There are more than 1.5 million Canadians who trace their origins to Italy, with most living here in Ontario. In fact, their contributions here and across the world stage are so numerous, we have dedicated June as Italian Heritage Month in Ontario.

Speaker, the Italian Canadian community is known and respected for their values and traditions of hard work, ingenuity and dedication to family life in their community. And, of course, Italians have a deep and proud history to draw upon, filling the shelves of libraries around the world. Their ancestors had an empire that spanned Europe and beyond, and their legacy has had a profound impact on all of humanity. Countless great Italian figures have shaped Western philosophy, law, culture, faith, science and so much more. To this very day, Italians continue to be a name on the world stage in science, engineering, sports, cuisine, fashion and much more.

Today in Ontario, there are almost one million Ontarians of Italian descent—Italian immigrants and their children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren who literally built so much of the province with their own hands, minds and hearts. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Italian Ontarians, and it is a real honour to recognize their great culture and identity today with all of you.

Happy Italian Heritage Month.

On the subject of licence plates, I have to say, upon reflection—

I have to say that under the sleepy watch of this government when it comes to auto theft, the fact is most people have been left on their own. And the police divisions have been left on their own, begging for the supports that they need in many different ways: “Come on, give us help.”

Let us fix these jurisdictional issues. Yes, I heard someone say that this is a federal issue, not like—I don’t know how many government questions there are a morning; they’re literally all about carbon tax, a federal issue. But, of course, on this one thing, “No, we’re not going talk to anyone about it. The last thing is we’re going to talk to auto manufacturers.”

But when I think about it, most drivers and the enforcement agencies, when it comes to auto theft, are left on their own. So much so that I fear, on the issue of licence plates, if we continue under this sleepy watch, we may have to change the Ontario licence plate motto from “Yours to Discover” to “Yours to Recover,” because that is literally where we are. That’s what it is. That is essentially what is going on. Because if you want to get your car back, you’re going to have to track it, you’re going to have to find it in a container—I don’t know what—come there with a blowtorch, a bulletproof vest maybe, whatever else, and call all your friends because you don’t know what you’re going to end up with.

I want to thank my friend for giving me the bill. And I apologize to the government because I was really taken in. I was almost captured by the resolve they had when they said they were going to deal with this auto theft issue because they really sold it. They really sold it as an end to auto theft in the country and in the province where we continue to set records in terms of the thefts that have happened.

So, to the government: You want to say that you are the party of getting tough on crime—again, ironic, because they are being investigated. But the thing is, if you want to do this, there are solutions that are out there. They’re literally in every single newspaper. Other jurisdictions are doing it. We’re talking about the VIN registration, where we are now a hot spot for stolen cars to come in here. It’s such a fast way to deal with it. We know that over 70% to 80% of these cars get shipped out of the province. So that means in some way, shape or form, they end up in the back of a truck, on a container, at a border somewhere. We know this has been happening since 2018.

So, to this government: Please do it on behalf of our enforcement agencies. Provide them the support in this effort. Reach out to the federal partners. Maybe as you repeat the words “carbon tax” over and over again, if you literally repeated anything else—if you said, “car theft, car theft, car theft,” in the same way you talked about carbon tax, I’m sure we would actually see a steep decline. If you showed even a fraction of the energy of repeating yourself on that every single morning in terms of some of these other issues—and I could name all sorts of them. And yes, the other thing is beer. I know we heard about that. Carbon tax and beer is really what I got from them—and embarrassingly walking back legislation.

But the thing is, this should be all you. You could do something about this. You want to talk to big business? You know, I’ve raised this to government members—about talking to auto manufacturers. Let’s talk about the highest standards of theft protection in the province of Ontario. You know what I get back? “It’s not our role.” Meanwhile, they will want to talk to businesses and say they want to attract business here, so it doesn’t really make any sense. Because it seems like they will talk to auto manufacturers about batteries and nothing else. Making these vehicles actually safer so that you or a loved one isn’t on the receiving end, God forbid, of some weapon for them to get at your vehicle—no, that’s not part of the conversation. I just can’t understand that, for a Conservative government.

