplace inspectors in the province of Ontario to look at health and safety. We've increased the amount of health and safety training that is now mandatory in the province of Ontario. Every single worker in this province must take basic health and safety training before they enter the workforce. We've got mandatory specialized training for those people that work at heights. Speaker, since last April 100,000 Ontarians have taken work at heights. Workers that are new to the job including young workers. This is so important, Speaker. Young workers are three times more likely to be heard on the job than older workers, Speaker. We need to concentrate on that. At the minister of labour, we're doing exactly that. I'd ask all members to spread that message through their own constituency offices about the importance of health and safety. Thank you. Any questions? Mr. Speaker, I am sure you have seen the news that California and Quebec's recent cap and trade auction flopped. In fact, only 11% of the allowances were actually sold. Now, California is scrambling to make up for this funding shortfall. Still, the environment minister actually told TVO yesterday he isn't worried about similar problems in Ontario. Even though the government has promised to spend $1.2 billion in cap and trade funds on a lottery list of liberal pet projects without even raising a dime, the Liberals are spending money they don't have. So, Speaker, how will the government cover the tab for the Liberals' $1 billion spending spree if Ontario's first cap and trade auction crashes just like California and Quebec did? A member from tourism, culture and sport is warned. Do you want to gamble? Who's me? Sorry, Minister of the Environment and Climate Change. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I appreciate the question for the member opposite. This is a market system. There are periods. We've had over a dozen auctions now where they were oversubscribed. The last one was 95%. This was lower. At different points in the compliance period, there will be greater or lesser demand. We are early and far away from the end of the period. We expect fluctuations, Mr. Speaker.  It is not a politicized system and it works on supply and demand, which last time I looked was a fairly consistent principle with conservatives who like markets and like the market to solve problems. So, we're using a market mechanism that is working all around the world, Mr. Speaker, and within the next 12 months, over half the world's economy will be covered by a carbon pricing system. The vast market, the cap and trade system that we're talking about in Japan, China, Germany, Britain, California, Mr. Speaker. It's a market. It will go up and down. We have confidence in markets. Back to the minister. The truth is, the minister is planning on funding shortfalls and he said so. He actually told TVO yesterday, and I quote, we know in the early years until the market is mature, you'll see more dramatic swings. Speaker, I find it unbelievable that the Liberals are willing to write billion-dollar checks without knowing how much money they'll have in the bank. With no contingency plan in place, the Liberals will once again leave Ontarians with either more debt or more taxes. So, Speaker, I ask the minister to be clear with the people of Ontario today, are the Liberals going to plunge Ontario deeper into debt or raise taxes to cover the funding shortfall after their first cap and trade auction to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Mr. Speaker, if you needed more proof that all of this money was going to reduce greenhouse gas and environmental programs, here's your proof. The money is dedicated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It is a market system. Money comes in transparently based on how much comes in at each auction. It goes out. It will be independently reviewed and it is spent transparently on greenhouse gas emissions. In the years that the market generates more revenue, there will be more revenue spent. And this is the difference. This money is going to programs the cement industry wants. Homeowners want. It's going to lower heating costs. It's going to help people buy low-carbon vehicles. It's going to make major investments in our auto sector to modernize and continue to support a dynamic auto sector. Liberals have the money to invest and to vote against the auto sector. Thank you. I stand you set. New question. A member from Windsor to come see. Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Premier. Good morning, Premier. Today we've joined by hundreds of individuals and families who have suffered an injury or illness at work and have been felt let down by the Liberal government's mismanagement of our province's workers' compensation and the WSIB is opposed to protect our province's most vulnerable. Instead, over the past six years the Liberal government has been too concerned with bringing down WSIB's $12 million debt and doing so at the cost of those who depend on their benefits to make ends meet. Speaker, when will this Liberal government stop retiring the WSIB's unfunded liability on the backs of injured workers in the province? Thank you. Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the member from Windsor to come see for this very important question and for the courtesy he extended me prior to this question. Speaker, all injured workers deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. When those injuries occur, Speaker, we wish they didn't occur and we do everything we possibly can to make sure they don't. When they do occur, people should expect to be treated with the WSIB, I think, in a very progressive way. Just earlier this year we passed legislation that established the indexation of WSIB benefits to full CPI. We're going to index benefits that oddly enough, Speaker, we're taking away 19 years ago by the very member's same party. We've reinstated them. Speaker, we listen to the concerns. Part of that respect, part of that dignity is to make sure we understand the concerns of injured workers. That's why today is so important. What we've done in Bill 109, Speaker, is focus better clearly and precisely on the rights of injured workers in this province. Speaker, we'll continue to do that. Thank you. Supplementary. Speaker, if life was as good as the minister makes it sound, we wouldn't have hundreds of people on the lawn today saying this is not the truth. The truth is, under the Liberal Government's watch, those who suffer an opportunity to work and go to the WSIB for help get attacked on all fronts, including reduced claims, premature return to work, ignoring the advice of medical professionals, and that list goes on and on and on. Amar Pierre, who's at the rally at Queens Park today, is a father with a torn rotator cuff from a picking job, received through a temp agency. He's unable to work and struggles to make ends meet because the WSIB has disagreed with his doctor. Speaker, I'll ask again when will this government stop retiring WSIB's debts on the backs of Anwar and our province's most vulnerable workers? Do you see it, please? Thank you. Minister. Thank you, Speaker, and thank you once again to the member from Windsor to come see. He raises a very important question. Speaker, that's precisely why this House passed Bill 109 simply to focus on improving protections for workers in this province. Speaker, we change the way that we calculate survivor benefits. We may be at an offence now for employers to prevent workers from reporting workplace injuries and illnesses. We've increased the maximum corporate penalty, Speaker, from 100,000 to 500,000. We put a lot of pressure on the WSIB commissioner, Speaker, to investigate when people have an issue with the WSIB. They have an umber to go to, Speaker. It's that simple. You listen to injured workers.  