Sorry, just further to my question from before: It’s got to be difficult, again, for government members, considering that the Premier has tripled his office staff and filled it with people making much more money than the government members themselves. I’ve been thinking about it because it’s been a revolving door for lobbyists coming and reaching the leadership of this party. Do you think it’s now just a strategy whereby, why not just hire the lobbyists so you can see them every day and not to have to take the phone calls? Do you think something like that could be occurring?

It might come as a surprise to the member who just asked the question and to all that we’re actually in a Conservative majority government, meaning they can and pretty much do whatever they want. So if they want to do something about the carbon tax, they can do it and they don’t need a referendum.

But we also know this is a government that loves spending money, and a referendum would allow them to spend even more money, probably in that way. Do you believe that this is just part of their desire and almost addiction to spending taxpayer money? Because they have spent more than any government in the history of Ontario.

So I’ve been thinking about it, and considering that the Premier has about 100 staff working in his office making more money than MPPs, do you think one of those staff is actually an auto insurance executive themselves? I can’t understand any other reason, other than the fact that these insurance execs are writing their policies on auto insurance.

I really appreciated the speech about gravy. We’ve seen a lot of gravy in the last six years. My question was just simply: Of all the flavours of gravy that we’ve seen in the last six years, what was your favourite flavour?

Questions?

I want to thank the member opposite for his speech. He’s always very well researched and he knows his stuff.

He’s talked about removing tolls on the 412 and the 418—great. But there is a portion of the 407 that is still tolled by the province of Ontario. Now, since he is so much against the tolls on highways, I know he must be screaming in caucus meetings, “Why aren’t we taking the tolls off that part of the 407?” So tell us, why isn’t the government, if they’re so against tolls, removing the 407 tolls that are part of the provincially owned portion of that highway?

Speaker, I’ve been thinking about it, and I really believe that this government truly does not want to get rid of the carbon tax, because if they did somehow, they would have nothing else to talk about, literally. You go in the halls and they’re walking the corridors, “Carbon tax, carbon tax,” bumping into each other, bumping into walls.

My question is simple. Do you believe they believe that if they repeat the words “carbon tax” over and over and over enough, it may actually change the scary and embarrassing fact that they’re under RCMP investigation?

I want to thank the member for his always-eloquent speech. I wanted to ask a question of him: When this was first debated at second reading, a government member got up and spoke that tolls weren’t the way to go; that it was actually gas tax that was the way to go, that it was sensible, that it was smart. A PC Conservative Ford government member said that the gas tax was the way to go. In fact, he sits way over on that side. I just wanted to ask what the member thought about this Conservative government member talking about gas tax being the way to go.

Speaker, you know, you can’t make this up. This government put out these blue plates not that many years ago. Those plates couldn’t be seen in bad weather, couldn’t be seen in the light of day, they couldn’t be seen in the night, and it was an embarrassment, right? Because border officials, officers were saying, “Guys, get it done. Get these plates off. They’re a safety issue. They’re a safety issue”—over 150,000 on the road.

And so what did this government do? The minister came out and he announced a plan. Do you know what he announced the plan to get it done was? To let weathering and rust take care of the plates. The plan was to do nothing.

My question is, why can’t this government get it done right?

Thank you for that question. It’s astounding to me that after 20 minutes of me commiserating with the government side, actually not blaming them for bad decision-making individually, and saying collectively that the decisions are made somewhere high up by a PR guy and by special interests, they get their feathers ruffled instead of saying, “Yeah, you’re right. You’re right. It really sucks.”

But that’s exactly what the reality is of this. They may not want to admit it today, but they know—they know—what I’m saying is true. They absolutely know that what I’m saying is true. They’re just too scared to say it themselves.

Health care Tory math: You want to talk about numbers? You? Under this government, hospitals are being forced to pay double the amount to hire agency nurses than have their own nurses. At the same cost, they could be doubling the amount of nurses in our hospitals. These are things not to be proud of: escalating costs of everything, an affordability crisis, skyrocketing costs of literally everything under this government; claiming that they’re going to fight a housing crisis, and all they’re doing is making land speculators rich while people struggle, while workers struggle. How is this something to be proud of?

But again, I don’t blame the member, because it wasn’t him. It was the people making the decisions that they’re all forced to have to walk in line with and follow. I get it: It ruffles feathers—ruffles feathers to know that you made it to government and you’ve got no power, individually. That’s why I commiserate with them, and I wish that they would stand up to their leadership and have an opinion.

