Welcome David. The stage is yours and these beautiful people are waiting for you Hello everyone Today I want to start with like a little class a little masterclass on feedback This comes from my experience. I worked across very big multinational corporations very small startups and At the same time both in consulting for many years and currently in automatic on products This to say that I hope that there is something for any one of you regardless of where you're coming from If you feel too shy for questions live today, this is my Twitter render for leto double L double T What I want to start is that we need in a way to relearn feedback and the reason I'm saying this is that Feedback is something that we feel it's natural But so we realize that well, I can do this right But it's just a skill. It's a skill that can be developed It's a talent that can be grown and it's something that you really really want to grow in in your team So let's start laying the foundation. There is one very interesting aspect and was researched and by cannibal And he was noticing that a lot of people think that negative feedback works Better than positive feedback and there is an interesting thing about this, which is The concept of regression to the mean which means that even a person is constantly growing like in this diagram If you're performing worse than your average and They give you a negative feedback on that. It's not because of the negative feedback. You're going to improve, right? It's just because you're regressing to the mean you're going back to your average and at the same time If we're giving you a positive feedback for something good you did it will look like that you're actually the next time It's likely you're going to perform worse So we have this kind of bias and perception That when we give positive feedback the person is going to get worse and then we give negative feedback The person is going to get better, but that's not about the feedback. It's about regression to the mean It's absolutely normal, but doesn't tell anything about the feedback you gave of How good it was Second reframing I want to do is around the ideas of positive and negative positive and negative are overloaded terms and Specifically we think of positive negative something that confirms and negative something that Corrects something wrong you did but what it really tells us even if of course there is some correlation Positive and negative tells only about how we received it We can get some really good and sorry the criticism and Feel good about it because we know now what to do next So in a general sense, it's usually considered a negative feedback, but in practice. I'm feeling good about it So is it negative? So let's try to avoid these two terms as much as possible and the way I want to reframe the pieces that compose feedback Are three so one is content then we have the attitude and how you approach feedback and the form you use to give feedback in terms of content the reframing I want to make is About doing two things You want to give what is usually considered positive feedback, but I want to call it confirmation You're giving a person the confirmation that they're acting well and they can do better and that's that's the right direction At the same time, you don't want to criticize them you want to adjust them So you want them to improve on something so the criticism is in fine But you need to give also direction that helps them to adjust in the right way to go The second aspect is a shift of attitude This is tricky because sometimes we have some unconscious Fear about ourselves. So we are trying to look better just by criticizing someone else This by the way is absolutely normal. It's human, but we need to start recognize this We need to start to recognize that we need to shift to give good feedback From this kind of undermining kind of feedback to a supportive kind of feedback to something that builds the person And this is more commonly known as radical candor if you've never heard of the concept I would advise you to Check at least the the video by Kim Scott And it's a great concept It's exactly this idea that you want to give feedback that is truthful and at the same time that is supportive That is genuine and I say this particularly because we also have another bias that we think that rude means candid This is something we need to hammer in our mind Especially when we evaluate the feedback that someone else is giving sometimes we see very rush The Russian and hard feedback and we say well, what they're saying is true True. Okay, it may be maybe good content, but it's not a synonymous You can be totally sincere without being rude and this exactly this concept of being sincere Exactly this concept being a caring about the person receiving the feedback And the third aspect is form now this could be a big topic on its own But the general idea is that communication styles are different even if you're coming from the same place We work in the same company for a long time. We are very aligned together. We may have two entirely different communication styles So we need to try to match and adjust to see which communication style the person receiving feedback is better adjusted to And at the same times their language barrier if you're working on big companies on across multiple Countries and nations and languages There is naturally differences because we interpret individual words. Maybe with different ways Maybe we learn different the words in different contexts and of course cultural differences as well But probably the best tip I can give you here because we cannot list all the things that could happen in the form Is that we need to assume that misunderstanding happen? We recently had a conversation about you know, how earning and like quality of life relates to that and there was a big discussion that came out because Actually, we weren't disagreeing on the ideas, but we weren't disagreeing of the definition of what a rich person meant and That's funny because once we clarified what rich meant across this group of people Now suddenly we agreed. Oh If you mean rich in the sense, then yeah, you're right. I agree with what you're saying So these are the three components that would disassemble feedback and I hope that will help you to reframe the way you structure it But then let's shift to the next step, which is what to do with it So what when what to do when we are actually given a receiving it? But before that I want to introduce another aspect that is often overlooked Which is the idea to ask Asking feedback is something that needs to be developed So how how can we ask for feedback because asking allows us to be and receive Good feedback in return. So the first thing is be explicit be explicit about the kind of feedback. Do you want? never Introduce and never ask something like can anyone give us feedback about this. Do you have feedback about this? Because what what can people do you want? What are we talking about exactly? So first of all Which level of feedback are we talking about right if you're talking for example about design? I may be asking like a general overarching flow analysis. I don't want to get too much into the details So it's better if I tell you that I don't care about the details right now We'll care about that later if I'm doing maybe a code review Similarly, maybe I can ask you can we review the architecture right now instead of getting immediately into the details of line by line Code review, so this is essential because allows a better communication a more efficient communication and So you want to ask a specific question the more specific the question the better feedback you get But even more importantly in the question you don't want to prime the answer Well, sometimes you may want but priming means that you don't want to suggest them what kind of answer you want You don't want to tell them well between these options Which one do you prefer I prefer this one? Right this happens it may be phrased differently, but you want to avoid a kind of structure a kind of sentence that will prime them And sometimes of course you want to say well given the analysis I did I think that this is the best solution But please give me that and that's again a way to frame the way you are asking for it But now it's clear that you're coming from a certain angle Finally a bit of a note about anonymous feedback I would generally suggest that anonymous feedback shouldn't happen if you are creating a good environment if there is a good team If there is a safe space there Usually anonymous feedback isn't very effective Because you have an open discussion you can talk together and you can approach even difficult topics together Sometimes however, maybe necessary you can do anonymous feedback by proxy So by giving feedback to a third person that then anonymize for you Or there may be a tool for doing this like an anonymous survey Regardless try to adjust and use anonymous feedback as little as possible Of course usually the threshold here is if giving feedback can be perceived as dangerous of threatening for the person Now now that we know how to ask we can move instead to know how to give proper feedback The first key thing surprisingly even giving feedback is again to ask is again about asking I've noticed many many times that if the same exactly same feedback if you introduce it it by Can I give you feedback? It has incredibly incredibly more power Because you are creating the setting with a simple question you're creating the setting the other person start being prepared It's very unlikely. They're going to say no, but maybe they will and they maybe say well, you know what now It's not the right time. Let's talk tomorrow But this in a way gives power to the person You're giving feedback to another important aspect I'm not going to differentiate too much between the two, but it's important to a knowledge That some feedback may be about the thing you're building About a project about a product about the tools anything and sometimes the feedback is about the individual Sometimes you want them to grow sometimes you want them to improve Okay, these are two different kinds of feedback that are have a slight difference and It's important to a knowledge when it's one and when it's the other It may seem obvious sometimes, but it's better clarifying this First thing be timely being timely is probably one of the most important things in game feedback when something happened You want to write them right now to tell them you want to be as close as possible to the event So you can discuss on the actual practicalities of it of actually what happened. You don't want never generalize it Be always as specific as you can address it This is especially valid if you're talking about of course an individual if you are helping them to grow The second aspect here is I can't be timely Because nobody likes to rework if you're midway through a project and you're questioning the assumptions of the project It's very unlikely that the team is going to listen to you But this is absolutely normal of course still do that if there is a critical issue that Wouldn't allow you to ship or there is a measure flow, but in general This happens more often that you may expect a couple of years ago. We were talking with with a person who was an amazing researcher and she was telling me that well giving constant feedback to teams and nobody was listening and We review okay when you did it when it happened and we noticed that every single time Was because it was never at the beginning never in the planning, but it was always midway through a project So of course there wasn't attention for the team because the team couldn't take it at that specific