You make the system work for them. That's exactly what we're doing, Speaker. I'll be proud today to stand before those hundreds of injured workers and talk about the track record of this government, Speaker. It's second to none. This is the first time we've done this in place to make sure that the respect and the dignity that they receive when they need services from the WSIB. Thank you. Thank you, Speaker. My question to the minister of environment and climate change. Now, diverting waste from land is an incredibly important issue that many generations of governments, many government pass have grappled with. Quite well. I'm going to talk a little bit more about my role here as the member for beaches East York. I work closely with the recycling industry to expand the materials collected in the blue box to include box board, wrapping paper, used books. I also work with a team of people at the beverage industry, the alcoholic industry, in order to bring the deposit system to liquor bottles in the case of a land or a border crossing. Well, I think of it as it is now 251. And I know, Speaker, that during the course of our hearings, five days and clause by clause, we heard numerous submissions from people across the province. About how to increase your one fifty one, so I'd like to ask the minister, Mr. of environment. Climate if he could explain to this house the improvements we made to the bill to serve on Terrell better thank you, Minister the environment and climate earlier speaking in memorial. He was the lovely job. And if that spirit of non-partisanship that when we get it in the House is a good thing. And this bill is an example of that, Mr. Speaker. Members from all three parties worked very hard on this together. And I want to give credit to the member for Huron Bruce and the member for Toronto Danforth and many other members here on both sides of the House. This is an excellent bill. The work we did with Amel will relieve about $117 million in municipal costs. The work we did with Unilever, I want to thank John Coyne and Bob Chant and all of us, will actually make this much more efficient and more cost effective for business, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Supplementary. Well, thank you, Speaker. And thank you to the member from the Minister for Environment and Climate Change for his excellent work on this file. This has been extremely important that we are listening to parties and representatives on all sides of the House to bring together the best bill we can for waste diversion in Ontario. So this input has been very critical, but I'd also like to shout out to the member for Mississauga, Brampton South, who shepherded the bill through committee, who was extremely important in drawing out some of the commentary in order to ensure that we got all the nuanced stuff right in order to make this bill as good as possible. So the bill is intended to improve resource efficiency and have the right people in the right place pay for and do the work. And so that's why we know that just recovering 60% of the waste materials could generate upwards of 13,000 jobs and contribute over one and a half billion dollars to gross domestic poverty. So will the Minister then speak to how this bill can affect the people in the province on a daily basis and help us improve our diversion rate from landfill? Thank you, Minister. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for his support. I also want to thank the member for Mississauga, Brampton South, who did an excellent job. She's got a sharp mind for this. And to the member for Sudbury, who stole all my bow ties, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this is a remarkable piece of economic work. And I want to thank the Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure. This is going to help us improve productivity. For example, we collect enough aluminum in Ontario and Quebec to run an aluminum smelcher entirely on recovered materials. That means it would only use 5% of the energy it does from virgin materials. Three of our steel mills work entirely on recovered materials. These are huge productivity gains that reduce structural costs in the Ontario economy. And the synergies of this all-in-government approach have not seen the environment as hostile to the economy, but seeing one contributing positively, the other. And I want to thank the Premier and my colleagues for taking this all-in-government approach integrating economic and environmental policy. I want to thank the opposition parties for working so closely with us in providing real leadership. Mr. Speaker, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question this morning is for the Premier. It happened earlier this year for fans of Adele and even prior to that for fans of Springsteen. This week it happened again as there was a huge outcry from music fans. It's been deafening actually. Fans of the tragically hip who went online to buy tickets and those tickets were snatched up in just seconds after they went on sale. What those fans probably didn't know, however, was that last July this government changed the ticket resale laws to make it easier for big ticket sellers to gouge customers. For years, these corporate giants have been going to legislatures around the world trying to change scalping laws so that they can turn the screws on consumers. And last summer, you eliminated the last protection for consumers that there was. Speaker, what possible reason could the government have for abandoning music fans and concert goers here in Ontario? Thank you, Premier. Attorney General? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, I feel sorry for those fans of the tragically hip who wanted to go to concert and have to pay these prices. And so in 2010, Ontario amended the Ticket Speculation Act to add additional protection to consumer from unfair ticket reselling practice. So the amendment prohibited a related primary ticket seller and secondary ticket seller, including broker and agent from selling ticket to the same event. The amendment was aimed at ensuring that those who profit from the sale of ticket on the primary market may not also profit from the resale of the secondary market. You know, we did that. It's a complicated explanation to say, you know, to prevent this from happening. But, you know, like it seems like the technology is always ahead. And I said, you know, we're doing we're going to do what we can to prevent it. Supplementary. So it's OK then to rip off consumers if it's online, but but not face to face according to this government. Late breaking story on the CBC, Mr. Speaker, for 91 years, it's been illegal in Ontario to sell tickets above face value until last summer. And at that time, the government changed the law. John Carastimatus of Mervish Productions said this change catered to big ticket holders like Ticketmaster, Stubhub and MLSC. Quote, that's what this new law was all about to allow these corporations to be able to legally use the same techniques that the so-called street scalpers use. If Ontario music fans want to know what really happened, I've got 52,700 reasons why this happened. That's how much Ticketmaster and its parent company have donated to the Ontario Liberals in the last two years. Speaker, why did Ticketmaster end up like the Leafs winning the Cup in 62 in Ontario? Minister, I won in 1967. The Minister of Consumer Services. Thank you, Speaker. The amount of time that's left doesn't bother me at all. And anyone else who wants to speak out, right? The member from Eglinton Lawrence is warned and the member from the rent for Nipissing Pembroke is warned. Anyone else? Getting close to being able to name some and I'm not going to stop. Minister of Government and Consumer Services. Thank you, Speaker. And I want to clarify a couple of things here that the member has raised with respect to this issue. There was a regulation change July 1st, 2015. One of the fundamental issues that was at the heart of this was the fraud that was taking place with systems that were not able to be verified and people getting tickets that were. Excuse me. Member from Leeds, Granville is warned. I'm going to pass the test. Carry on. Thank you, Speaker. And so what was done was the important change that was made that allows companies to resell those tickets on the original site with guarantees. The government does not set ticket prices for the public and for clients. That's determined by the marketplace, as most would agree. What people will pay for them. Our concern around protectors is with respect to the fraud that was taking place and the validity of the tickets to ensure that an individual actually purchased an authentic ticket. Thank you. Thank you. Good question. Member from Kalora, Lady River. Thank you, Speaker. To the Premier. Speaker, quote, in the spirit of reconciliation, the Ontario government should do the right thing, end quote, and clean up the Wabagoon River system and Clay Lake. That wasn't the NDP that said this, even though we've repeatedly raised the issue of the legacy of mercury contamination of the Gracineros First Nation territory with this government. That was Ontario regional chief Isidore Day, quote, no single act would go further to illustrate that a new era has dawned in our relationship with indigenous peoples and our shared environment, end quote, Dr. David Suzuki, quote, efforts to remediate the mercury have been postponed long enough, end quote. That's the Liberal MP for Dryden and the former Indian Affairs Federal Minister, Bob Nalt. Speaker, when will this government do what everyone knows needs to be done and clean up the Wabagoon River so that the people of Gracineros may fish and live off their land without becoming sick? Question. Thank you. Thank you. Minister of Aboriginal Affairs. Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, as you know, this report was released the other day. It is with the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change. My office received a copy yesterday. My office is reviewing the report as is the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change. The report suggests new science. This government is always, always interested in the best science available, the newest science available. We will consider the science suggestions, the recommendations in the report after our experts have had a chance to review the report and would have a comment later on it. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker, two days ago, the same day the Premier apologized for the province's role in the legacy of residential schools, the Premier said that she hadn't read the report that her government has had since April. And now we hear from the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs that they've only received the report yesterday.  Yesterday the Premier said she had read the report, but she claimed that the solutions that were proposed in there weren't clear. So let me be clear, because the report is very clear. Determine whether there is an ongoing mercury leak. Find out if there are hotspots that carry contaminated mercury downriver. Inject clay into the river to enhance the natural remediation that's going on. It has been done effectively in other parts of the province, such as February, decades ago. We know that it can be done. So Speaker, let me ask this. Why won't this Premier commit to cleaning up the Wabagoon River of its mercury contamination that's making the people in grassy neighborhoods sick? Minister. Minister of the environment and climate change. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Not only has the environment and climate change. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, very much. Not only has the Premier read it, she's instructed me and the Minister of Indigenous Relations Aboriginal Affairs soon to be something even more exciting. So Mr. Speaker, the report is being reviewed right now. It's been read by myself and the Premier. We take it very seriously. It's not a simple report. It asks for determination of sources, which is complex. There's issues of soil and, sorry, of sediment. There is issues of the fact that dried and plant doesn't use mercury anymore, and there's still potentially other sources. And there's a complex set of issues in clay lake. Chief is at our day and I meet every two weeks. We met yesterday. We had a lengthy discussion about that. He's proposing some ideas. He's working with Grassy Narrows First Nation. We will be moving very quickly on this, but everyone agrees more research to determine which of the interventions suggested and which combination are the best. And we're going to get to the bottom of it, and I'll work with you to ensure we work together on that. Thank you. New question. I'm going to turn the table to North. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. My question is for the Minister responsible for long-term care and the promotion of wellbeing. World No Tobacco Day, an important milestone across the globe and an opportunity for us to consider the impact of tobacco on Ontarians. Doctors know that smoking is a universal evil, heightening the risk of heart attack, stroke, poor leg circulation, emphysema, and multiple cancers. I'm grateful, in fact, that our government has made it a priority to educate Ontarians and to provide support for those looking to quit. For example, the smoke-free Ontario strategy has greatly reduced tobacco use and lowered health risk to non-smokers in Ontario. In addition, the government has made many contributions inspired by community organizations, public health units, and outspoken individuals who have worked tirelessly to promote smoke culture. My question is this. Will the Minister please update this House on the government's smoke-free Ontario initiative? Associate Minister of Health, long-term care. Thank you, Speaker. I want to thank the member from Etobicoke North who I know as a physician is a great advocate for this issue, and I want to thank him for all of his advocacy. As we all know, 2016 marks the 10th anniversary of the Smoke-Free Ontario Act. Through this act and through our work with various contributing organizations, our government has significantly reduced tobacco use in Ontario. As a result of this important work, smoking rates in Ontario have decreased from 24.5% in 2000 to 17.4% in 2014, which represents 400,000 fewer smokers, that's 400,000 lives saved. Our strategy focuses on prevention, protection, and cessation, and we've invested over $300 million in this strategy since 2008, and more importantly, Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to announce that in our recent budget, we committed to a funding increase of $5 million for smoking cessation. Thank you, Supplementary. Thank you, Minister, for your leadership on this file on the Smoke-Free Ontario Strategy. I know that important work, of course, lies ahead in our efforts to make Ontario the jurisdiction with the lowest smoking rates in Canada. The Minister's focus on protection and enforcement, prevention, cessation, all will have important impacts in the lives of both non-smokers suffering second-hand smoke, as well as smokers who are looking to quit. Speaker, yesterday the Minister celebrated the 10th anniversary of Smoke-Free Ontario at an event that recognized contributions of anti-tobacco champions across the province. And while she spoke to the attendees about the need to refresh and update all three pillars of the Smoke-Free Ontario Strategy, she also made important commitments to providing new cessation supports for Ontario's priority populations. Speaker, through you to the Minister, can the Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care please inform the House about the smoking cessation supports this government is providing for all Ontario? Thank you, Minister. Thank you, Speaker, and again, once again, I thank the member from Etobicoke North for the question. And I know he, as a physician again, he'll be delighted with some of the changes we are making as we move forward with the new cessation action plan. This plan includes the establishment of an online cessation hub that is a centralized access point to help tobacco users navigate the system and to find local services and cessation aids tailored to their needs. And this will be in place by summer of 2017. A centralized access point to help tobacco users find local services. And starting by the next quits season, Mr. Speaker, I am so pleased to announce that we will be providing one quits line phone number available to all Ontarians 24-7 which will offer coaching and counselling to help smokers quit. We have a number of cessation service network of coordinated support. And we look forward to enhancing these. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Good question. The member from Haldeman North. Thank you to the Minister of Health A year ago, this legislature enacted a private member's bill to create a provincial framework and an action plan concerning vector-borne and zoonotic diseases, diseases like Lyme. The law mandates the framework and the action plan within a year of when it was passed. Obviously, the year is now up. Will the Minister please outline to this House and to people affected by diseases like Lyme the required plan to take action? Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have a Lyme reference group which is comprised of stakeholders on this issue that is working towards issuing a strategy together with the provincial government. We're working on a broader strategy as well. But I appreciate getting a health question because I feel compelled to address an issue that was raised by one of the members colleagues earlier this week about the cancer care clinic in North Bay, Mr. Speaker. And I'm compelled to because this involves individuals and families who are suffering from cancer who have been shaken because of a rumor that was started by the member from Nipissing. And the rumor began with him and was promulgated by him. And there was no truth to it, Mr. Speaker. And the President of North Bay Hospital as well as the head of the cancer clinic had come forward and publicly denied that there was no truth. Come to order, please. Come to order. People are taking a risk. There are votes today. Please finish. You have a wrap up. Mr. Speaker, this is so important to the public interest. The member from Nipissing didn't bother to call the hospital. Didn't bother to come to the clinic. Didn't bother to talk to me. He promulgated a rumor which he knew was untrue. I know my job. The member will withdraw. I withdraw. Thank you. Supplementary. Minister, I do ask you to come back to this issue of the deadline for action. On Lyme, I received an email from a mother of a Lyme victim and I quote, people of Ontario need to know that our healthcare is like living in a third world country. Minister, people continue to go to the states for Lyme disease testing for treatment. We want to know what is Ontario now doing as legislated to help these people. What's been done with respect to testing? What's been done with respect to treatment to prevention, surveillance? What new approaches we've had a year do we now see with respect to education and research? The tick season, the mosquito season is now upon us and Minister, I sincerely ask you what has been put in place. Thank you. Minister. Thank you Mr. Speaker and the issue of Lyme disease and the broader strategy as well for dealing with similar zoonotic diseases that are prevalent in this province. It's an issue that's extremely important to me as a public health doctor. It's extremely important to the ministry. We're working hard. We have a reference group that is comprised of many stakeholders. I want to commend as well the member from Algoma, Manitoulin. I'll be meeting with him next week, I believe, and a number of stakeholders specifically on the issue of Lyme disease and I want to commend him for his proactive work and advocacy on this issue. It's extremely important. We have a reference group which is doing our hard work which is working towards updating our strategy, our provincial strategy and Mr. Speaker, I won't be satisfied until we have a strategy that reflects the best clinical guidelines available so that we can provide individuals that are at risk of or suffering from Lyme disease, whether that's acute or chronic, if they get the best possible care in this province that they could get. Thank you. The member from Windsor to come see on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, I stand to correct my record earlier today. I said the unfunded liability at the WSIB was $12 million. We know the unfunded liability, unfunded