I was called out by a government member saying that I wasn’t sticking to the topic. I’m not really sure how that comes into play about the current bill or even what I was saying. Respectfully, I was talking most recently about the privatization that this government is wreaking on health care and what the effect is, that it is bad Tory math, that they take spots—instead of paying nurses and respecting them so that they stay in hospitals, they stay in their long-term jobs, private agencies are coming in. We’re paying double the cost. A quarter of that at least goes into administration—their profits. This is our taxpayer money. Health care is spiralling out of control. They’re making rich friends and donors richer and richer and richer. That money, as the Tory cycle of life, comes back into their coffers.

This has to stop. I hope these members of this government in caucus somewhere get the ministers aside. Shake them. Tell them, “Stand up to the leaders. Stand up to the special interests and the PR guy and do what’s in your heart. Do what’s in your conscience.” Because I know a lot of you are not happy.

Thank you to the minister for that. I’m just trying to commiserate with the government. The reality is, I’m telling them, Speaker, individually that it’s not their fault, because they had nothing to do with the decision-making process. Because they never do—they never do.

So was it this government? Was it a minister? Do they have power or not? Well, we’re going to find out as the RCMP continue this investigation on who knew what. But these are exactly the issues that we’re facing from this government. They’re not accountable to the people because the people making the decisions claim they have a mandate. It’s not them. It’s not the people that put their names forward, fighting to make change for their community, who get to make any decisions here. It’s PR guys and special interests. That’s it.

Now, the “notwithstanding” clause: Again, this is a measure that is supposed to be brought in, I mean, literally, under extreme circumstances. Well, these guys are using it to change toilet paper in the bathroom—for anything. It doesn’t matter. Do you know why? Because if they can’t get their way, they will break it out.

And you don’t know the amount of flack they got for that. And I was getting flack on their behalf, people calling and saying, “I can’t believe this is even happening.” They thought this is inside baseball; nobody is going to know. Do you know many lawyers and judges were rolling their eyes at the abuse of this government with regard to the “notwithstanding” clause?

The licence plates—I’m going to get into it again. What an embarrassment, right? Vanity plates that can’t be read. They can’t be seen in bad weather. They can’t be seen at night. They can’t be seen in the sun. Get it undone. Then they announced a plan to do nothing about it. That was the plan: Don’t do anything.

One of the first times this government had to backtrack was on the autism file. They won’t listen to the advocates—autism advocates. They’ll pick up the phone call from Enbridge. So they came in here and they made changes, and families and individuals were out by the hundreds, if not the thousands, on the front lawn, and they had to again get undone the damage they did to the system.

Public health, e-learning, class sizes: I mean, the pandemic taught us how successful remote learning can be in some of these cases. But these were things that they all talked about. A French university—they lost a member over this. They took aim at French-speaking people in Ontario. And then they had to go back on it.

Legal aid: Tear that up too, right? Imagine, at a time where they want to talk about law and order, and there are victims of crime, they don’t even want to support them. It goes on and on and on.

And in the time I have left, I won’t be able to get into schedule 5 much. I already talked about Enbridge, how Enbridge called them up and said, “Guys, we’re paying you. We want to charge customers. It’s not going to come out of our bottom line. It’s not going to come out of our profits.” Well, guess what this government did? They passed it—

But I’ll get on to the final thing, in the minute left: schedule 6. And there’s not much time. The 407, highway tolls—the only time tolls have ever been collected on the 412 and the 418 was by this government. So they’re removing tolls from highways that in other cases don’t have tolls, and then in other cases, the 407, which under the past leadership—and I won’t blame them individually—allowed the cost of the tolls on the 407 to balloon to the highest-cost toll highway in the visible universe. That’s what we’re facing. Do something about it.

In the 30 seconds left: They had an opportunity in the last session of government, a billion dollars that the 407 owed the people because they breached their own contract. They did not reach the level of cars that they were supposed to. This government could have taken them to the cleaners and said, “You owe us a billion dollars.” Do you know what the government did—why? Because the 407 sits right here on that shoulder of special interest. They said, “Keep the money. The people of Ontario don’t need a billion dollars; you have it. Make more money on the backs of Ontarians.” That’s what this government’s been all about.

Interjections.

I’d never blame the member for the past, but the 407 and rates that they charge are really the past of the Conservative Party. In the last session of government, the 407 actually broke the terms of the contract, in the sense that they did not collect enough, they did not have enough ridership on their highway, and that triggered a penalty of a billion dollars to the province of Ontario. Your government, the one you didn’t sit in yet, decided, “Hey, 407, we don’t need a billion dollars. Keep it.” Would you have decided the same thing had you been sitting in this chair?

I’d like to begin today’s debate just asking the simple question as to how the government comes up with names for their bills. I’ve heard rumours. One rumour is that the guy responsible actually designs bumper stickers, because we’re debating the Get It Done Act.