moment So timing here is again important. They don't they don't want to do the work again and third be timely again This kind of timely instead is in a positive fashion If something good happen, you don't want to kill it If you are having a great meeting you have a presentation and it went incredibly well You presented to all device precedents and always good and you're walking out and your colleagues come to you and a great presentation, but What you killed it right? Please give them the time to enjoy the moment. You can't wait a day This something okay, of course you want to be timely, but in that situation, maybe wait one day, right? Because that's good for them to enjoy the moment. It went well, right? So there is no need to constantly push for it. So suddenly Another aspect is be explicit with those assumptions. Tell what it where you're coming from Because different angles are incredibly useful, especially in when we promote diversity people coming from different angles are very very useful But you need to be clear what assumption are coming from you need to be clear that oh if I think about this kind of user then this is my suggestion and also ask the stupid question Because it happens so often that in a team Everyone thinks that there is a stupid question Nobody's willing to ask it because Everyone should already know it And so that thing is never clarified That thing is never put on the table for clarity for synchronization to help everyone to know it So of course ask the stupid question. Don't be afraid of it Actually be proud of having the courage to ask that question This is a very simple trick, especially if you're in writing and that happens also often Change all the you when you're talking about a product to this thing This suggestion or this code or this design is never about your design what you did Try to do personalize it if it's not of course about the person right, so I'm saying this because maybe the concept again the content may be great But if you're trying for your feedback to be well received. Do you want to put them on the defensive? No, of course You're trying to make them better So try to avoid putting them on the defensive try to be about the thing you're making and not the individual Sometimes it is personal though Sometimes you're not talking about the products about we all want the person to grow And I found out over the years that the best way to approach this is That regardless of the person how the person thinks about it may be the first time you're about to talk about it Assume that they know about the problem and assume that they're working on it and Assume that they're having a hard time about it I think that this is the best way to put you in the right mindset to approach a person with respect and be tactful about it another advice here is Like the idea of never stop at criticism never stop at the negative but always provide a way forward Never say like oh, you know this code is bad or this design is bad You can say the design is bad. This is the reason why and here's a few ways you can choose between on how to go forward This is again incredibly powerful because you're helping them to go in the right direction And of course you can discuss on the criticism on this suggestion But then again, that's a great way to go forward and I don't know how many of you have heard of the idea of the shit sandwich raise of hands Right, this is incredibly debated. I've seen in many situations people say oh, yeah That's a great way to give advice and people are saying. Oh, that's an awful way to give advice my opinion, this is neither in the sense that You need to start adding an element at this time and this is important because Often what happens when you do this kind of management reviews 360 reviews Or like quarterly one-on-ones with your manager What happens is that you're getting all the criticism all at once. That's not very useful. That's not very motivating And so what they're saying well if you use the shit sandwich, you're also giving positive feedback So it balances out well actually no Because the problem there is that it's not really about the format Is that if you wait so long and then it happens and you get all the negative feedback together the positive feedback at that time? Will be felt as fake at truthfully they could be it will be felt as fake So it's not about really the format. It's about the fact that you want to give time You want to give as we said before timely feedback? And if it's timely then you are building up over time and in the moment you're fixing that you're correcting them You're motivating them and then of course you can still have the general reviews because Sometimes some things come out only a patterns So you need a repetition and then you can do a summary at some point But still this is the best way This is because this is why the shit the shit sandwich doesn't really work It because it's not about the concept of how you give feedback It's about the time when you give it and this has been proven if there are research over research that great teams Are giving themselves great feedback positive feedback motivation to one each other And if you would dig a little bit more about the content again confirmation and adjustment We see that confirmation is good because among all the possibilities all the things you could do and all the things you could focus in your daily work I am confirming that the direction you're going is good If of course gives a boost to morale It can be helpful for imposter syndrome if you know the the idea that a lot of people like fill imposters in their daily job And I feel that They're going to be Recognized as imposter the next day and in the end this builds trust And at the same time when you work on the adjustment this again builds trust because it removes the downside So you are uplifting from above and you're pushing at the same time from below so you're helping the person grow you're helping the project grow and Of course time is a variable But what you're doing here is they're trying to build a safe zone a safe space when this discussion can happen Does the person feel safe enough to approach even difficult and critical conversation? and to create this Especially if you're a team lead if you're a manager you need to admit your own errors and Need to accept the other person errors the more you start doing this the more the environment is conductive and positive Say sorry This is can be very hard for a lot of people But it's the first step to create this kind of environment and to grow yourself to be a better person giving feedback And one aspect is also give agency So the way the reason why we ask do you want feedback is because you're empowering them you're asking for their consent You're asking them if they can act upon it so they're giving power And in the end this the the end of a safe space is again the same concept of growing and building trust Now how to receive feedback well Let's start with the team right in the team First thing you can do let's assume the feedback is not great So it's someone that hasn't listened to the first part of this presentation so first thing Breathe try to split it try it's not about you try to separate. Okay. This were personal attacks and This is the objective part of it Great. Now I have the objective part. I can focus on that part and Then I do another thing that is splitting the problem that they're mentioning from the solutions They're giving because some people that when they're giving feedback, they just give the solution say oh, you should be doing this Okay Why? What's the reason why are you suggesting that right? We discussed it before so if that doesn't happen You have to do the extra work in separating what is the problem and what is the solutions they are mentioning? Again, if they don't do it you have to do the work yourself. What are the assumptions where they're coming from? What's their angle? This is especially interesting because As often as especially as designers or developers We have a little background on the works in working for example of the businesses. We're working with and Sometimes the perspective of a person that is working to grow the business is very different from our perspective So it's important to try to reframe and see where they're coming from and Often it's a healthy angle and it's good to incorporate it because I mean we're trying to grow our businesses And also pair up if especially if this is a hard feedback and This works of course better if you're communicating in text because you can review the text It's great to compare with someone else because you know, I've read this Comment that they gave me feels bad. But what do you think about it? Am I taking this to personally? And so you're seeking by this external approval or Negation You're able to grow yourself because you're able to get this more objective perspective and you're able to find an angle to improve We are we work in in an open source community So there are a few things that in the open change because when you start opening up when you start talking about large communities Where especially there is again in open source where everyone can come in and do what is called like a drive by drive by feedback Again, you want to start taking a deep breath? Maybe even two or three and Approach it like research Like like where you're doing a survey imagine that you're doing a survey you're collecting the data and you're analyzing it So you approach it like that some feedback you analyze it in a quantitative way some feedback analyze in a more qualitative way And so you're reviewing in aggregate form and since it's difficult to assess specifically The background and the assumptions at each individual is coming from one thing that can be more easy to do is To review which group they belong to Is this feedback coming from a business owner? Is this feedback coming from blogger? Is this be feedback coming from a developer? Right these feedbacks are all good feedback, but their angle is important to understand how that needs to be Appreciated and evaluated and sometimes it was important to see which context the feedback is happening It's very different if the feedback is happening on github or on track And it's very different from feedback that is happening under a blog post And it's again very feedback very different from feedback that could happen in person So this changes and reframes a little bit and especially if you're working in a team and collaborating with others Which I hope you are Sometimes you're not the right person to answer Sometimes in your team, there is a person that has a more informal perspective that is the best person to do it And so even if you are the person that actually read it and is participating in the conversation Maybe you can ask can you review this and answer here? and this is super helpful and And I think you want to do is to knowledge everyone Because they're giving feedback they're giving your time They're giving value and What you want to do, of course, maybe there are so many of them You cannot personally relate to each one of them, but it's still important to a knowledge every and each individual feedback you're receiving Of course, not all feedback is equal again because there are assumptions because of background and of course The loudest voice that doesn't necessarily mean they are the most important So these are all assessments you have to do but still it's very important to a knowledge each and every one of these feedback you're receiving and I'd like to wrap up with with a code for Bruce Lee, which wasn't just a martial artist, but also a philosopher and To motivate and invite every one of you to grow to be your best self for you and your team Thank you very much. Thank you very much David. That's a Fantastic start to the day's talks and I think a great guide for all of us working together on the project We do have time for questions. We've got around 15 minutes. Very good timekeeping today So if you do have a question, we have mic runners Could the mic runners just wave please to say everyone out So we've got a couple down at the front and at the back as well I think I understand we are mic running actually this morning Okay, I Understood we were okay. Well, we could Mike stand as well.  