debt load at the WSIB is $12 billion. Thank you. The minister of finance on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, I think you're indulgent. This is not an introduction which I missed earlier today and I appreciate the order that you provided yesterday. I just wanted to congratulate today our page captain Julia Michaud who's doing a great job and I just want... I'm sorry, that's not acceptable. Thank you. Minister Valdeman Norfolk on a point of order. Mr. Speaker, I recognize it is after 12 o'clock could I ask for a special dispensation for a late show on a recent question? The member from Hulman Norfolk is correct that afternoon after the hour of noon it needs request for a unanimous consent to issue a late show. Therefore, on behalf of the member from Hulman Norfolk seeking unanimous consent to put forward a late show. Do we agree? I heard a no. The Minister of Health, Long-Term Care. Mr. Speaker, earlier when I was speaking to the issue of deferred maintenance in hospitals, I had erroneously indicated, this is a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I had erroneously indicated that the annual spending on deferred maintenance by my ministry is $100 million. In fact, the annual spending on deferred maintenance from my ministry is $175 million annually. Okay. And I would also take this moment to simply say to you, I will be strict on what I told you yesterday. I do not want any tricks being played. We are not going to do this anymore. We're going to simply say introductions are done during those two times in which you're allowed to introduce and I'm staying firm with that, as are my deputy speakers. We have a deferred vote on the motion of third reading of Bill 100, an act to enact the Ontario Trails Act 2016 to amend various acts. Calling the members, this will be a five minute bill. All members, please take your seats. On May 31, 2016, Mr. Cotto moved third reading of Bill 100. All those in favour, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the clerk. Mr. Cotto. Mr. Cotto. Mr. Bradley. Mr. Bradley. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Shirelli. Mr. Frasier, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Baker, Mr. Bauer, Mr. Dahl, Mr. Dahl, Ms. Hogarth, Ms. Hogarth, Ms. Koala, Ms. Moly, Ms. Martin, Ms. McGarry, Ms. McMann, Mr. Milchin, Ms. Nidoo Harris, Mr. Pops, Mr. Rinaldi, Ms. Reneal, Mr. Tebow, Mr. Clark, Mr. Harteman, Mr. McFow, Mr. Wilson, Ms. Jones, Mr. Fidelli, Mr. Yacobusky, Mr. Miller, Perry Sound, Ms. Cocoa, Mr. McNaughton, Ms. Scott, Ms. Thompson, Mr. Barrett, Ms. Monroe, Mr. Yurek, Mr. Bailey, Mr. Walker, Mr. Smith, Mr. Harris, Ms. Marteau, Mr. Pettipies, Mr. Koh, Mr. Miller Hamilton, Mr. Stony Creek, Mr. Bisson, Mr. Vantog, Ms. DeNovo, Mr. Tavins, Ms. Sattler, Ms. Taylor, Mr. Natashack, Ms. Armstrong, Ms. Angelina, Ms. Fyfe, Ms. Campbell, Mr. Montag, Mr. Hatfield, Mr. Gretzky, Mr. Gates, Ms. French. All those opposed, please rise one at a time if you recognize why the clerk. Mr. McLaren. Mr. McLaren. Mr. Nichols. Mr. Nichols. Mr. McDonnell. Mr. McDonnell. Mr. 92, the nays are three. Wow. The ayes being 92 and the nays being three, I declare the motion carried. Do you have the bill? Do you have the next motion of the line? You get resolved that the bill do now pass and be entitled as in the motion. We have a deferred vote on the motion of closure of the motion of current reading of bill 151, an act to enact resource recovery and circular economy act 2015 in the Waste Division Transition Act 2015, and to repeal the Waste Diversion Act 2002. Calling the members, this will be a five-minute bell. On May 17, 2016, Ms. Magnum moved the third reading of bill 151, an act to enact resource recovery and circular economy act 2015 in the Waste Diversion Transition Act 2015, and to repeal the Waste Diversion Act of 2002. Mr. Cole has moved that the question be now put. All those in favor of Mr. Cole's motion, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the clerk. Mr. Bradley. Mr. Bradley. Mr. Shurelle. Mr. Shurelle. Mr. Shurelle. Mr. Amayor. Mr. Sousa. Mr. Sousa. Ms. Wynne. Ms. Wynne. Ms. Matthew. Ms. Matthews. Mr. Hoskins. Ms. Hoskins. Ms. Sandals. Mr. Dooga. Ms. Dooga. Ms. Wicharls. Mr. Quinter. Mr. Quinter. Mr. Cole. Mr. Tocquehle. Mr. Tocquehle. Mr. Dillon. Mr. Dillon. Mr. Orzetti. Mr. Gravelle. Mr. Zimmer, Mr. Quadrie, Ms. Albanese, Mr. Dixon, Ms. Manga, Mr. Crack, Ms. Wong, Ms. Wong, Ms. Hunter, Mr. Sergio, Mr. Morrow, Ms. Jasek, Mr. Del Ducat, Ms. Dahmerla, Mr. Fraser, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Baker, Mr. Ballard, Mr. Don, Ms. Hogarth, Ms. Koala, Ms. Mollie, Ms. Martin, Ms. McGarry, Ms. McMahon, Mr. Milchins, Ms. Nidu Harris, Mr. Potts, Mr. Rinaldi, Ms. Reneal, Mr. Tebow. All those opposed, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the court. Mr. Wilson, Mr. Wilson, Mr. Arna, Mr. Hardim, Ms. McCloud, Ms. Jones, Mr. Clark, Mr. Fidelli, Mr. Yakibusky, Mr. Miller, Parry Sound, Ms. Skoka, Mr. McNot, Ms. Scott, Ms. Thompson, Mr. Barrett, Ms. Monroe, Mr. Yurek, Mr. McLaren, Mr. Bailey, Mr. Walker, Mr. Smith, Mr. Harris, Mr. Nichols, Ms. Marteau, Mr. McDonnell, Mr. Pettipies, Mr. Cove, Mr. Bisson, Mr. Vantoc, Ms. DeNovo, Mr. Tabbins, Ms. Sattler, Ms. Taylor, Ms. Taylor, Ms. Natashack, Ms. Armstrong, Ms. Amjelina, Ms. Fight, Ms. Campbell, Ms. Campbell, Mr. Montau, Mr. Hatfield, Ms. Gretzky, Mr. Gates, Ms. French. The ayes are 53, the nays are 41. The ayes are 53, and the nays are 41, and declare the motion carried. Ms. Magnet has moved third, reading of Bill 151, an act to enact the resource recovery and circular economy Act 2015 and the Waste Diversion Transition Act of 2015, and to repeal the Waste Diversion Act of 2002. Is it the pleasure of the House of the Motion? Carry. I heard a no. All those in favour say aye. Aye. All those opposed say nay. In my opinion, the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Carry. That wasn't much of a portion of the law. We resolve that the bill will now pass an entitled in the motion. There are no further deferred votes. This House stands recessed until, oops, sorry, the member from Haldeman Norfolk on a point of order. The order, Speaker. Could I ask unanimous consent for a late show on the Lyme disease question? Being afternoon, the member from Haldeman Norfolk is seeking unanimous consent to have a late show. Do we agree? Agreed. Agreed. There are no further. The member from Nipissing on a point of order. Speaker, I stand on a point of order. Yesterday during question period, I spoke of a rumour in the City of North Bay. It turns out it's not a rumour, it was a fact. That's not a point of order and the member should know so. There are no deferred votes. This House stands recessed until 3pm this afternoon.


