It’s my great honour to rise today to discuss Bill 188, Supporting Children’s Futures Act.

I’d like to being with a story. Back in September 2019, I had the opportunity to meet a really inspirational individual, somebody who had founded and created the Child Welfare Political Action Committee. Her name is Jane Kovarikova. It was interesting because when we first met, she informed me, “Oh, I’m a card-carrying Conservative.” I said, “What does that matter?” We continued to do some pretty phenomenal work which culminated in a really wonderful event for a number of young kids. You see, Jane told me about her background, and her background was as a former crown ward who had aged out of the system without having been adopted. She shared some very disturbing statistics. Some of the statistics she shared included that 1,000 Ontario teens each year age out of care without having been adopted. About 400 of those teens will qualify for post-secondary education and 400 will drop out of high school. Of those 400 who do qualify for post-secondary education, only 20%—20%, Speaker; that’s 80 per year—will pursue post-secondary education.

But another unfortunate aspect of that is, even of that 80, only eight end up graduating from post-secondary education. It is an enormous loss of human potential, of brilliance of innovation, of some ideas that we may never know because the state has not supported these young people in their dreams and their pursuits for higher education.

Jane discussed many people whom she’s had the privilege to work with and how teens in the foster care system have a number of different intersectional barriers, including things like poverty. They may have moved around quite a bit as a young person. They might have, as a result of that, fallen behind in school. Some might just simply not be ready because of these arbitrary age-limit caps that are placed upon post-secondary education. They might be ready after the arbitrarily low age-limit for child welfare support. You see, many also might have other barriers, such as psychological barriers, logistical barriers, where they live, where they want to pursue their studies. They might even run into the barriers of the OSAP application itself, which asks them questions such as, “What are your parents’ names and what are their incomes?” I don’t know that children who are aging out of the child welfare system are really able to answer that question in a correct way.

From 18 to 21, youth will have an allowance of approximately $875 per month and after that—and I know there have been changes from this government—unfortunately, these individuals are expected to be ready to enter society and ready to enter the job market. They have to be fully independent. They have to have their credentials. They have to be career-ready for life as fully functioning adults, and I don’t think that is necessarily possible. You see, the state is what many have described as a truly terrible parent.

Now, I was inspired after having met Jane because of her work with the MPP for Sudbury Jamie West, and she had indicated that, along with the MPP for Sudbury, they were able to convince Laurentian to offer free post-secondary education for five young people who had aged out of the crown ward system and had not been adopted. It was phenomenal work, life-changing work, and I was really incredibly inspired.

I want to read a quotation from Laurentian from that time. It states, “Jane Kovarikova, a graduate of Laurentian and currently a doctoral candidate in political science at Western University, grew up in foster care in Ontario. She founded the Child Welfare Political Action Committee, a not-for-profit organization that advocates for change in the child welfare system. It was thanks in part to her advocacy, with the support of Jamie West, the MPP for Sudbury and also a Laurentian alumnus, that Laurentian reinstituted its tuition-waiver program this year.” Phenomenal, phenomenal work. The Child Welfare Political Action Committee has gone on. There are at least 71 institute options for children who are exiting the crown ward system to pursue that free post-secondary education.

Jane also goes on to state: “Education levels the playing field for people like me. I am grateful that financial access to university education will no longer be a barrier to social mobility for even more people who were raised in Ontario’s foster care system....” She goes on to state, “If you were or are in foster care, know that Huron, Brescia, King’s and Western, believe in you.”

You see, Speaker, after that initial September 19 meeting in 2019, Jane and I were able to get meetings with Dr. Barry Craig and Dr. David Malloy, and Jane went on meet with Dr. Alan Shepard, and Huron, Brescia and King’s were each able to offer five positions each for children who had aged out of the crown ward system. Then, main campus ended up offering 15 spots, bringing it to a total of 30.

I want to quote Dr. Barry Craig, who provided some information when they made this announcement on October 27, 2020. Dr. Craig said, “At Huron, we believe everyone, no matter background or socio-economic status, deserves access to education. It’s what defines Huron’s mission of delivering elite, yet accessible education, while challenging our students to be leaders with heart. Having this partnership will ensure a clearer path to education for those crown wards. Now more than ever, our hearts need to be in everything we do, and we must always enable success and opportunities for those in less than ideal situations.”