There we go So if you have a question the mic stands are just there if you recall how we did it with Matt yesterday afternoon If there are no questions on the floor right away, that's good because I get to ask questions then which is super awesome so Yeah, I've really really interesting stuff with the Daniel Kahneman quote. I'm not sure not everyone might be familiar with Kahneman's work But it's fantastic very practical Cognitive psychology work and he's been working for a long time and many of their sort of ideas of psychology Are there any other particular aspects of Kahneman's work that you thought ah, that's that's really being useful In feedback that you might want to point people. Well, as I said, it is a lot of work So I would probably suggest just to check out one of his one of his books or one of his talks There is a lot of material around. Yeah, and yeah, it's as I said, it's very very Yeah, I think he did a Ted talk about two three years ago, which is well worth it. Yeah, okay. Now we have questions on the floor Yes, hi Davide. I have a question. I was sitting there with my colleague Kate and She suggested I ask you You mentioned how it's important to acknowledge all feedback because people have bothered to do that What if they're like trolls? Yes, that's an excellent question And it's probably a talk on its own so trolls are difficult in the sense that The general advice is you don't want to feed the troll right and that's absolutely fine And it works in very small scale though It's something that if it's just an individual happens on your own blog. You can pretty easily moderate them We currently have a technology issue in the sense that this doesn't work at scale a lot of the tools and they're provided today Don't provide really great management for when it's not one troll, but it's a coordinated Group of people that is attacking So in this way, unfortunately, there is no specific Feedback on how you can handle it Ignoring internally it's usually the best approach and usually different tools Have different ways to try to just remove them from the conversation as much as possible This is very dependent on the platform and I hope in the future that there will be a better approach to do this But unfortunately, we are in the middle ground right now Where we don't have a really good solution for this kind of skill attack, but the original advice of Ignoring is probably the best at a small scale at least Thank you. Okay, we have another question Hey, Davide. I love this talk. Thank you for doing it So sometimes I have found that when Feedback is really important to give as in we're trying to avoid a negative result It can also be a really bad time for that person to hear The feedback so I was wondering like we're on which side do you air bad timing or avoiding a bad result? Okay, we're getting advanced here So the first thing is depends on how well, you know the person, right? If someone you don't have any background you don't have any way to assess how the feedback is going to be received in detail I will probably err on the side of delaying it And finding the right moment the more you're comfortable and engaging with the person the more you're basically able to find the right word because some I Will say that a way I think about it is that everyone has their own fears Everyone is acting upon them and everyone has a different way level of awareness about them So if you know what their fears are how aware they are of their own fears Then you can more easily manage and give good feedback without hitting these walls So in this sense, I think it's regulated the timing is more regulated But your knowledge and your engagement with the individual The communication channel also can be a way to review it, right? So doing it that in text Sometimes is great for some people because you're actually able to pace the word and give time to think But sometimes for other people is absolutely worse So again, you can adjust and see if this person is better by voice or in person or if it's better in the text form So I don't think there is a general answer to this unfortunately But I think it's a great question to us because we can start creating this awareness of when is the right moment Thank you very much. Great question. Thank you Yes, another question. Hello. I had a question about giving motivational or constructive feedback to also avoid a negative result So you give this feedback? They react and they start doing better as a as a leader of people. Do you? Say oh great job, and then they revert back to their previous Habits or like how long do you monitor and keep providing feedback until? It's not a problem anymore. Do you have advice there? Because my initial reaction is to say This is what I want and I want you to keep doing this, but I don't know if that's the right approach no, I mean the mindset is absolutely right and I Think that there is there's something to say there about Again the knowledge of the person unfortunately But also that The positive thing that you want to give is always Probably should this is something I should have said in the presentation It probably needs to be as specific as possible because if you're just saying oh, that's great or that's you're doing great That's not specific enough because that's if you start repeating that it becomes void, right? So good positive feedback is a positive feedback that is specific on the thing exactly a thing that did well You need also to be aware of the regression to the mean that explained at the very beginning So it may look like that the next time they're performing worse That's not necessarily because the feedback didn't work. It made you just a matter of how they're growing Okay, so I will definitely set a longer time frame and also depends of how big The problem we're talking about right if it just oh, can you adjust how you write like the syntax of Of your code or how you write like you need to add Full stops at the end of every sentence, you know The kind of thing is probably basic and probably you would expect to happen right the next time and to never repeat it many times again if it's a more structural change then You probably are already aware of how difficult it is for the individual to approach a change And that's the kind of change I would probably monitor over a long time The way I would approach a more like a deeper change of the transformation and deeper growth in the person is To let them to set the goal So if you try to be explicit because it's something that you want, right? So it's a goal you want and you want to share with them a goal So okay, this is what I want. Let's set a goal common that we both agree. It's valuable Let's set a time frame And let's see how it happens and how long this take if it's working well, and then you do the check-ins and so on So this is for bigger kind of transformation and change So I will always try to in this case it to be as explicit as possible in setting these goals Does it help? Very much so. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. Do we have another question from yes, we do Hello, I have a question about your opinion when the feedback Is used in the sense of manipulation with co-workers or you know when a manager uses feedback To either hold your ambitions down or how to overcome that personally or how to recognize it some kind of advice Thank you. Yes. That's a tough one. Okay so the most practical advice I could give you in this sense is Find a third person Find someone else that is Maybe as close as possible to the situation so they can assess it, but as detached as possible so they're possibly objective Because in this way they will allow you to review every feedback you're giving you're receiving To say if you actually want to receive it or if it's just manipulation So this is more from for me. It's more of a protection Because you don't want Your clarity and your well-being to be influenced by these kind of techniques and also the more you develop This ability to recognize when this is happening the more like protected you are because awareness here is super important Then Once you start like developing this it becomes more challenging in the sense that if it's your manager Then how you can like correct that right? How can you help your manager? How can you manage up? to them, right and here we start getting into a difficult territory because Sometimes as plainly as I can say is change workplace Sometimes and this however needs to be assessed because not all HR is created equal if it's a good HR You can refer on the side to them If it's bad HR again, probably you want to need more anonymous feedback. Maybe But this becomes a little more of a challenge the situation and I don't think it's strictly about feedback because then you are Handling a more of an organizational problem because if it's happening with you It's happening with all the people that are interacting with this person. So Yeah, I'm afraid it jumps to a different level there. I hope was still useful as an answer Thank you very much. You've got time for maybe another question or two. Yes, sir Yeah, hello, hello, David. First of all, thank you for amazing presentation. It was very useful and very Very well presented. Thank you. No, I am I'm wondering do you have some opinion or perhaps some experience what that what makes what makes a person actually leave a feedback for example, we are we are working in In the open as you said For example, if we are creating a plug-in or verps team or anything else we have a large number of people downloading it using it and Some people like it some people would like it to improve but only only a relatively small percentage of those users actually Bother to leave a reply or a feedback Do you think it's it's it's it's a matter of Only like extreme opinion extremely good or extremely bad or is it a matter of culture? If this if this person is coming from a culture where it is more more common to to be open to to give feedback Just a few words about that and Yes, no, that's an excellent question especially in this context so The first thing I would say is Great also that you gave me an example So if you're talking about a plug-in or something that is for example an app on the app store Or a theme and you'll see you know There is the open feedback form and people are just leaving comment So the first thing I would say is that mostly negative feedback Will be there in the sense that if you are having a positive experience It's less likely you're spending time to go and find and vent and rant about it Right, so this creates already a big bias to our like negative feedback. I'm using negative specifically here Even with the disambiguation I was doing so the first thing here I would suggest is To try to find source of feedback that are more neutral So for example if you have enough users in your plug-in or in your app Start asking for feedback inside the app, right to everyone not necessarily all the people that have a bad experience And here I will say don't also try to manipulate it There are some applications for example that ask you oh, are you having a good experience and say yes, so give us feedback Okay, and if you say no, they say okay next time I mean that doesn't work either, right, so you want to be as sincere as a neutral as possible And you want this especially to balance the feedback that is happening these open spaces because as I was mentioning The the context where the feedback is Happening matters and how it's triggered and how people get there now. I can say there are certainly some some cultural differences And I'm not saying necessarily like country or language or whatever, but there are some individuals that are more like easily there to to give you feedback and to help you but I Would take this more in the sense of the ask part of my presentation. So if you are able to ask for feedback In a structured way, then you're going to get the value and this is especially important If you're building a product of any kind because if you're listening only and you have only as a source source of feedback These kind of open spaces when I get the most negative feedback Then your product if you're relying on that your product Roadmap is likely going to be influenced by this thing and you're not actually listen to the positives to the people that are actually Wanting you to grow and your product to grow in a good direction, right? So try to offset it as much as possible. I Hope it helps Thank you very much David it for the answer for all that come and to you for the conversation and for a fantastic Presentation got the day off so a great start and I think it's gonna help us all in our work and in the community as well So thank you very much. Let's thank David again