Now, another thing that I’ve thought and I’ve heard, actually, is that they’ve got, essentially, a cauldron full of random words put together, and someone reaches in and pulls them out, and that’s how you’re able to get something like Get It Done. You read this and you have no idea what we’re talking about. If it’s the destruction of health care in this province, they’re getting it done; that’s for sure. There’s many different ways in which they’re getting it done.

I’m going to tell you a little bit about what they’re doing here, but before I do that, I want to talk a little bit about this government, particularly the government’s backbench. I’d like to begin with that, because I have to say something. I think you have a really tough job and I think you have a tougher job than we do, because we can come day in and day out with a clear conscience and oppose bad decisions, and you’ve got to go along with them. The thing is, it’s not easy for you. It can’t be easy for you; it really can’t.

I see, sometimes, during question period when we put out a question to this side, and people are literally struck on the government side with an epiphany. They’re just sitting in their chair reeling sometimes. They’re having a crisis of conscience. They can’t believe that this is what their government and this is what their ministers are up to. They just can’t. They put their names in hoping to have a hand in change for the province of Ontario, bringing their own philosophies to bear, whatever it is, and they come here day in and day out and sit absolutely powerless—powerless to leave a mark, to leave a legacy, to do absolutely anything. All they can do is sit there and take it. That’s all they can do on a day-to-day basis.

Now, I think it’s better to not call them backbenchers; it would probably be better to refer to them as parliamentary assistants, because this is probably the government, per capita, that has had the highest number. For that, I congratulate you. That gives you an opportunity to be nearer to decision-making. But I think this is what you quickly found out: It doesn’t matter that you’re a parliamentary assistant; you don’t get to make a decision. You are a parliamentary assistant because it is a means of control. Because when you are faced with having to rubber-stamp bad decisions, all you’ve got staring you in the face to keep you in line is the brand that they could threaten to take from you and a PA-ship, and yet you still do it. You may not want to admit it now. You may not want to admit it now, but maybe at 2 a.m. when you’re going to get milk out of the fridge because you can’t sleep, you’ll think about it then, and if you don’t think about it now, you’ll think about it soon.

One of the things I’ve always noticed about these same members is I think they’re terrific people. I really, really like many of the members on the government side. I talk to them in the halls all the time. I talk to them outside of the chamber. One thing I never, never truly understood was how it is that a group of individuals like these—principled, good, who want to make change—end up making decisions like the ones that we face here in the province day in and day out.

And then you go to the next level: the ministers. I’m going to get into that as I discuss one of the schedules in this bill. Do the ministers make decisions? Are the opinions of the ministers actually respected? I would say no. I would say, for the most part, no. You get all the way up to the highest levels, to leadership itself, and I think that the decisions don’t even come from there, because at the highest level of this pyramid of power exists, on the shoulders of power, one side that’s a PR guy, and the on the other side it’s special interest.

An example of that is the bill we were debating earlier, the Keeping Energy Costs Down Act—another fun title, because it’s actually doing the opposite. In that case it was Enbridge. A decision was made and within 15 hours of the decision, somewhere intermediary someone high up in Enbridge—maybe its $19-million CEO—called out, reached to someone high up in this government and said, “This is completely irresponsible. Don’t allow this.” Now, their own investors didn’t want it, but they said they would pass that on to customers. And this government rubber-stamped it. This government came out within 15 hours. You have individuals of all stripes, people fighting so many different things, and they could never get even a phone call across to a member that could make a decision in this government. But the people with power always, always do.

So what are we getting done here? Environmental Assessment Act, schedule 1: Based on some of the conversations that I’ve heard, an EA is just nothing more then an impediment. As I had said before, it was Conservatives of the past that established conservation authorities in this province. The Conservatives of the past have legacies. In fact, the public energy system, hydro, was delivered by Conservatives, and they said it should be at-cost. How far has this government fallen? How is it described that EAs are essentially an impediment? This government has no interest in quality control. What they want to do is now presuppose decisions and say, “Go along. Do whatever you want. Forget an EA. We don’t care about them anyway. They’re just really a hassle.” They’re not something that this government is interested in. But you know there are cases where people will purchase newly built condos, homes and other things before the developers even purchase lands. They will put that out for sale, and guess what? The project doesn’t get through. And who is left holding the bag? Consumers. There are reasons why you can’t put the cart before the horse, but the government doesn’t want to hear it.

I want to move on to schedule 4, the Photo Card Act. What this one reminds me of are licence plates in this province. Licence plates trigger for me what this government has been, which has been an entire month of wasted time going back and backtracking on bad decisions they made.

Now, again, government backbenchers, I don’t blame you individually for this, because none of you had any choice in any of these decisions. Someone high up at the top will come up with something that you have no control over, and it makes its way down, and then you’re told with a piece of paper, “This is what you’re doing. This is how you’re going to vote. No opinion on your part is necessary. Just do what you’re told.” And so you do.