It was a powerful meeting for me, because, as it turns out, I was a joint student of both Huron University College and Western University. It was really amazing that the leader there, Dr. Barry Craig, was able to see the value in this initiative. It was really inspirational to me.

Jane and I also had a phenomenal meeting with Dr. David Malloy from King’s University College, who stated, “A basic moral test is how our most vulnerable members are faring. All of us at King’s are dedicated to improving the life of the poor by breaking down barriers to education. We are humbled to help enable former crown wards to be fully part of society by aiding them with a King’s education rooted in social justice, equality and the education of the whole person.”

It was yet again another powerful meeting. It was amazing to see, when brilliant minds come together, united in purpose, how they can change the lives of young people who deserve our care.

Dr. Alan Shepard states, “Jane’s success and leadership are inspiring—we want to encourage others to follow in her footsteps. We’re proud to join the growing number of schools committed to helping crown wards achieve their academic goals.”

At the time, I stated, “I am incredibly thankful to Huron, Brescia, King’s and Western for their commitment to our community. This historic leadership illustrates how Londoners care about one another and promote a kinder, more just and brighter community. My heartfelt thanks to the community-building vision and compassion of Drs. Craig, Jensen, Malloy and Shepard, as well as a true leader whose desire to reach backwards brings others forward, PhD candidate Jane Kovarikova. This is life-changing work.”

It was truly an honour to participate in this, and I just want to go over some of the other places where the Child Welfare Political Action Committee was able to secure free post-secondary education. They managed to have work done with the University of Toronto. Université Sainte-Anne created a youth-in-care bursary. Wilfred Laurier announced an updated Learners from Care Academic Success Program. They also were working in Manitoba to try to bring forward tuition-free post-secondary education opportunities.

IBT, I believe, is the first career college to offer tuition waivers to current and former crown wards. The University of Ottawa introduced a financial support program for youth leaving care. Sheridan had also offered a tuition bursary for current and former youth in care. Northern College offered educational opportunities. Nipissing University and Canadore College offered tuition waivers to youth in care. Lakehead University offered a tuition waiver for youth in care. CBU has a tuition waiver program. We also have Seneca.

We also have New Brunswick Community College. It’s the first post-secondary institution in New Brunswick. I could go on and on. It’s across Canada. It is phenomenal. Holland College; McMaster; NSCC, the first college in Atlantic Canada; MSVU; Loyalist—it is truly phenomenal, the work that has happened, and again, this is life-changing work.

So, Speaker, as we look towards Bill 188, I am just so thankful for the work that was able to be achieved and so happy that we were able to cross party lines and were able to work together. We were able to focus on one purpose, and that was to make sure that kids have the support that they need to change their lives because education is the greatest democratizing force. It’s unfortunate, though, that kids in care facing difficulties, facing potentially an incredibly problematic background that we could never possibly understand, for many of us—we should be making sure that the state, as a parent, is providing them with those opportunities to escape cycles of poverty, to really live to their true potential.

When we look at Bill 188, it is interesting: I believe it is something that should be supportable, but it does raise some questions for us in the official opposition. One of the concerns that we had back when the Conservatives first formed government was how the child and youth advocate was removed as an independent officer of this Legislature, and it does beg the question: Why was this done, and does the government now see the value in reinstating that officer, to make sure that those kids have a contact, have a person—a voice within the Legislature—who is independent? That is incredibly important.

I also think to some testimony that we heard at the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs as we travelled across the province. We heard from the London and Middlesex children’s aid society that there were six children whose parents had to put them into care because there weren’t spots within the community for them to receive the mental health assistance they required. Since the number was reported in February of this year—it was six—and I believe that number has grown to nine, last I checked, and could potentially be yet more. I can’t think of the moral difficulty of a parent who loves their children and wants to give their child every opportunity that this world has to offer, and yet is faced with this situation where they simply can’t help their child anymore, because there’s no access to mental health supports. Imagine that, Speaker—imagine being in that scenario, where there’s no other option for you but to put your child into care. Now, those children aren’t necessarily in need of care, which is really the problem here, Speaker. What they’re in need of is mental health supports.