Thanks for coming to my talk. My name is Peter Tran. And I'm going to talk about delivering an application to multiple clouds using Flux and Carvel. Today, we'll talk about the challenges of creating a multi-cloud deployment. I'm going to go over the tools that I'm going to be using to solve that through an example with a live demo. And then I'm going to close off with some options for alternative tools. Who here has received an invitation to go to a wedding in the last year? All right, a few of you.  OK, so live went well. So the three kind of milestones we're looking at to kind of invite people to a wedding are, one, your addresses. You want the physical address where people reside, whether it's being your town, your country, or around the world. You also want consistent information. Ideally, things like your venue and location and time don't change unless, of course, you're planning to get married in spring, summer of 2020. The last thing we're looking at is customizing your invitation. Perhaps you have a really good friend who's already married. You might put their name and their partner's name on the invite. Or you have an old friend who might give them a plus one. So a little bit of tweaking per invitation. The reason I draw this analogy is because it's similar to the experience of trying to deploy something on multiple clouds. The first thing, one of the things you need, is a tool that's flexible enough to send off to different environments. So you're different cloud providers, for example. The second thing you're looking for is a consistent application. You don't want an old version running on this place and a new version running over there. You kind of want that confidence of consistency. And the last thing is the customization. Perhaps in your east coast region, traffic is a bit low, so you want to scale down the replica sets to minimize cost. Or if you're having a leader follower model, you might want to scale up and down the replicas or change things like host names. Today I'm going to go over the two tools that I've been using to solve this problem. The problem or the goal of having different destinations that I'm using Flex, and for the consistency and the customizations, I'm using Carbell. By the end of this talk, I'm going to walk you through how I'm putting these two applications, or this one application, onto the cloud. It's my invitation to my wedding that was six years ago. I'm inviting my friend, Abril and Ryan. One lives in Vancouver and one lives in Toronto. So this multi-cloud journey, I broke it out into two parts, two stages. Stage one, we'll take a goal application and build a Carbell package. Stage two, we'll take that Carbell package, pass it into Flex, and Flex does a really great job of sending it off to the two clusters, one in Toronto and one in Vancouver. Before I dive into these two stages for this multi-cloud journey, I wanted to do a sidebar of what I'm calling the Carbell corner, which I'm going to explain all the different tools and interesting pieces that make this journey possible. I want to talk about the package, and the two things that power the package, CAP controller and YTT. The first thing I want to talk about is the image package bundles. So image package bundle is a container and the resource yaml that uses that container, things like your deployment, service, and ingress. And the concept is called image package bundle under Carbell. KBuild is a CLI tool that does quite a few things, but for the purposes of this talk, it compiles the container and the resource yaml into that image package bundle. One thing I forgot to mention was the image package bundle is an OCI image, so you can treat it like an image, put it into registry, there's an open API schema, and the last thing, or second-last thing, is the Carbell package, which is a wrapper around the image package bundle, and I apologize. This is the one that has an open API schema that makes it easy to query. Packages also have versions, and it's another feature of the Carbell Suite. Cap controller is the Carbell controller that makes all of these CRs I just mentioned possible. It's responsible for resolving things like the image package, bundle, the package itself, into the running apps. When it does this, it uses a tool called YTT. YTT kind of looks like a templating language, but it's actually a very powerful programming language. You have if, else's, for loops, and variables, of course, and when Cap controller resolving your Carbell packages, it takes your templatized resource yamls and compiles them into populated resource yamls before applying it to your cluster. So going back to our journey for taking our applications to the multiple clouds, stage one and stage two. Stage one has a little bit more steps involved. We start off with the Golang app. We're gonna use code to build the container. We're gonna write our resource yaml. We're gonna use that kbuild tool from Carbell to create the image package bundle and then wrap it up into a Carbell package. So this is the application I'm using. I wanted to highlight these two lines. It's very basic. I'm gonna grab an environment variable and I'm gonna invite that person to my wedding. If you're invited, I'm gonna use code to build the container. Code is really handy for building go apps. Next, I'm gonna work on my resource yamls for this invitation.  Highlighted here, I have these two lines and that syntax there is ytt. Over here on the right, I have a variable called guestname and on the left, I have a variable for hostname. And these are just gonna stay as templates in my Carbell package and they're gonna be rendered later on. So that achieves one of our goals, which is to create the customization per our application. The next step is using kbuild, the other Carbell tool to just create the image package bundle. It's actually a command line kbuild-f and because the image package bundle is an OCI compliant image, I'm gonna publish it using image package CLI to push it to my registry. The last step in stage one is to take the image package bundle, wrap it up in this thing called the Carbell package. The Carbell package contains things like versions and the crux of it is this line highlighted here, which is the image package bundle itself sitting on my registry. So that was stage one, we took our goal application, built a container, wrote our resource yambles that will leverage that container, wrapped it up, wrapped it up again into a Carbell package. And now we have that consistent packaging that is versioned that can be easily ported to different places. Moving on to stage two, we have our Carbell package, we're gonna pass it into Flux and Flux will handle pushing it to our two different clusters. One thing I oversimplified earlier was the Carbell package is useless on its own. It's kind of like a Java class. You need to create something called a package install to create an instance of that class or in this case, an instance of that application. And it looks something like this. On the right here, I have this package install. I'm referencing, I don't have the name here, but referencing a specific package name and its version. And if you recall in the previous slide, I created these variables using the YTT syntax. This is where you kind of populate it with your customizations. So right here, I'm inviting Ryan to my wedding. He's based out of Vancouver. And on the left, I'm inviting Abril, who's based out of Toronto. So we're taking our Carbell package, pass it into Flux, we're creating a