I want to thank the member for his thoughtful comments.

He discussed removing the need to apply for leave to construct on energy matters, approval for consumer-funded transmission projects and impact transmission system upgrades being planned in the province. My question is, will removing the need to apply for leave-to-construct approval for consumer-funded transmission projects remove or impact existing rights to municipalities or utilities?

I appreciate the member’s statement and her providing the information about her experiences, but as a part of our commitment to break down the long-standing barriers in justice specifically—and as we were talking earlier, the system previously was literally paper-based. It was not up to date. It was not in a place where it was going to be moving efficiently for very much longer.

Our government is moving more services online by investing in technology and improving processes to deliver a better experience for prospective jurors. Not only will this reduce administrative costs, but it will make it easier for jurors to participate in the court system no matter where they live.

Will the member opposite agree that moving from the paper format to a digital-first experience would benefit the judicial system?

Through you, Madam Speaker: The backlog in the Ontario court system affects all court users, and creating judicial capacity enhances the effectiveness of the courts. I know this. I lived in this. This was my world. To help resolve this backlog more quickly and ensure faster access to justice, this initiative, by allowing retired judges to come back, is a way we can effectively utilize our courts and allow the process of justice to be more efficient. It’s just another way of cutting red tape.

Thank you to the member across for his comments.

This bill is all about removing red tape. We’re focusing on reducing barriers to improve services. This includes a whole-of-government plan, including the elimination of administrative overlaps.

Just as an example, currently, the WSIB is required to create both a five-year strategic plan and an annual business plan spanning three years to come. The strategic plan and the business plan duplicate content for governance and oversight. Requiring the WSIB to submit both is burdensome and a matter of red tape—and yes, those are weeds. So removing, in that circumstance, the five-year strategic plan while keeping the business plan will eliminate red tape and ensure that the WSIB focuses less time on paperwork and more time on helping the workers.

As mentioned, I did work within the system for several years. We were constantly dealing with paper. Papers get lost; people lose them. Those notices were actually sent out to people, and they would lose them; it would never get back to them. They could get into trouble. Eliminating that paperwork will modernize the court system. We do still have a requirement that—people can still ask for paper.

But actually modernizing the system and the justice system is a long time overdue, absolutely.

Following up on what I was talking about earlier, as we continue to modernize regulation, our government is committed to taking action that reduces that red tape. We’re proposing to repeal the five-year strategic plan for WSIB, and we’re focusing and proposing that this be done by providing a five-year strategic—the WSIB, also allowing them to submit a business plan that spans three years or more. This strategic plan, this business plan is not a duplicative—

TPON is utilized, I believe, by all of our not-for-profits and we want to keep them whole. The enterprise Transfer Payment Ontario system, TPON, is used for the end-to-end administration of transfer payments, from application to payment to reporting. Continuing to implement TPON will provide ministries with standardized, streamlined processes to manage and administer their transfer payment programs, resulting in more efficient and effective program delivery at a lower cost to the taxpayer. For transfer payment recipients, this system will provide seamless user experiences, reducing their administrative burden and freeing up more time to deliver key services for the people of Ontario. Through this initiative, there is a concerted focus on bringing all government transfer payments and programs and related IT systems onto TPON and driving an enterprise-wide efficiency and process.

I’m pleased to have the opportunity to speak during this third reading debate on Bill 46, the Less Red Tape, Stronger Ontario Act. I’ll be sharing my time with the member from Chatham-Kent–Leamington. I want to thank the Minister of Red Tape Reduction and his parliamentary assistant for their dedication on moving this important bill forward.

The Less Red Tape, Stronger Ontario Act is the first red tape reduction bill of this mandate—and the ninth red tape reduction bill since forming government in 2018.

Our government’s focus has been and continues to be building Ontario. Bill 46 will contribute to the goal by strengthening our province’s competitiveness in key areas. It will strengthen our supply chains so that more goods can get to more places. It will support our farmers and agribusinesses by laying out a path to produce and grow more food right here in Ontario. It will help grow Ontario’s labour force and protect our workers, so businesses can find the right people to grow and expand their operations. And it will make governments easier to interact with and work with by simplifying administrative procedures, improving customer service, and reducing compliance costs.

In total, this bill, as well as related policy and regulatory changes, will add up to 28 individual measures to reduce burden and red tape in Ontario. This is important because red tape is a significant barrier to efficiency.

When I was a little girl, I loved to swim, but it didn’t happen naturally. So, after a near-drowning experience when I was maybe three years or four years old—I’m going to get to the point—my family, who were all lifelong swimmers, were determined to make me a better swimmer. I thought about this when I was looking at the act. I was determined to become an efficient swimmer. I want to swim quickly. I wanted to get to where I was going, whether it was in the pool or the lake, quickly and efficiently, without any lag behind me. First, I learned to float, dog-paddle and then, finally, I was a swimmer—along with water wings. But once I was a skilled swimmer, I realized that water wings aren’t the fastest way to get around. They’re a barrier to swimming quickly and efficiently. I learned that removing those water wings made a more efficient swimmer of Laura. I listened to my instructors, I gained endurance, and by the time I was 10 years old, I was able to swim across the lake and back with no assistance from anything or anyone. I avoided the weeds in the lake because those things could slow me down or drag me down, which was also dangerous.