foul committed by Austin Daniels once again Delaware Valley is a program they've got just two players that have scored multiple goals this year they're leading goalscores Nick Miller number 10 and number 16 Andre Permia skin so Permia skin they each have two here's a long feed and a touch hit in the net


It is now time for oral questions, and I recognize the leader of the official opposition. Thank you, Speaker. I first want to just acknowledge that today is person's day, and back in 1927, the famous five began the journey to making sure that women became identified as equal persons to men. In that note, I want to direct my question, Speaker, to the Acting Premier. Does the Acting Premier believe that a woman fleeing domestic violence should be able to take a day off to get her kids to some counseling without fear of losing her job? Acting Premier. Minister of Tourism. Thank you for the question. I am going to take a leap of faith and assume that you are talking about a recent change to the round table. I don't think that there is a member in this chamber who would ever suggest that workplace violence in our schools, in our classrooms, in our homes is appropriate. We all need to work together on this issue. It is nonpartisan, and we need to get past the throwing of knives back and forth and actually work together. And in the supplementary, I would like to highlight some of the important work that we have been doing on our side. Well said, Minister. Supplementary. Well, unfortunately, Speaker, the minister made the wrong leap. We actually already have worked together to try to make a difference for women who are facing domestic violence. It is called changes to Bill 148 that are currently in place where a woman now is able to leave the workplace in order to deal with the domestic violence that she is facing to try to help her to ensure that herself and her children are safe. And those protections are one of the many hard-earned rights that the Premier has pledged to tear up when he strips the protections from Ontario's Employment Standards Act. And the Acting Premier explained how a woman taking time off work to protect her family is bad for our economy. Minister. Minister of Labor. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I appreciate the question from the Leader of the Opposition. I think all parties in the past have brought forward motions of supported private members' bills and had great discussions in the legislature of what more we can do to protect women against violence and to get to places that can help them leave those difficult situations. The Leader of the Opposition is referring to Bill 148, and we have said that we are reviewing Bill 148. I've had many, many meetings with a variety of stakeholders, including associations that represent people that are fleeing from domestic violence, associations, shelters, et cetera, and we will be bringing information soon this fall to the legislature on those discussions. Thank you. Final supplementary. Well, Speaker, I just want to say that most employers that I talk to want to see those protections remain in place. So it's not just a matter of all of those fantastic women's organizations that are supportive and helping women to escape these kinds of situations, but most employers that I talk to want to see those particular protections remain in place. And the law is designed to make sure that every woman actually has that protection if she needs it, which is what leads to the question, which is what leads to one question. Who is the government asking, or rather who is asking the government? If there is anybody, we would like to know who is asking the government to take away the provisions in the Employment Standards Act that enable women to leave work when they're fleeing domestic violence, because what I'm hearing from the employer side is they're not interested in having that happen. The Leader of the Opposition is correct. I mean, I think collectively as a society we've been able to shine more light on the fact that there's a large increase of women being affected by violence, and it should not be tolerated in any situation, in the home, in the workplace, or anywhere. And I myself, when I was in opposition, have passed many bills to try to protect women. We continue to believe in that on this side of the house. As I said, I have met with a variety of stakeholders, individual people, all of our caucus colleagues have heard from the people in their writings about the increasing of violence against women and the need to do more. So, Mr, to the Leader of the Opposition, through Mr. Speaker, we will have more to say on that in the days to come. Next question, the Leader of the Opposition. Thank you, Speaker. My next question is for the Acting Premier. The Financial Accountability Office revealed earlier this week that $500 million in cap-and-trade spending has actually not been cancelled, but the Ford government refused to reveal where the money is now going. Can the Acting Premier tell us why the government won't share that information? Acting Premier. Minister of the Environment. The Environment, Conservation and Parks. Mr. Speaker, through you to the Member and thank you for the question. The FAO report did make a number of things clear, including, and I will speak to the Member's question, but it made clear principally that Ontarians were going to save $264 per family. It made clear that the estimates we'd made around the wind-down of the credit market of $5 million of cost were accurate. And it made clear shockingly to some that the total cost of a federal carbon tax would be close to $650 per family. It also talked about the orderly wind-down. As we have discussed, we will be winding down certain programs. Other programs, including transit and housing programs, will be continuing. These are the sorts of programs that we're spoken about in our platform, the important transit changes that are being made in the GTA and otherwise. So when the entire program is wrapped up, which will happen at the end of October, for example, when the Windows program, which is part of the orderly wind-down, has happened, there will be further reporting on the details. But, Mr. Speaker, I think the important part of the FAO report was saying that the government was on track in terms of returning money to Ontarians and on track in terms of winding down. Mr. Speaker, you know, families have heard promises from governments before, and they've also seen governments refuse to be clear about the facts. What they heard from the Financial Accountability Office this week was they'll be paying more. The government is adding $3 billion to the debt. There is no climate plan, and their own government is refusing to tell them where half a billion dollars is now going. So why is the government not being upfront, clear and transparent, with the FAO and Ontario families? Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure what the Leader of the Opposition was reading, but what was clear was what the government had been very specific. We had said we would have an orderly wind-down of the program. That is happening. We had said that there would be a $5 million charge for the wind-down of the credit market, a market that the Leader of the Opposition would have said would cost $4 billion. No doubt it would have cost $4 billion if the Leader of the Opposition had had the chance to make a cost that much. They also said very clearly that $264 will be saved by families and that a Trudeau carbon tax will cost $650. And yes, Mr. Speaker, as the programs are wound-down, we will make sure that Ontarians, unlike the previous government, see where the money is gone and they see that cap and trade is gone and that carbon tax doesn't replace it. The Minister still refuses to do as what he refused to do, or the governments refuse to do, in terms of a query from the FAO, which is disclose where this half a billion dollars is now going. Families have heard promises from government before, and they've also seen governments scramble to hide the facts. What they heard from the FAO very clearly earlier this week is that they will be paying more. The government is adding $3 billion to the debt. There is no climate plan, and their own government is refusing to tell them where a half a billion dollars is going. Why is this government not being upfront and transparent with the FAO and Ontario families? Mr. Speaker, because the Leader of the Opposition has given me the chance, we are, of course, going to have a climate plan. We were clear in the campaign we'd have a climate plan. We were clear when we cancelled the failed climate plan we'd have a climate plan. We were clear when we introduced Bill 4 there'd be a climate plan, and now Ontarians can give us contributions to that to the video.ca backslash climate change where we're collecting information on the climate plan. But let's be clear. The NDP have not been at all transparent when it comes to their plans. That's why you had a $7 billion hole in your budget. When we talk about $3 billion less in revenue, that's $3 billion less of government programs for you. That's $3 billion in Ontarians markets where we think the money should be spent. Start the clock. Next question. Leader of the Opposition. Thank you, Speaker. This is my final question in this series, and it's to the Acting Premier. Earlier this week, my colleague in this House, the member for Quittenong, rose to remark on the life of the late former Chief of Gracie Nero, Steve Fobester Sr. I wouldn't mind taking a moment to add to my colleague's comments. I mourn his loss, and I give my deepest sympathies to the community speaker as well. The Chief died due to complications, or the former Chief died due to complications from Minamata disease, mercury poisoning, that he had been living with for decades. Does the government acknowledge that former Chief Steve Fobester Sr. suffered from the effects of mercury poisoning and that this is what contributed to his death? Acting Premier. Minister of Indigenous Affairs. Minister of Indigenous Affairs. Thank you. As