Yesterday, the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs, in its consideration of Bill 180, the budget bill, heard about how there can be up to a two-and-a-half-year wait for children accessing mental health care. Now, if you think about that alone, in and of itself, that a child who has a mental health need may have to wait two and a half years—that amount of time for an adult is an incredibly lengthy amount of time, but for a young person who is passing developmental milestones, who has an enormous amount of pressure, whether it be from school, whether it be from friends, social media, any number of things—that two-and-a-half-year gap is enormous, especially when one considers the intersection of mental health.

If we do not deal with the root cause of an issue, it ends up growing, it ends up ballooning, it ends up creating yet more issues and, unfortunately, at that point we’re not dealing with the root cause, we’re dealing with a number of after-effects. Why we don’t simply make sure that kids have access to care within 30 days is beyond me.

In discussing this bill, Bill 188 adds a new section to the Child, Youth and Family Services Act. It creates offences and penalties for a child services provider who contravenes sections of the act around restraints of wards, confinement of wards or use of corporal punishment. It makes good sense. Providers can face elevated fines—up to $250,000—one year of imprisonment or both. Providers that are not an individual, such as group homes, can also be fined $250,000. I should state there are not also limits on other, more serious offences.

Speaker, I want to think as well about privacy and about how this impacts children who have aged out of the crown ward system. After having lived potentially a very difficult youth and potentially a very difficult upbringing, these young people didn’t actually have access to their own information. That, to me, is unconscionable.

Oftentimes, when we are young people, we are formed by the people we meet and the experiences that we have as we grow up. I can imagine that many young people who have aged out of the crown ward foster system would want to then go into a caring role, go into a role supporting other people who are facing that same sort of childhood that they were in. It’s unconscionable to think that that person who might be working with young people in the foster system has access to children’s information, but even though they have aged out as a crown ward, can’t have access to their own information. That is something that is addressed with Bill 188, and I think it is long overdue.

I also want to think about how horrific and how disturbing it might be that a young person who has aged out of the foster system and is now working within the foster system as a caring person might be working alongside people who can access information about them—private information about them as a young person—without their knowledge. That is something that Bill 188 will seek to circumvent, and I think that is something that is long overdue. The information about us should be a possession of the person alone, not possessed by the system, especially when that person has become an adult.

As I begin to close my remarks, I just want to thank all of the education providers from Brescia University College, Huron University College, King’s University College and Western University as well as Laurentian for seeing the value in supporting young people as they seek to improve themselves, as they pursue their dreams. Education is the great equalizer. Education is the great democratizing force.

I’m so proud that I was able to work on this. I know that, many years from now, I will probably look back on this life in politics, and as I consider what might be the things that I am most proud of, this will definitely be one, because it was an opportunity to help, to participate, to advocate, to make sure that these young people—who had a very difficult childhood, who had never been adopted, who have created a chosen family—would be able to pursue their dreams, and to also know that they had the support of these post-secondary institutions; to know that there are people out there who care about them, who want to see them achieve their dreams.

Speaker, this is life-changing work. But first and foremost, I want to thank, I want to congratulate and I want to honour Jane Kovarikova for her tremendous work. She’s a force of nature. She’s unstoppable. Jane, it was an honour to work with you. Thank you so much for everything that you continue to do.

I’m happy to join my colleagues to speak on behalf of Bill 188, the Supporting Children’s Futures Act, 2024, currently under consideration by this House for second reading.

Madam Speaker, today, I stand before you to address a matter of utmost importance: the welfare of our children and youth in Ontario’s child welfare system. It is a subject that touches the very core of our society, as it pertains to the safety, well-being and future prospects of our most vulnerable citizens.

This bill, if passed, will improve the safety, security and well-being of children and youth in care.

Madam Speaker, we are here because our government will never leave anyone behind. Our government wants the best for every child and young person approaching adulthood. And we are working together to deliver better outcomes for young people and their families and caregivers.

So, as you can see, Madam Speaker, this bill is an important element to the government’s ongoing redesign of the child welfare system.