Later, in my high school and university years, I worked as a lifeguard. There, my team and I prioritized important issues like younger children in the pool and keeping them safe, which is also relevant in this bill. We opened up early and we stayed open late for the swimmers who needed the extra time. We had a harmonized workspace. We created a better-run pool that the entire community could safely enjoy.

Learning to swim was the one thing that I could do, but learning to swim effectively with more speed and less drag made it possible for me to save lives—and a couple of adults, I should add.

That’s what we’re doing. We are taking the water wings and getting the weeds of red tape away from us, making it so that Ontarians can get where they need to go faster and with less drag.

When it comes to our work, there are five principles that guide our efforts to reduce tape. The first principle is to protect public health, safety and the environment. We do this by easing regulatory burdens in a smart and careful way that always maintains or enhances important health, safety and environmental protections.

The second principle is to prioritize the important issues. We do this by assessing which regulation costs are the most time-effective—while looking for innovative ways to ensure rules stay effective and efficient.

The third principle is to harmonize rules with other jurisdictions, including the federal government, where we can. This is one of the most efficient ways to reduce compliance costs across the board.

The fourth way is to listen to the people and businesses of Ontario on an ongoing basis, to learn what we can do to remove obstacles in their way—the weeds and the water wings.

Our fifth principle is to take a whole-of-government approach. This is the key to delivering better services to people and businesses, making it easier for them to access the information, programs and services they need to succeed.

To be clear, Speaker, we do not believe that rules and regulations themselves are the issue. But unnecessary, repetitive and outdated regulations are a problem. And it’s a problem we’re committing to solving.

As someone who previously worked within the judicial system, I can tell you how happy I was to hear that the act also included a number of changes to modernize and reduce administrative burdens in the justice sector.

Firstly, our government is proposing to amend the Provincial Offences Act to help reduce the backlog at provincial offences courts. Often, I hear from law professionals within my riding who tell me that the backlogs left over from COVID-19 are substantial—and I experienced them myself. Ontario needs to have access to justice within reasonable time frames. The proposed amendments would allow the court clerks, rather than a justice, to reopen certain convictions if satisfied that certain conditions are met, such as having a missed notice or being unable to attend a meeting through no fault of their own. This change would help to address the backlog by using court resources more efficiently and freeing up judicial time for other serious matters.

Secondly, we’re proposing to create more judicial capacity and alleviate backlogs in criminal cases at the Ontario Court of Justice by temporarily raising the limit on the number of days that retired judges can work. Creating more “per diem” judiciary capacity enhances the scheduling capacity and efficiency in the courts. This will help resolve the backlog more quickly and ensure faster access to justice for Ontarians.

Lastly, the proposed legislation will also reduce administrative costs and make it easier for prospective jurors to participate in court systems through updates to the Juries Act. If this bill is passed, it would introduce a pilot program that would make jury questionnaires available online and help us assess the impacts and response rates in different communities. Recipients of the online questionnaire would be able to request a paper version if need be, but this proposal would allow us to test the feasibility of moving away from sending hard copies of jury questionnaires through the mail. When I was in the judicial system, we dealt with paper constantly, and I was very relieved to see when our courts were finally moving forward. Getting rid of paper is something that brings us into this century, and it is long overdue within the judicial system, providing potential jurors or Ontarians a modern, convenient, streamlined way of participating in the justice system while reducing administrative burdens and costs.

I would also like to discuss some improvements that we’re making to some of the essential but often invisible functions of government.

TPON, also known as Transfer Payment Ontario, is a single-enterprise digital solution for delivering government transfer payment programs. Participants such as municipalities and not-for-profit organizations use TPON for everything from applications to payments and reporting. Our government is bringing the vast majority of all its government programs and related IT systems into this one platform, resulting in more efficient and effective program delivery at a lower cost to the taxpayer. For transfer payment recipients, the system provides a seamless user experience, reducing their administrative burden and freeing up more time to deliver their services and programs to their communities.

Speaker, I’m incredibly proud of the work the government has done so far to reduce regulatory burdens on people and businesses. I’m excited to see the changes proposed by this legislation in action. For businesses, some items could increase regulatory effectiveness, ease of operation and reduce the cost of doing business. For individuals, some items would reduce the cost of living and streamline interactions with government in Ontario.

All of us benefit when businesses can grow and thrive. A competitive business climate brings economic growth, jobs and new investments. These are investments that will not leave or go south—or even begin in Ontario. We want the businesses to start in Ontario; we want them to remain in Ontario. We don’t want them to go south.

Building on the previous red tape reduction bills and packages, the cumulative impact of these measures is expected to help modernize Ontario’s regulatory system. Our government needs to remove the red tape, like the weeds or the water wings, to move forward. We need to move forward with supports. The province’s economic competitiveness and ability to create and retain high-quality jobs is imperative. We have to make Ontario an attractive investment climate and make things easier. Those combined measures ultimately seek to build a stronger Ontario. People and businesses will thrive now and in the future.

I invite the member for Chatham-Kent–Leamington to speak on the further impacts of this bill.

I want to thank the member opposite for his statement.

This bill is focusing on reducing burdens to improve services and make life easier for people and businesses in this province. We’re here to reduce red tape. And this proposal does not change how the crown fulfils its obligations to ensure meaningful consultation with impacted communities. We’re streamlining businesses, fostering a strong business climate and modernizing regulations to make it easier. Does the member agree that supporting the unique needs of businesses ensures interactions with the government are efficient and important?