The last thing is to say that they must all know, Speaker, that these are really lukewarm solutions to any of this. Because the reality is, we all know that this is not going to be a serious deterrent. If a person is willing and has worked themselves up to do serious harm to someone else, they are not going to be deterred from the simple matter of losing their licence indefinitely on not just the first, second, but on the third attempt. I’m sorry, but this is not scarier than jail for criminals. It literally is not, and I think the government knows this. So, if they’re going to get up, puff out their chest with pride and declare that it’s an end to auto theft in Ontario or even a serious dent, let’s be serious: It’s not.

There has been work. There have been conversations at the highest levels. Please listen to the enforcement officers that you talk about respecting everyday. There are solutions out there, like our member from Oshawa has talked about here and in the media and everywhere else. Deal with the fact that these VIN numbers are being stolen. That is leading cars to come here, making us not just number one for car thieves but for stolen vehicles too, which is kind of ridiculous, because you’re imagining cars are being stolen from here and then other cars are being welcomed into the province. It makes no sense. It’s an embarrassment.

This is not the kind of growth that you want to see under your watch. There are actual, real solutions. Please, come back with more serious legislation. I don’t know how much time we have left in this session, but you can put a serious dent when it comes to auto theft and you can make Ontarians feel safer, whether they’re actually behind the wheel of their car or waiting—some of them literally fearful every single night that they may wake up in the morning and have no vehicle to drive to work or to go somewhere else. The ball is in your court. Come on. Let’s get serious on crime. Let’s get serious on auto theft, not this bumper sticker stuff. Come on. You can do better than that.

Under the current system, I guess, presumably, a car thief goes with their full identification, their licence and everything. They drive to a prospective home to steal a car—maybe park their own vehicle in front of that property, steal the car and leave.

And now, under this new system—because we know, there’s no way that a criminal is going to try to steal a car now that they no longer have a licence—we will actually see an increase in demand in getaway drivers under this legislation. So we may see some more openings for actual getaway drivers as a result, and this might be one of the unintended consequences we’ve seen as a result of legislation in this House. So thank you so much for the question.

Oh, okay; sorry.

So we know that it’s an issue and we’re going to stop cars at the borders, right? Now, I know the ports are in Montreal and the west coast. But people have been tracking stolen cars by police, and where do they end up? In the back of a rig, a trailer, a container. We all saw that frustrating episode of Marketplace where a guy tracked his car to a railyard and the police couldn’t get into it because of jurisdictional issues. So, of course, this is probably going to be an appeal to the federal government to deal with those jurisdictional issues, right?

Interjection.

Okay, all right, so maybe they’re not talking about that. How about stiffer penalties? When you watch on the occasion when these criminal rings are captured—it’s usually not one guy; it’s usually 20 faces. You see them on the screen, on CP24. I mean, are we talking about tougher penalties and punishments? Because, you know, it’s not just the person stealing the car. Sometimes, it’s a young person compelled by organized crime, a gang. How do they end up in these rings? How do they end up in a container? Are we talking about maybe going after shipping companies, ensuring that we get to the bottoms of these rings, and stopping it in many ways? We’re talking about that, right?

All right, so they’re not coming up with stiffer criminal penalties. How about—okay, I’ve got one. This is something that’s been working in Quebec. We know that as we increase technology of these—for car thieves, now, you just have a remote starter and they can capture your signal or they could plug into a port. There’s lots of stuff that they can do in that area. So, surely, we’re debating legislation here where this government is going to be reaching out to auto manufacturers and ensuring that cars sold in Ontario are of the highest standards and protections, right?

Government members, that stuff I’ve talked about is in the bill, right?

This is a government that really talks tough when it comes to at least blue-collar crime because we know that they consider white-collar crime as innovation in some cases, but I’ll leave it at that.

But the thing is there is no way because this is a government that loves police so much that just to spend more time with them, they’re willing to be investigated even, right? And so I’m expecting that there’s got to be more to this. Does someone have a copy of the bill?