I had rosen in this place, some days ago, Mr. Speaker, I had an opportunity to reflect on a person that I've known for almost two decades. Sitting across the table from him in my law office in Canora, I had a chance to admire and respect a man whose legacy is without comparison from a small northern community. He led the charge, not just for issues for his communities, opportunities for Treaty 3, but also with respect to mercury contamination. Most recently, a week or so ago, my friend, the Minister of Environment, Conservation and Parks visited the community. He had an opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to the work that needs to be done on the English River system, and I had been there prior to ensure that beneficiaries from that pension would be fully indexed and retroactive. We're doing that to honour his commitment and his legacy, Mr. Speaker, but also to hopefully close a dark chapter in Ontario's history. Supplementary? Well, Speaker, to the shame of successive governments, former Chief Fulbister and the people of Grassley Narrows had to go across the ocean in order to get help and recognition for the mercury poisoning that they suffered from. Experts determined that 94% of the population of Grassley Narrows suffered from and continue to suffer from the debilitating effects of exposure to mercury, and yet the majority of the community suffering from mercury disease still doesn't receive any compensation through the Mercury Disability Board. A board, as we all know, that was set up for that very purpose. Will the government commit to updating the Mercury Disability Board so that all Grassley Narrows community members suffering from the effects of mercury exposure can receive the full and fair compensation that they so rightfully deserve? Minister? Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I should also mention that we had an opportunity to spend some quality time with Chief John Pace from Wabseemung all too often. It gets lost in the discussion that members of that community were affected, and of course comprise a critical mass of the people on that pension. Mr. Speaker, it was a significant policy advancement to index those pensions for the people who had been recognized by medical experts historically as having been impacted by the contamination. I know in visiting with the community and celebrating in traditional ceremony that we had done the right thing, Mr. Speaker, to update a 30-year-old pension, ensure that it was done retroactively so that those folks could experience an increase to reflect historical challenges with the pension, and moving forward would have a fully indexed pension from the Mercury Continent. Thank you. Next question, the Member for Scarborough-Reese-Park. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Finance. We have been hearing a lot about fairness in our auto insurance system. The Liberals and NDP had talked a big game on auto insurance, but time and time again we see that that is followed up by no action. It's clear that the Liberal-NDP system of failed, stretched goals and auto insurance is broken. The private member bill introduced on Monday by the member from Milton Wood if passed moved us forward in developing an auto insurance system that is fair and serves the needs of drivers across Ontario. Could the Minister please explain the importance of this initiative and how our caucus is working to ensure that Ontarians can benefit from an auto insurance system that treats the people of Ontario fairly? Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the Member from Scarborough-Reese-Park for that question. Once again, I want to take a moment to congratulate the member from Milton on his initiative. His bill, Speaker, if passed would end auto insurance discrimination by scrapping the outdated territory system and preventing auto insurance companies from discriminating by using someone's postal code or area code. And it does so in a responsible, practical matter. The rationale behind this bill is simple. A good driver in Brampton should pay the same similar rates as a good driver in Ottawa pays today. With this bill, if passed, there will be more consumer choice, fairness, and a focus on personal responsibility. I look forward to continuing to work with the member from Milton on this initiative. Supplementary. Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the Minister for his answer. It's clear the member for Milton brought forward a thoughtful approach which looks at this issue from a province-wide lens and which, if passed, would ensure there would not be unintended consequences for drivers in other parts of the province. It does not appear the same can be said for the member for Brampton East. After taking some time to review the bill he put forward in the House, it seems clear that it would have the opposite effect. In fact, there appears to be major concerns that his bill would raise rates on Ontarians in other parts of GTA. Can the Minister please elaborate on these concerns? Totally true. Minister. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and once again thank you to the member for that question. As I said yesterday in this House, the NDP member from Brampton East wants the GTA to be considered a single geographic area when insurance companies set their rates. However, this will serve only to increase insurance costs across the entire GTA. In fact, the member's plan would cause rates to rise in many of his caucus colleagues' own writings. On the other hand, our member from Milton got this right. He took the time to consult, to listen, to develop a plan that will deliver real fairness to the system if past all drivers across all Ontario will benefit from the thoughtful plan he put forward. Restart the call. Next question, the member for Essex. Thank you very much, Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Community Safety. Speaker, as the Minister should know, the OPP's Economic Crime and Corruption Unit has been conducting an investigation concerning a waterfront cottage owned by Vaughan Council candidate Eliana DiBiazi. The OPP are investigating links between work done on this cottage by contractors and over $150 million in contracts granted by Mrs. DiBiazi's husband to those same contractors. Speaker, the Minister of Community Safety is responsible for the OPP, and he knows that his office should be above and beyond reproach. Yet he's been actively campaigning for Mrs. DiBiazi throughout this municipal election. Speaker, why does the Minister responsible for the OPP think that it's appropriate to be campaigning for a candidate that is currently at the centre of an OPP investigation? Mr. Community Safety and Correctional Services. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to make it clear that I am here as a member of the legislature, and this morning I did send a letter to the individual in question, as it's been brought to my attention that she has been using my photo on her campaign brochure. As a recently elected Member of Parliament, I understand that emotions and activity levels run high in the heat of a campaign, and that at times an over-enthusiastic volunteer might take steps which are inappropriate or unapproved by some of the individuals involved. I understand that this may be the case in this instance, but be that as it may, I've stated publicly on several occasions that it is not my intent to endorse any single candidate during the municipal election. I do, however, commend every candidate who has chosen to put their name forwards on a ballot and run in a democratic process to work for the people. Supplementary. Restart the clock. Supplementary. I believe that the minister has just acknowledged a disturbing pattern that we've seen by the members of the Crown on the other side. First, we have a premier who's been seen campaigning for neo-Nazi sympathizers. Now we have a minister responsible for the OPP campaigning for... Government benches will come to order. I'm going to caution the member for Essex on the use of intemperate language. So I will recognize him to put his question. Speaker, again, I've spoken to the disturbing pattern that we've seen and the conflict, the potential conflict of interest on the offices of the ministers and the premier himself. My question is simply, how can the minister think that it's appropriate for him and responsible for him to be campaigning for a candidate that's at the center of an OPP investigation? Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I mentioned, I commend every candidate who has put forward their names on a ballot to stand up and ask the citizens of municipalities across the province to give them a chance to serve as an elected representative. For those who have successfully elected, it will mean years of difficult, important work to be done on behalf of deserving, hardworking citizens. I myself benefited by growing up in a community in a province and a nation served by politicians of fortitude and integrity. The society these great men and women helped build provided me and my family and millions of other people a safe and prosperous place to grow and learn and work and raise a family of their own. While I cannot predict the future, it is my strong hope that each of the candidates who are successful in the upcoming municipal elections will want to work collectively to do the best for the province and for their municipalities. Corridor. Member for Essex, come to order. Start the clock. The next question. Member for Hastings, Lennox and Addington. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question today is for the Minister of Environment Conservation and Parks. Regularly, like many of my colleagues, our constituents contact our office with concerns regarding the cap and trade carbon tax. And they struggle to understand how it is improving the environment and they're uncertain as to the cost that they will eventually have to bear. But there are several, several things that they are quite aware of. They are familiar with the difficulty in putting food on the table or paying one's hydro bill and surely not too hard to figure out their concern if they have enough gas to make it home from work or work from home. They feel the burden that the cap and trade carbon tax has placed on them. Mr. Speaker, the people, they need to know. We all need to know how will Ontarians be impacted should any kind of carbon tax ever be imposed on them? Here it is. Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. Mr. Speaker, and thank you to the member from Hastings, Lennox, Addington for the question. All Ontarians do deserve to know what the costs of the cap and trade program would have been and the potential costs for the Trudeau carbon tax. And that was made clear by the FAO in his report. $312 a year, Mr. Speaker, would have been the cost by 2022 of the liberal cap and trade program. That's one of the reasons that we got rid of it. But more concerning today is that $648, Mr. Speaker, by 2022 will be the cost of a Trudeau carbon tax. Mr. Speaker, with respect to our visitor in the gallery, I'm not sure what they're smoking up in Ottawa, but this is not going to fly with Ontarians. This isn't a program that they want. This isn't a tax that they want. This isn't something that the people of Ontario or the people of Canada can afford. I certainly am very, very pleased that our guest is here to hear our comment today. So thank you for helping us understand the impact of a carbon tax and what it'll have on Canadians. And as we all know, and I've stated before, most of us have experienced many, many Canadians are struggling with making ends meet during the rising costs. I know my constituents are so, so pleased that they finally elected a government that truly understands and will listen to their concerns. Yet over and over again, at various levels we see the Liberal Party, the ADP, and the Green Party rise in this house in support of a cap and trade tax, another tax. The FAO report concerns, confirms our deepest concerns. The carbon tax will take money out of the pockets of every Canadian. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Environment describe to us why this regressive cap and trade carbon tax program will not work for Ontarians? Mr. Speaker, through you to the member, and I am going to take another opportunity because we, as I promised, are putting a plan forward that will work for Ontarians, so we're looking for their impact at ontario.ca backslash climate change. But to the question, clearly what the auditor-general had said when she talked about the cap and trade as an ineffective tax, pearly conceived, that would ship hundreds of millions of dollars out of the country, cap and trade was not going to work. The question, I think, to the opposition party is a good one. The NDP member from Ottawa Centre raised $150 a ton carbon tax. Let's put that into terms people can understand. That's a 35 cent a litre increase in gasoline. Our elimination of cap and trade has already cut gas prices by almost 5%. We will cut it by 5 cents, we will cut it by a further 5 cents, but that gas tax increased is $4100 for the average... Thank you. Thank you. Next question, start the clock. Member for Essex. Thank you very much, Speaker. My question is to the acting Premier. We've just received some pretty shocking breaking news. Can the acting Premier confirm that the Premier's former campaign tour director has been now appointed as the Ontario Trade Representative in Washington and will be getting an almost $75,000 pay hike over his predecessor, which would actually leave him earning more than Canada's current ambassador to the United States. Minister of Economic Development and Trade. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you for the question. Actually, Ian Todd will be appointed October 22nd to be our trade representative in Washington and a special role that the previous representative in Washington didn't have as a special advisor to the Premier. His compensation will be very comparable to what Manique Smith, Representative, was making. Order of the opposition. In addition, listen to this. In addition, salary was receiving pension contributions and a one-year severance. Preferesics come to order. Here, here. Supplementary. Apparently, the Ford gravy train has arrived at Queens Park and it's all aboard.  This is insane. Speaker, most Ontarians would be lucky to earn $75,000 $75,000 a year. Never mind getting a $75,000 bump in pay. Media reports, Speaker, today indicate that Ian Todd, a former campaign advisor, is going to be representing Ontario and Washington and that he'll be taking home more than the Canadian ambassador. How does this government justify a conservative insider this job in paying him $75,000 more than the person he's replacing? The opposition benches will come to order. The opposition benches will come to order. Minister. Once again, we see NDP math. Can't you understand over there? He's getting a salary like Manique Smith did, but he's not getting a pension contributions or a one-year severance. In addition, Mr. Speaker, we fired the consultants and we fired the retailers are gone and that office will be saving $710,000. Benches start the clock. Next question, the member for Ottawa venue. To the Attorney General. A couple of weeks ago, the day after the testimony of Christine Blasey Ford at the Brett Kavanaugh U.S. Senate confirmation hearing, two different women came into my constituency office and they decided in me that had been sexually assaulted in the past. This disclosure happens often when there are, it's the essence of the Me Too movement essentially because disclosure triggers memory. Now I refer them to the rape crisis center and in the context of my conversation with the rape crisis center after that, they explained to me that they had not received confirmation of the funding from the Attorney General for the service of legal advice for sexual assault. Can the minister confirm to this house that she plans to continue to help survivor of sexual violence access the legal system? Attorney General. I thank the member opposite for the question and I want to express the fact of my view and the view of this government that we feel for the women who came to you and we encourage all women who were experiencing violence to come and they were incredibly brave to come to you and tell you their stories. Our government believes that all Ontarians should live free from violence and the threat of violence and that is why we take the programs that our ministries offer to keep Ontarians free and to help them through the justice system. We take those programs very seriously and we're looking at them because we want to make sure that they are delivering the services in an effective and efficient way to actually provide the real help and services that the women need and so I committed to looking at all those programs across our government we are all doing that and we will have more to say on that in the future. Great question. Supplementary. I think there's a certain urgency for them to get to know what the answer is and that was the point of my question. I just want to say as well today is persons day in Canada. We celebrate the historic decision that decided that women were persons and therefore could be appointed to the senate. Indeed we celebrate this day because we celebrate the importance of ensuring a voice of women in politics but also in policymaking. I understand that the minister wants to respond adequately to violence against women and to respond to policy gaps that exist to empower women to be part of the policy process is really important in the context of violence against women and because individual women that have experienced violence sometimes want privacy governments in the past have often find it useful to seek the advice of organizations who work with women who have experienced violence. So would the attorney general consider the advice of the Barbara Schliffer clinic, the CalACS and all the organizations that were part of the round table on violence against women would she admit to having one round table for her ministry to ensure the presence of voice of survivors in policymaking. Thank you. Minister. Well thank you and I'd like to thank the member opposite for giving voice to the women that giving a voice to the women who came to you to bring their concerns to this house. I have had the opportunity to sit down directly with members of the Barbara Schliffer clinic as well as other members representing individual organizations that do the important work that we need them to do and I continue to do that and so I myself and I know the minister my colleague has also who is minister responsible for women has also been doing that and I will continue to hold round tables and also to meet with organizations individually so that I can speak to them about their concerns as well as learn directly from them about the important work that they do the work that they do in our province is valuable but we do so in an effective and efficient way so that we help the women that are in need. Thank you very much. Next question the member for Burlington. My question is to the minister of finance. Yesterday as result of federal liberal legislation recreation cannabis became legal in the province of Ontario and across Canada. This coincided with the passage of our own government's legislation bill 36 which was the result of a progressive consultation with municipalities, first nations police services and public health officials. I was pleased to see our government continues to make the safety of our children and youth a top priority speaker. There is no question that every decision our government makes with respect to cannabis must have the best interest of Ontario's children and youth top of mind. Minister could you please tell the house how safety continues to be the top priority plan for cannabis legislation? Thank you Mr. Speaker and I want to thank the member from Burlington for the question as well. It was our responsibility to develop a retail and distribution system that protects youth and combats the illegal market. Yesterday the Ontario cannabis store retail website began to provide a safe, secure and reliable outlet for consumers 19 and over to purchase cannabis and I want to congratulate the hardworking men and women of the Ontario cannabis store for producing for the people of Ontario. As cannabis is delivered to homes in Ontario it will be incumbent upon those receiving those packages to provide valid ID proving they are 19 years of age or over to complete the transaction and receive retail or the cannabis. The Ontario cannabis stores online channel is the only legal place in the province to buy recreational cannabis. This will be followed by a licensed private retail store in April of 2019 and we continue to foster a healthy competition to combat the illegal. Supplementary. Minister for answering my question it is clear that Ontario is put in place a robust system for the Liberal federal decision to legalize cannabis. It is reassuring to see a system in place for cannabis that prioritizes the safety of our communities and combats the illegal market. It is clear that this retail distribution system was designed to ensure that cannabis remains out of the hands of people under the age of 19. Although I am confident our approach will not tolerate anybody sharing selling or providing cannabis to anybody under the age of 19 I am concerned about players in the illegal market continuing to target our children and youth. Can the Minister please inform the House about the resources our government is providing to combat the illegal market through enforcement against those operating outside the legal regime. Thank you. Thanks again to the member for that question. Once again Speaker, OCS.ca is the only legal place to buy cannabis in the province cannabis retail and dispensary stores operating in Ontario today are doing so illegally. The government has given the police the tools to shut down illegal cannabis store operators. Further we will be providing municipalities with $40 million over two years to help with increased cost due to the federal government's decision to legalize cannabis. Today illegal operators face significant fines and they will never be granted a license to participate in the legal market. Since we began towards building a distribution model to comply with the federal government's decision we have been abundantly clear that there will be zero tolerance for those who operate outside of the law on cannabis or attempt to market to our youth. Next question Toronto Centre My question is to the acting premier Prior to the election the Conservative promised to honour the gender based violence plan that would have provided sexual assault centres across Ontario with a 33% funding increase. This much needed funding would have enhanced services at existing centres and expanded programs to under serviced communities instead of supporting survivors this government has broken its promise funding has not flowed and this week we learned that the government has also dissolved Ontario's provincial round table on violence against women prompting the resignation of co-chairs Farrakhan and Pamela Cross. As a sexual assault survivor myself I find this government's actions both heartless and cruel. Speaker why aren't survivors of gender based