The child welfare sector in Ontario is tasked with providing crucial services to children and youth who may find themselves in precarious situations, whether due to abuse, neglect, conflict with the law or complex special needs. Under the mandate of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, these services are administered by children’s aid societies, with a primary focus on protection and support.

Out-of-home care, a vital component of the child welfare system, involves providing care to young individuals in settings away from their parental homes. This can range from basic accommodation to specialized programs tailored to meet specific needs. Foster homes, children’s residences and staff-model homes serve as environments where children and youth receive the care and support they require.

In Ontario, over 7,000 children and youth are currently in care, overseen by 424 licence holders. Among those, approximately 4,038 foster homes and 301 group homes play a pivotal role in providing a stable environment for these young individuals to thrive.

Recognizing the significance of this issue, our government has embarked on a comprehensive redesign of the child welfare system. Madam Speaker, every child and youth deserves a safe and nurturing environment regardless of their circumstances. Through comprehensive redesign, our government is introducing a new initiative to improve the quality of care in out-of-home care. Some of these changes include:

—developing a new framework of what out-of-home care looks like;

—increasing and enhancing oversight and accountability of out-of-home care;

—supporting that oversight by adding 20 new positions across the province to support the management, inspection and oversight of out-of-home care for children and youth; and

—launching the Ready, Set, Go Program, which provides youth in the care of children’s aid societies with life skills that they need, starting when they are only 13, and financial support when they leave up to the age of 23 so that they can focus on post-secondary, including the skilled trades or pursuing employment.

Through initiatives like the Ready, Set, Go Program, many of the reforms proposed in this bill are designed to better support youth and provide skills and knowledge. They will help youth transition into adulthood.

Moreover, our efforts extend to strengthening oversight and accountability within the sector. The Supporting Children’s Futures Act, 2024, represents a milestone in this journey. If passed, this legislation will introduce measures to enhance safety, service quality, oversight, accountability and privacy for children and youth in care.

One key aspect of the proposed bill is the reinforcement of the oversight mechanisms to ensure compliance with established standards. Stringent application processes, increased accountability for operators and new enforcement tools are among the provisions aimed at safeguarding the well-being of children and youth.

Furthermore, the bill addresses the crucial issue of privacy rights for former children and youth in care. By restricting access to their records and enabling—

My question to the government with regard to Bill 188, the Supporting Children’s Futures Act: There are immediate steps that you can do today to advance the futures and keep safe and well the children and youth of Ontario.

One of those things is to pass Bill 174, the Missing Persons Amendment Act. That would really help protect vulnerable people, especially those with disabilities. This is a bill that I understand the member from Hamilton Mountain has put forth. This government has said yes to this and yet you have not delivered.

Another thing to help our children and youth: bring back the provincial child and youth advocate so there can be a voice, an independent non-partisan voice, in this Legislature speaking on behalf of children and youth. Don’t do it for the NDP; do it for the kids. Do it for the family. Do it for the people who feel down and out and betrayed by the care system.

Thank you, and through you, Speaker, I was just going to add that the measures contained in the Supporting Children’s Futures Act would, if passed, create a safer environment for every child out of home care. We won’t get into the specifics of profit or not-for-profit. It helps every child.

I was going to talk about the Ontario Ombudsman. It’s an important safeguard that provides rights to children of youth in care. Young people in care already have the right to contact the office of the Ombudsman; however, that’s contained in the Ombudsman Act rather than the Child, Youth and Family Services Act. And since children’s aid societies and service providers are governed by and most familiar with the CYFSA, the status quo leaves a potential gap where a youth may not even be aware of their rights.

This bill proposes to entrench details about this right and remove any lack of clarity for the rights with respect to the Ombudsman. Does the member opposite not support giving young people a stronger understanding of this right to the Ombudsman?

There are some good aspects of Bill 188, the Supporting Children’s Futures Act.

I want to share a statistic in this House from a few years back: 44% of youth in care graduate from high school compared to 81% of their peers. I think that speaks loudly to the lack of supports that we have both in the care system and also in the education system.

I will say it over and over again: Mental health has to be a priority here in Ontario. And how do we do that? We do that by having the caring adults, the caring professionals in place who also have culturally relevant training to support our diverse Ontario youth.

Will the government commit to more funding for our education system and our care system so it can actually care and function—