Okay, let’s see, section 41.0.2, Suspension related to theft of a motor vehicle—suspension of their licence? Oh, and we’ve got three—so, first conviction, 10 years; 15; and then an indefinite suspension of your licence as a deterrent. That will take the thieves off the road? No, this is not possible. Is this the bill?

So, Speaker, let me understand this. Hardened criminals willing to go to a person’s home, home invade them in some cases, rob them maybe while they’re in their vehicle, or do worse, are going to be deterred by losing their licence indefinitely, not on their first—

Interjections.

No, you know what? Upon thinking about it, you know what? Maybe this is a very serious resolution. I mean, imagine never being able—and of course, we know, for a criminal, the last thing—I could see some of these hardened criminals; you could imagine them on those police shows. I mean, really, we’re talking beyond sociopathy, psychopathy. There are lines for a criminal. There are some things you’re not going to do, right? There’s a line you’re not willing to cross in some cases, and I think everyone here has got their line, whatever it is. But I could see someone, certainly a thief who’s willing to go to your house, break in, assault you to get those keys to steal your car and drive away with it—but no way they’re going to leave their house without their licence. There is no way of that. I could totally imagine that right now. I mean, some thief that day has decided they’re going to go out there and make the world a worse place by stealing someone’s car, and they’re going to get into that car; now they’re going to say, “I can’t do this. What am I going to do? Take a bus? Am I going to have to ride a bike, maybe a unicycle or, even worse, walk?”

Imagine that. Or imagine the embarrassment of having to reach out to someone and say, “Look, can you give me a drive?” “What do you need to do?” “I’ve got to steal a car.” “Oh, okay. No, I’m not going to”—and maybe other thief friends or whatnot. It would be a massive embarrassment to them to actually have to do that.

So, to give credit to the government, forcing criminals to have to rideshare—imagine. And getaway drivers are going to be put out of business. This could be an end to getaway drivers, and that is serious. That is serious. That is, I guess, a big deterrent.

This government—usually, we criticize them for consulting. Once in a while I find out they consult. Of course, they don’t always consult the people you want them to consult. So I don’t know if they reached out to the car thief syndicates or organized crime—

Interjection.

Maybe I’m not being fair. Maybe this is, in fact, a deterrent. I can see how, if you’re a hardened criminal, the one thing that you’re not going to do is leave your house without a licence. When you steal a car, when you’re about to commit crime, you’re going to ensure that you have all your full documentation with you: licence, health card, maybe passport, whatever it is. This is a piece in a puzzle of taking that away from them, so I can see that it could be a little bit of a deterrent when it comes to doing that.

I guess I would love to understand, too because this does beg the question: Who writes some of this legislation? I want to know whose angry uncle gave them this advice to put this as a solution, or what was it? Which armchair—we all got those people that will tell you how to fix all the problems.

I want to thank the member for her very thoughtful, well-researched presentation and debate of one hour. Thank you for that.

I want the member to tell us how hardened criminals—people willing to rob, steal, home invade and maybe even do worse—will be deterred from stealing cars by taking away their licence. Tell us how this is going to work.

We’ve heard submissions from a government that loves to talk about growth—growth at all costs. We hear from the Minister of Job Creation talking about growth in certain industries, jobs and all that happening, but there are some forms of growth that this government doesn’t talk about: growth of people waiting in food bank lines, growth in terms of the lineups waiting for a surgery in a hospital, growth in many different ways. But there has been a growth in—I don’t want to call it a sector, but one area that incidentally dates back to the beginning of when this government took their first oaths of office in 2018, and this has been a steady growth we’ve seen year after year, increasing, increasing, increasing. It's gone up 100%, 200% and, in some cases, some have said 300%, and that—

Now, I can tell you, I was so excited to hear that we would be debating legislation to tackle auto theft in Ontario, truly something that I’ve heard government members talk about as an epidemic. They said they were going to take decisive action, and the members got up and they were proud. You could see. They stood straight-backed, ready to talk about the solutions to this scourge in Ontario. So I’m so proud because, I’ll be honest, I was a little worried, because as I’ve watched these numbers continue, and I was looking for leadership from this government to talk about the scourge, and we waited and we waited and nothing was coming up, and I began to think that the only part of the car they were interested in was its battery. But no, now we are debating legislation around auto theft to, in some cases, say that they’re going to be taking car thieves completely off the road, and I’m so excited about this.