violence a priority for this government? Acting premier Tourism Tourism culture Look as I said at the beginning of question period there is no one in this chamber who understands and appreciates our role as legislators to protect women who have experienced violence in their homes in their workplaces in their schools frankly even in this chamber I want to reassure the member opposite that we very much appreciate the work that the co-chairs have done it is unfortunate that they chose to resign I don't know if that was a political decision I'm not going to go there what I am going to say is our minister our government is 100% committed to make sure that the women in this province who have been abused in the workplaces will get the help they need start the clock supplementary in the midst of the Me Too movement survivors are finally in a place where they can summon the courage to seek the supports that they need the Hamilton sexual assault center has seen a 100% increase in the calls to their crisis line in the past 3 years their wait list for counseling is 7 months long funding that they were promised would have allowed them to hire a full-time counselor to address their increased demand Speaker will this government honor the gender-based violence plan release the funding that was already promised and immediately reinstate the provincial round table on ending violence against women minister thank you speaker that my colleague is working hard on this issue I know that it has changed the system has changed we have people coming to shelters who have far more challenging issues than 20-25 years ago we cannot keep operating the same way and expect that we are going to solve this problem I want to remind the member even though she was not here that it was actually my colleague and friend the now minister the select committee and it is not just about doing the same old thing and expecting a different result Order start the clock next question thank you speaker my question is for the attorney general yesterday recreational cannabis became legal in Canada this was a policy implemented by the federal government one that left the provinces and municipalities to navigate I know our government has been working diligently since being elected to establish a plan to protect our children and combat the illegal market and I was glad like many others across this province to see these efforts result in yesterday's passage of bill 36 I know this bill was based on wide-ranging consultations that were undertaken across the province and it makes me proud to be part of a government that works hard to embody the voice I also know we heard from many stakeholders during the committee process on this bill which also shared support for the government's efforts in this legislation Mr. Speaker, I was wondering if the attorney general can share with the House some of the feedback we received about the government's plan to address legalization at bill 36 the attorney general Mr. Speaker, thank you and I'd like to thank the member from Stormont, Glengary for the question over the past several months our government has worked diligently with stakeholders across the province including law enforcement, public health organizations, parents, municipalities consumer groups, businesses indigenous organizations and other provinces with private retail models during our consultation process we heard loud and clear any plan on recreational cannabis needed to achieve three objectives protect children, keep our roads and communities safe and combat the illegal market Mr. Speaker, bill 36 does just that but don't take my word for it, in a submission to the committee on social policy the Canadian Federation of Independent Business said we are very encouraged by the overall direction that the government is taking on cannabis on bill 36 the government has done a good job of highlighting the dangers of driving on cannabis and the importance of keeping it out of the hands of young Ontarians Thank you Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank the Attorney General for the response it's always welcome to hear the government's plan has widespread support and has been developed with partnership with a wide range of industry experts and professionals I know the people in my riding will also be happy to know that our government takes its responsibilities very seriously and is working hard to keep them and their families and their communities safe Mr. Speaker the Attorney General has spoken at length about the importance of combating the illegal market and the role that a private retail system will have in achieving that we know that the previous Liberal government's plan to establish a government run retail model for cannabis would not have been effective in protecting children and communities by combating the legal market Mr. Speaker I'm wondering if the Attorney General can share some of the feedback she received on the change of direction by our new government Mr. Speaker I'm happy to share that information we chose to move ahead with a tightly regulated private retail model because the public model that had been proposed by the previous Liberal government and championed by some labour groups would be incapable of seriously competing with the illegal market under the previous model our communities would have been left more vulnerable and susceptible to the underground market instead a tightly regulated private retail model was the preferred and only responsible choice in Ontario during committee we heard from the Ontario Chamber of Commerce that quote the OCC supports Bill 36 and the Government of Ontario's commitment to developing a private retail model for the responsible sale of cannabis and licensed retailers and that the safety and social responsibility must be the first overwhelming priorities taken into response about the underground economy health and safety I'm pleased to say Mr. Speaker it achieves this for the people of Ontario Thank you. Next question the member for Davenport Thank you Mr. Speaker My question is to the Minister of Education Mr. Speaker hundreds of parent groups and school councils from every school board across the province have been waiting patiently for a response from the ministry about the status of their applications for the parents reaching out grants my office has been flooded with questions about what's going on and how important parent engagement funding won't be coming at all Will the minister explain to these parents why the government couldn't be bothered to inform them that this funding was never going to come Minister of Education Thank you very much Mr. Speaker and first of all to the member opposite in the NDP party she needs to get it right and go back and Chuck Hansard I did not say that and furthermore I suspect the fact that we're being responsible after 15 years of mismanagement in absolute nonsense that was created by the past Liberal Administration taxpayers in this province are supporting how we're going through a line by line audit to make sure we're getting the best result for the investment made and so as we hit the pause button to consult from one quarter of this province to another we are doing the right thing because we have to identify the priorities from the people who are impacted and we need to ensure that the consultation carries on and we fulfill every requirement that we've set out so that our voices are heard and we have the right priorities going forward Thank you Mr. Speaker through you again to the minister of education you've actually said nothing to parents at all the only thing you've communicated is through this when we asked you Mr. Speaker parent and school councils have been blindsided by this government's sudden cut to this program and they deserve to know why one group I'm going to give you some examples one group was planning a series of three parenting workshops with a focus on well-being mental, physical and sexual health along with a lending library for parents they told me this school does not bring in a huge amount of funds from the community because our parents are living with lots of everyday life costs we have very little money to use toward trying to improve our student experience will the minister explain to these parents why supporting parent engagement and education ranks so low on their priority list and will you restore the funding now an opportunity time to remind all members to make their comments through the chair minister response and my number one priority is ensuring that every single voice across this province has heard in terms of identifying and having a chance moving forward for the parents specifically with our consultation for the parents.ca is the place for people to exercise their voice because you know what the opposition the entity party they're just trying to create chaos and the fact of the matter is I am so proud of my team in the ministry of education and speaker once again to hear from the parents across this province go to fortheparents.ca let your voice thank you next question member for Eglinton Lawrence my question is to the minister of finance this week the select committee on financial transparency began to hear from witnesses regarding the findings of the independent financial commission inquiry report the committee heard from the auditor general and senior public servants about the previous liberal government's accounting and financing schemes these officials provided an overview of the decisions made and concerns raised about the fair hydro plan and the details about the pension asset disagreement with the auditor general what we heard regarding the previous governments treatment of Ontario's books continues to shock can the minister please share with this house his impressions of what the committee heard this week to finance thank you Mr. Speaker and thank you to the member from Eglinton Lawrence for that question we know that all members of this house have been watching the work of the select committee with great interest as it begins to look into the findings of the independent financial commission of inquiry the importance of this committee's work in restoring accountability and trust cannot be understated it was alarming to learn from officials testifying before the committee that they repeatedly expressed worries about the fair hydro plan to the previous government only to be ignored the auditor general was equally scathing during her testimony saying that she would have left her client if they were private sector auditors it's clear the previous government's rate mitigation plan was a questionable scheme right from the start thank you minister for his answer not only do we need to fix the financial problems we've inherited from the previous government but we must also determine how the situation was ever allowed to get this bad as the committee continues its work I know we remain committed to the people of Ontario receive answers the select committee will continue its work next week as we continue to learn more about the Liberals accounting schemes how they came to be and who made these decisions can the minister please outline the importance of the committee's work to get answers for the people of Ontario minister thank you Mr. Speaker the committee continues to hear important witnesses who will help them get to the bottom of how this happened and why we know that the advice of the independent financial commission of inquiry has been invaluable to our government the auditor general gave our government's public accounts their first clean bill of health in three years when the president of the treasury board tabled them last month our government will continue to work to fix the mess left behind