customization to ask Flux to create an instance of these applications. And it's in the handle of pushing it to the Toronto and Vancouver cluster. For those of you who are not familiar with customization or with Flux, Flux is able to take your application code and put it onto clusters by specifying something called customization, which I've highlighted two lines here, which means a path of where your GitOps repo, your code is lying. So I have a cluster slash Toronto directory. And it also takes an acute config. And the acute config is a really nice universal, kind of like access point. You can swap it out with acute configs from any cloud. It doesn't have to be from the same cloud provider as long as it's valid. And in this example here, I'm passing Flux my Toronto acute config so it can access the Toronto cluster. And anything in that Toronto directory will be published there. And I'm gonna repeat the same thing for Vancouver. So that gives us the last kind of goal we're looking for. We have the customizations of our application. We have the consistency of it. And now we have the flexibility to push it wherever. And that leads us to the end of stage two where we have our writing apps on the different clusters. So let's go into a live demo. So in my get off three pull here, let's start with Toronto. I have my package install. It has a reference to, here we go. It has a reference here in line 11 to that package I already created before this presentation. I have a version number. I apologize for how weird that is. And I have a reference to a secret, secrets below here. And this is where I'm specifying the kind of variables I created in my YTT templateing all the way back when I was building my image package bundle. The three things I have customized here is a replica, a host name for this application and my friend. So, let's unwrite our ravine to the wedding. I'm sure she'll come. She's not too busy these days. All right, let's push it up. All right, so I committed my package install and the secrets file that kind of populated the variables and I pushed it up to my get ops repo. Before this talk, I've set up those customizations I mentioned earlier. And in that customization, I have a pointer to a secret that contained my Toronto cube config. And in a moment, I should see, so this over here is my Toronto cluster. I should see the package install created in my default environment. Oh yeah, oh, here it is, just a second. Wait, no, this is my Toronto cluster. Yeah, okay, here we go. So this is the package install. Ignore the funny string name. That was part of my setup. This package install reference that package I mentioned earlier is gonna have some pods writing. Should be one in my default environment. Here it is. And let's go to Toronto and great. Aval is gonna get my invitation out of my Toronto cluster. And I can do the same thing for, earlier I prepared another package install that is equivalent to the one we just saw. So I invited Ryan to the wedding and he's a really cool guy, so he's definitely gonna come out. And what's happening under the hood here is my package install is being picked up by Flux. Flux sees that we need to resolve everything in this directory, in that Vancouver directory, including the package install and the secret. The package that it's gonna be using, I created earlier and I already uploaded it. And shortly we'll see the package install spin up and the pod underneath show up. I think I set it to 30 seconds, so it shouldn't take longer than that. There we go. Awesome, let's see if our pods are up and running. Awesome, my one pod is up in the Vancouver cluster. Let's go to invite.vancouver. No healthy upstream. That's too bad. I don't really like Ryan that much anyways. Let's give back to the presentation. So today we went over how we took a goal-length application, packaged it up into a Carvel package, passed it into Flux and Flux handed it off to my favorite friend, not the other one. Before we end off, I wanna talk about alternative tools. So today I did talk about Flux and Carvel. To create that flexible destinations, you can use many other tools. Argo CD is one, I see it's very popular here today. And you could use Helm to achieve the consistency and the customizations. And one thing I actually discovered or realized during this week was you could use Flux for this whole experience because customization controller has these variables that you can use. Anyways, you might be wondering, so why did you use this like Carvel stuff? There's two kind of scenarios where I think Carvel has a bit of an advantage. The first one is that YTT tool I mentioned. It's a full programming tool. It's like a templating language and a programming language all at one. And if you're working with some really unwieldy stacks of YAML, I found Helm charts obviously work really great, but a little bit hard to work with in terms of navigating when there's mistakes made or collecting all the images you're using. So YTT, though a bit of a learning curve can be very powerful in making your YAML management a lot easier and friendlier. The second scenario where I think you might wanna consider Carvel is for edge or air gap environments. If you recall the image package bundle, that's kind of the heart of the Carvel package, it's an OCI compliant image. And if you wanted to move your application from one registry to a more secure registry where you're gonna cut off the internet afterwards, there's a really handy command called image package copy, which actually does a reverse, sorry, inverse, no. Recursive copy of your image, it looks into all the resources that image is next to, and all those resources, if they use more images, it goes and copies that over as well. And if those images happen to be a image package bundle again, it recursively goes and scoops up everything and moves it over to your new cluster. So that was actually a really handy scenario where I think Carvel packages are really convenient. So that brings me to the end of my talk. If you have any questions, you can reach out to me at petertrann at vmware.com. And I think we have, I'm taking good time, lots of time for questions. So do you have any questions in the room? In order to orchestrate to the Toronto, where were you running Flux to orchestrate to Toronto and Vancouver? Yeah, for the sake of this demo, I did have it installed on a staging environment that I use all the time, and then I had some fresh environments for my running application. And I guess kind of the question stems from like, what is best practice? I think it's convenient to have it on one of the existing clusters, but I haven't seen any good data points for having it like a brain that pushes to the running clusters, clusters running your application, or like co-locating them for some reason. But that's a really good question. Any other questions? I have a thousand questions, but I'm just going to ask Juan, maybe the other two, the other 99 nine outside. So I've seen a collection of tools, and it might make sense in some cases to have a collection of tools, but why not have a single tool and add then support to Flux for