There’s a lot of solutions to that, right. The member from Oshawa has talked about VIN registration. In fact, we’re not just a hub where car thieves from around the world are coming to Ontario under the sleepy watch of this government; stolen vehicles are coming here because we’re not bothering to inspect the VIN, right? So, of course, the legislation is going to be dealing with that, and I know that that’s what we’re dealing with here, right? It’s the VIN?

I beg leave to present a report on Value-for-Money Audit: Ontario Energy Board: Electricity Oversight and Consumer Protection, 2022 Annual Report of the Office of the Auditor General of Ontario, from the Standing Committee on Public Accounts and move the adoption of its recommendations.

As Chair of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, I’m pleased to table the committee’s report. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the permanent membership of the committee and substitute members who participated in the public hearings and report-writing process.

The committee extends its appreciation to officials from the Ministry of Energy and the Ontario Energy Board.

The committee also acknowledges the assistance provided by the Office of the Auditor General, the Clerk of the Committee, and legislative research.

With that, I move adjournment of the debate.

I’m very proud to welcome again Fikayo Aderoju and his board members from Project Impacting Lives, including Rachel Kasujja, Naimah Raji, Lucky Osunbiyi, Kelly Mgbatogu, Jada McKenzie, Kimberley Okafor, Tofunmi Olowogorioye, Oluwafeyikemi Olusoga, Lorenzo Baitwa, Toni Bodunrin, Chikodili Odinakachukwu and Simi Olomofe. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

I want to congratulate and thank the member from Orléans for tabling this motion today. I must say that his debate here is always well researched, thoughtful and often very sharp-witted, which we need here.

We heard a government response that wasn’t so much sharp-witted as it was sharp. Upon listening—and I must digress. The amount of times the carbon tax is mentioned in the chamber—I actually believe that they may not, in fact, be interested in removing it because I don’t think they’d have anything else to talk about if the carbon tax was actually removed. I have a sneaking suspicion about that.

But on returning to the substance of this motion, I’m proud to stand and rise and speak on behalf of any measure to support our children and our youth here in the province of Ontario. It’s very important. I know, coming out of the pandemic, where many, many programs did not have the opportunity to even run—coming out of that, we are looking at ways to incentivize and to bring kids and youth back into programming, not just sports, not just music. There are countless ways in which this is possible. Certainly, this motion here is an attempt to do that. I know that it’s here in good faith.

I have to say, as a father of two young sons, having a child is truly a moment in your life where you could measure everything that has happened before and after. It changes you as a person into something you can only realize when you have that child. What would you not be willing to do for your own children? Certainly, programs that we send them to, extracurriculars, are not just important but they are essential for our children. We must remove any form of barrier that exists.

Certainly, there are many ways of doing it. Yes, you can invest in programming and find many different ways to do that. Yes, you can put more money in general into parents’ pockets. But incentivizing it in this way is also an important way and a way that will have children go out there.

Many parents face barriers of time and certainly finances to be able to put their children in important programs like this. We don’t want to see financial barriers. Many parents don’t have the time or money to be able to enrol them. But for those who do, it’s an average of $2,500 a year that parents spend. They spend to be able to give important opportunities for their children to reach their best potential, not just in learning skills and sports and new talents, but some of these extracurriculars may point them in a new direction that could change their lives.

Skills, friendships, social skills, motivation: The list goes on and on, and one could sit here an entire day explaining why this is a good idea and why it’s important to incentivize, give the parents the help they need and do the best for our children. Because after all, what could be more important than supporting our children, for they are our future?

We all say it, but once in a while we’re offered the opportunity to actually make it a reality. I believe this is one of those days. I’m proud to stand in support of this measure, and I thank the member for tabling the bill today.