by 15 years of liberal waste, mismanagement and scandals and ensure that everything we do results in better government for the people we appreciate the work of the select committee on financial transparency and look forward to the report back to this house with their findings next question thank you speaker my question is to the minister of finance minister is good to hear you talking about transparency this government has been making secret back room deals with owners and operators of the horse racing tracks across Ontario they've been doing this without consulting the communities the workers or anyone else impacted by the deals new democrats have been asking in this house for the details the government has required everyone everyone involved to sign non-disclosure agreements speaker the public has a right to know what's happening to our race tracks this government so transparent why did this government demand a gag order to be placed on the details of their secret deals that they've struck with those racing operators wow our government has kept its commitment to bolster the horse racing industry and repair the damage done by the previous liberal government only made possible with the support of the NDP agreements in principle have now been reached to keep slots at Kawaratha Downs and Ajax Downs and to providing additional funding to continue horse racing in Fort Erie and Dresden the commitment will directly support the horse racing industry in the communities our government has made a generous offer to these race tracks including for the return of slots to Fort Erie and Dresden but speaker the both made a business decision to accept enhanced funding instead speaker we continue to support this sector in supporting rural Ontario and the members opposite would do well to join us in that support supplementary the member for Niagara Falls thank you Mr. Speaker back to acting Premier there is no clear example of a backroom deal than the one that was made to keep the slots under the Fort Erie race track I was at closing day at the Fort Erie track on Tuesday and everywhere I went the same question why would the Premier break his promise to this town to return the slots and the jobs that come with him to be honest Mr. Speaker because the Premier never consulted the town of Fort Erie or the residents so my question is this my question is this will the Premier keep this government's promise to the town of Fort Erie and bring the meaningful number of slots to the race track as well as the jobs that come with them Minister I'm very pleased to see that the NDP member opposite finally recognizes the importance of horse racing industry considering they supported the Liberals when they got at the industry recently so the member may also want to take time to acknowledge the industry's real needs we made a generous offer to return slots to Fort Erie but the owner, the race track made a business decision to accept enhanced funding instead of supporting the horse racing industry in Ontario and we're listening to the needs of the industry's stakeholders and again Speaker the member opposite would be wise to listen as well Here it is! Thank you Mr. Speaker Local Government Week is a reminder that municipal government is where many civic minded people have their first experience with politics whether it's casting a ballot to knock on doors in their community or running for office themselves it's a great way to get politically engaged and to understand what public service is all about many in this chamber actually started their political careers either with local council or with a local school board in fact I myself had my first political experience campaigning for local representatives at the young age of 14 I'd like to ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs as a former mayor yourself can you explain how that experience played a key role in how you got to where you are today Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Thanks Speaker the member for Ottawa West Nippian for that excellent question he's right as a young person I was very very specific and engaged and I was very fortunate it was a great honour for me at the age of 22 in 1982 to be elected to represent the citizens of the city of Brockville as their mayor and one thing that that experience taught me is that we as elected officials have to engage young people and encourage them to get involved in the local government process that's why Speaker young people the opportunity to understand the importance of local government to instill the importance of voting especially in this election year and I firmly believe that by engaging young people that they'll be the next generation of local school board trustees local councillors and local mayor Thank you Thank you Minister for that answer your life of public service is one that sets a fine example for any young person interested in getting involved in politics Election Day is next Monday October 22nd and it's great that this year's local government week falls so close to that election we know that municipalities are the level of government that are most connected to Ontarians it's those services that are affecting waste and recycling and making sure that our streets are cleared of snow that really matter to people in fact during my own election in Ottawa West Nippian the number one issue that I heard at the doors was potholes on local roads Minister what is your message to Ontarians as we approach the next municipal election day this coming Monday Minister Thanks Thanks Speaker and again I want to thank the member for Ottawa West Nippian for encouraging young people to get involved in the process candidates in the municipal election across this province are working hard to get out and meet voters in advance of Monday's election and I think and I encourage everyone in this chamber to encourage their constituents to get to know those candidates get to talk to them about their platforms and the importance speaker encourage them to vote on October 22nd for the candidate of their choice I think we're so fortunate I want to take this opportunity to congratulate every one of those candidates that are putting their name on a ballot I think we all have to agree that we all recognize the incredible pressures that candidates have so I think each and every one of us should encourage their constituents to vote but to thank those men and women who are putting their names on the ballot I'll close the time we have for question free today member for Scarborough Guildwood on a point of order I wanted to just extend a warm welcome to someone I respect for her work on gender-based violence Farrakhan is in the house today and I know today is the day of persons I think it's very important that we recognize the work that you've done for women Pursuant to standing order 38A the member for Toronto Centre has given notice of her dissatisfaction with the answer to her question given by the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport concerning funding for sexual assault centres this matter will be debated today at 6pm Sorry Tuesday I apologize Tuesday at 6pm I am now prepared to rule on the point of privilege that was raised yesterday on Wednesday October 17th 2018 the member for Flamborough Glenbrook raised a question of privilege concerning an incident that allegedly took place on the floor of the house during the ringing of the division bells for the vote on the opposition day motion that was debated on the previous afternoon October 16th the member alleges that during the ringing of the bells the member for Hamilton Centre crossed the chamber floor to the government side and while there made deliberate and unwanted physical contact with her and made remarks that the member contended could be construed as an attempt to interfere with her right to vote in response the opposition house leader pointed to an earlier provocation of the member for Hamilton Centre during the debate on her motion in the form of government members standing in the back row of the government side to block allegedly intentionally the camera view of her making her remarks I've also received written submissions on this matter from the government house leader and the official opposition house leader I'm carefully reviewing the matter I cannot find that a prima facie case of breach of privilege has been established the authorities suggest that for a prima facie case of privilege to be made out the circumstances giving rise to the alleged breach of privilege should have prevented the member from discharging their parliamentary duties Joseph main got at pages 222 and 223 of the second edition of parliamentary privilege in Canada and the following are the final remarks about the narrow confines of parliamentary privilege there must be some act that improperly interferes with the member's rights the interference however must not only obstruct the member in his capacity as a member it must obstruct or alleged to obstruct the member in his parliamentary work for just as the member is protected for what he does during a proceeding in parliament so must the members or work relating to a proceeding in parliament be alleged to be improperly interfered with before the speaker may find a prima facie case end quote the member for flamborough glanbrook cited a ruling given by speaker Peters on May 4th 2010 which I recall but what distinguishes that incident from this one is that in 2010 it was established to the satisfaction of the speaker that members of the assembly were confined at a budget in a government building and not permitted to leave in sufficient time to attend a meeting of the house this obstruction constituted a prima facie breach of privilege in the case at hand the parliamentary proceeding in question was the vote on the October 16th opposition day motion which I note the member subsequently participated in casting her vote with the nays there is nothing to suggest that the member was obstructed from voting or that the incident otherwise interfered with her ability to carry on her parliamentary duties I understand that in some ways this place is adversarial to say the least that is the very nature though of parliamentary debate members will inevitably have different opinions and approaches and sometimes this will lead to conflict and heated exchanges we see that from time to time as I say that is all fair and in the nature of this place however we all share the honour having been elected to this legislative assembly to represent the citizens of Ontario and our constituencies it would be a disservice to this place and to those citizens who elected us for us to tolerate honourable disagreement degenerating to the level of personal insult, confrontation and closed mindedness only very recently the house adopted a members code of conduct on harassment which every single member of this assembly has personally signed a written pledge to uphold the preamble of the code cites its purpose as being to foster a culture in which members of the legislative assembly of Ontario treat each other with respect and professionalism and quote hopefully this is an attainable aspiration and it reflects the ways that all members can expect the house to conduct itself when doing the people's business in this the people's house these are still relatively early days in this parliament and together we have the opportunity to set the tone and establish a respectful productive culture here it is incumbent upon all of us to fulfil our roles with the dignity befitting this institution and to treat one another with respect and professionalism as our constituents would expect of all of us this house stands in recess till 1pm this afternoon