that single tool that does everything? Because in the end, you used customize for the whole thing to glue Flux and your packets. Do you really need to customize or maybe you could have native support for all this into Flux or into Carvel and have a better coordination between the two? So it was your question, did I really need customize or Flux for this area? If I'm already using customize, then I will use customize for everything. Why use customize and Carvel if I always need customize? That's a good question. So I guess there's a bit of a trade-off. If you want everything in one ecosystem, sticking to one set of tools, I think makes it simpler for your everyday life and your team. And if you are going to introduce another tool, you'll have to weigh those trade-offs of maybe edge deployments are really important to you and that recursive copy is something that's interesting. Maybe it's worth introducing yet another tool, but it may not be for everyone. So I think it'll be a case-by-case basis if it's worth introducing. Good question. Are there any other questions? All right, thank you everybody.


So let's see how much further we can take our method of using the differential operator to solve differential equations. So remember the term homogeneous is used in a couple of different ways in mathematics, and just to make things more complicated, it's actually used in a couple of different ways in differential equations. So in this particular case, if we have a differential equation of the form this horrible mess, equal to zero, where our ci's are constant, we say that we have a homogeneous equation with constant coefficients. It's homogeneous because all of our non-zero terms are either y or a derivative of y, and constant coefficients because our coefficients are, well, constant. Since this is also a linear differential equation, rewriting this using our linear differential operator l gives us a characteristic polynomial, and then the roots of the characteristic polynomial can then be used to find the general solution of the differential equation. What happens if we don't have a homogeneous equation with constant coefficients? There are two strategies. First, we can make an ansatz, an inspired guess of what the solution might be, or we can make the equation homogeneous. So an ansatz is an initial solution that works. It's basically an inspired guess. And here's everything you can be taught about coming up with an ansatz. Yeah, it's not much. Coming up with a good ansatz requires quite a bit of mathematical intuition, and by definition, you can't be taught intuition. On the other hand, a more algorithmic approach uses an annihilator, which annihilates the non-homogeneous part of the differential equation. Now, to some extent, finding the annihilator is like finding an ansatz. It takes a little bit of intuition to come up with a good one. However, we can be a little bit more systematic about this, and so we might make the following observations. First, it doesn't do any good to add, subtract, or multiply, because that won't eliminate a non-homogeneous term. It'll just move it around. But, well, we are talking differential equations. We might be able to differentiate it away. So, for example, let's say I have the non-homogeneous first-order linear differential equation, d y over dx minus y equals 8x minus 5. And the thing to recognize here is if I differentiate both sides, we get rid of the x term. Of course, we still don't have a homogeneous equation, because we still have this non-zero constant left, but a useful idea in life and in mathematics is that anything you can do once, you can do as many times as you need to. I differentiate it once, and let's differentiate again. And now we have a homogeneous third-order linear differential equation. And we know how to solve those using our linear differential operator. So, rewriting our differential equation in operator notation and that corresponds to characteristic polynomial d cubed minus d squared. We find the roots, which will be 0 twice and 1. And this gives us our general solution, y equals c1 plus c2x plus c3e to power x. And that seems great until you remember a very important idea. A kth-order differential equation will have k undetermined constants. And we're starting with a first-order linear differential equation. We should only have one undetermined constant. We have too many constants. So what can we do? Now let's think about this for a moment. Note that if we consider the homogeneous equation, dy over dx minus y equals 0, the linear differential operator will be d minus 1, giving us root 1 and solution y equals c3e to power x. And that's this part of our general solution. Using the annihilator, introduce two additional roots, 0 and 0, which corresponds to the solution y equals c1 plus c2x. That's this part of the general solution. These extra roots must correspond to definite but unknown constants, which we need to find. Since the problem reduces to finding the value of undetermined coefficients, we might call this, in a fit of inspired creativity, the method of undetermined coefficients. Yes, mathematicians are very bad at coming up with original names for things. Just as a side note, usually the method of undetermined coefficients is reserved for the part of the solution after finding the ansatz, either by an inspired guess or by annihilating the non-homogeneous term. In other words, somehow you get this general solution and then apply the method of undetermined coefficients. So here's an important simplification. Since c3e to power x corresponds to the root 1 for the characteristic polynomial for the homogeneous equation dy dx minus y equals 0, we know that when we substitute this into our equation, this part will be 0, and the linearity of the derivative will allow us to ignore this part of the general solution. And what that means is we don't need to worry about this part of our general solution because it will satisfy the homogeneous equation, and in particular, it doesn't matter what c3 is, it's never going to give us 8x minus 5. So we only need to find c1 and c2, where c1 plus c2x solves our original differential equation. So let's go ahead and find y and dy dx. So for y, we can take the part of the general solution that comes from the annihilator, and so our derivative will be, then dy minus y is equals means replaceable, solve for place dy dx minus y with 8x minus 5, and let's rearrange things on the right-hand side. And now I have this equation, 8x minus 5 equals minus c2x plus c2 minus c1. Since this must be true for all x, we need the coefficients of corresponding terms to be the same, and so we need minus c2, the coefficient of x, to be equal to 8, the coefficient of x. Likewise, we need c2 minus c1, the constant term on the right, to be equal to minus 5, the constant term on the left. And solving this system gives us c2 equal to minus 8, and c1 equal to minus 3. And so c1 and c2 are no longer undetermined coefficients, we've determined what they are, and so now we have our general solution to the original differential equation, y equals minus 3 minus 8x plus c3 e to the power x.