Thanks to the member. He is so passionate in fighting for labour reform and fighting for workers, as always.

We’re sitting here through the fifth incarnation of this Working for Workers. Again, I want to go back to what he ended the speech with: How many Working for Workers bills do you think we’re going to sit through before they actually fix deeming in this province? Why don’t you talk to us a little bit about that?

I actually want to dedicate my question to the Minister of Energy and my respect for him. Quite often, I have been impressed by him in the last six years; usually, it’s for his quick wit. But on this issue, I have never seen him move so fast—faster than the electricity in the wires—because when the OEB came out and said, “Make the shareholders, make Enbridge pay out of the profit margins,” he said, “No. Make the consumers pay.”

My question for our member is, who did it faster—Usain Bolt running 100 metres or this minister standing up for Enbridge in the media?

My question is for the Premier. Speaker, the public still remembers the bread price-fixing scandal where grocers reached a secret agreement to inflate the cost of bread for more than 14 years. They said they were sorry, but since then big corporations’ profits continue to reach all-time highs while Ontarians’ monthly budgets get tighter, and shrinkflation means we’re literally getting less for our money.

Speaker, something just doesn’t smell right in Ontario’s grocery stores. Can the Premier tell Ontarians what he’s doing to hold big corporations accountable and put a stop to price gouging?

It’s time to stop cozying up to powerful billionaires and start taking a much closer look at their business practices. Speaker, what is the Premier doing to investigate price gouging and make sure Ontarians aren’t getting ripped off on groceries?

NOSIs are a type of lien against property commonly used today to scam and extort Ontarians across our province, especially our seniors. Earlier this year, the Ontario NDP tabled a bill to ban them and put an end to this abuse. The minister said he agreed with us, but here we are two months later, and we are still waiting while homeowners continue to get scammed.

Will the minister commit today to banning these secretive, harmful liens against homes in Ontario and, if so, tell us when he will make it into law?

There are countless Ontarians with these secretive, harmful liens on their homes, including an elderly couple in my community with a dozen of them totalling more than $100,000.

I recently tabled a motion calling on the government to immediately notify all homeowners who have these liens on their homes, because the people deserve to know.

Will the minister support this important motion?

My question is for the Premier. Thousands in Toronto’s west end rely on the UP Express for their daily commutes. Airport workers, families and many others are stuck paying higher fares because UP Express riders don’t get to benefit from the One Fare program.

Can the minister tell us why UP Express riders and west-end commuters have been excluded from One Fare? Will he commit today to including them?

You know, in 2018, when the member was elected, one of the first things that this Conservative government did was rip up a grant program that existed to help students from low-income families go to university in an affordable way. We continue to see families—bright, ambitious students—facing massive financial barriers to go to university or colleges. Again, students in Ontario pay the highest tuitions in all of Canada.

Does the member believe that financial barriers to education should exist for our students?

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?

Last month, I held a meeting where I informed my community about fraud and the abuse of a type of lien against a property called a notice of security interest, or NOSI for short.

As you know, people across our province, especially seniors and vulnerable members of our communities, have been victimized by unscrupulous door-to-door salespeople who have used every trick in the book to try to scam them into a bad contract. Many of these scams involve NOSIs without the knowledge of the victim. So these liens sit unnoticed until the time comes to sell, take out a loan, or refinance your home. During this stressful time, the victims are extorted to pay large amounts to have the lien removed, or spend loads of time and money in the courts trying to reverse this vexatious registration. These liens are often in the tens of thousands. A family in my riding had over a dozen NOSIs placed on their home—a dozen.

In many cases, the personal banking and identification of these victims are trafficked and used to commit other types of fraud. In extreme cases, the victims are tricked into signing reverse mortgages in an attempt for the thieves to steal their homes.

At my town hall, residents couldn’t believe that the government hasn’t put an end to this yet. I let my residents know about our private members’ bill to ban NOSIs, and they all insisted that it be passed immediately.

Once again, I call on this government to ban NOSIs in Ontario and to notify all Ontarians who have a NOSI on their property, free of charge.

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?

Further debate?