But this government has done nothing but backtrack over and over and over again. And so I would say when you actually look at a portion of this here—this should not be called the Get It Done Act; it should be called the “get it undone act,” because there’s a portion in here that the government did around regional boundaries where they did it and then they undid it, and then in this they’re undoing what they undid. But that’s only a little bit of what they have undone.

There is actually a long list of what they’ve undone. The wage cap law—and this comes from the Canadian Press. Bill 124 capped salary increases. What did they have to do? They had to get it undone because it was ruled unconstitutional. And what did that bill do? It further damaged health care in this province. It directly damaged health care in this province. And how did it do that? Well, I’m going to let you in on a little bit of Tory math.

As we all know, we have long waiting lists when it comes to surgeries or getting treatment in hospitals and other places, when it comes to health care. But this government, above all, wants to privatize health care in the province of Ontario. They can’t say it openly because—remember how I told you that at the height of leadership, there’s a PR guy and then there are special interests on this side? The PR guy knows that Ontarians take pride in the public health care system; that this government doesn’t. They will find ways to destroy it, and one way is through planned obsolescence. How do they do that? Well, nurses and nursing agencies. They’ve done reports on this. The Auditor General has reported on this. It has been reported widely in the media. In southern Ontario, in some places, by up to 25 times more than the past, hospitals are having to rely on nursing agencies to bring in nurses. Why? Because our nurses are burnt out, they’re not respected, and they’re not paid what they deserve. So at a cost of something like $35 to $50 an hour for one of these hospital nurses, at the current rates, this government allows these hospitals, or pushes them, even, to go to agencies, to pay over $100 an hour—double. And of that $100, a quarter of it goes to an agency, it goes to their administration, it goes to profits; it’s not going to health care.

Nurses are leaving public jobs to go into those ones that you’re helping create. In fact, it was the spouse of a former Tory Premier who got into that business a long time ago. So what’s happening is this: For the cost of two nurses at the current rates, you’re getting one nurse through an agency—a nurse who is going to a new hospital, learning the place, at many times. Patients are there, and they’re seeing a different nurse every single day.

Our current nurses are burnt out and disrespected. And what is this government doing? They’re making the situation absolutely worse. Do you know why? Because when they go into private industry and that money from the government goes into more private pockets, where do you think that money goes? It goes from the taxpayer into a Conservative bank account. That’s what it does. It’s the circle of life for the Tories. That’s all that happens here.

They had to repeal Bill 124 because the courts made them. The dissolution of Peel: Guess what? They had to undo that too. They came in here—they’ve had no respect for municipal boundaries in many different ways—tore it up, and there it is; official plans, again, regional boundaries, the greenbelt.

Do ministers have control? Here’s where I get to that point. I would say no. And I think the greenbelt scandal showed that, because you can’t have it both ways.

This government, during an election, said time and time again, “We’re not going to open up the greenbelt.” They tried to open it again, and then, when they couldn’t do it, they weaken conservation authorities, they tear up EA processes, they do everything they can until eventually—remember the special interests I told you about sitting, on this shoulder? The special interests said, “Don’t listen to the PR guy.” He reached across, put his hand over the mouth of the PR guy and said, “Just do it. It’s where the money comes from.” Right? “What are we paying you for?” And so, what they did was they tore up the greenbelt.

At the time, the minister had to face question after question after question, and with a sweaty face—in fact, his documents damp from the sweat—he had to sit up here and defend decisions until he had said, “I had nothing to do with that.” How do you have it both ways?

So was the minister making these decisions or was he not? And then he ended up losing his job as minister. So if he didn’t make the decisions, why is he not in the chair? He did nothing wrong.

Well, whatever they did with the greenbelt led to the RCMP investigating this government. Again, I go back to what I said: I have tremendous respect for the backbench and the PAs and the ministers of this government. They had nothing to do with these decisions. They’ve got to wear them day, in and day out.

Imagine how embarrassing it is for a government that prides itself on being all about law and order to be investigated by the RCMP. It is nothing short of an embarrassment. And the government members feel that embarrassment. When we asked questions at the time, I remember standing beside—

I listened intently to the member, and he’s certainly an expert in his field. I know he cares deeply about the people of Ontario and his community, and I was so impressed with his speech. I heard him say that he believes the most efficient way forward is a gas tax, obviously. That is the most equitable way. Could you tell us a little bit more about why you believe that’s the case?

It might come as a surprise to many, but conservation authorities were first established by Conservatives generations ago in this province. I think a round of applause for them, right? Yes. Now, generations later, we’ve got this.

My question to either of you is simply this: What do you trust more: the results of an environmental assessment or the advice of a Tory Minister of the Environment?