It’s an honour and a pleasure to rise in the chamber today to speak about Bill 166, the Strengthening Accountability and Student Supports Act.

At face value, this bill is about three things: combatting racism and hatred, increasing mental health supports and services, and then increasing cost transparency. You’ll forgive that I’m a little bit skeptical about the government’s actual intention to deliver on these promises when, for example, on the issue of racism, we have a government that, immediately on taking power, slashed racism funding.

You’ll forgive me if I’m skeptical about a government that says it wants to fight anti-Semitism and Islamophobia yet, when given the opportunity to pass the Our London Family Act, chooses not to do so.

You’ll forgive me if I’m skeptical about a government that wants to introduce more mental health services and yet has been underfunding our primary care and health care system, leaving many people without access to a family doctor, which is for most people their main source of mental health care.

Finally, you’ll forgive me for being skeptical about this government’s interest in cost transparency when, under this government, the term “transparency” has become an oxymoron.

Furthermore, this bill is on the background of, currently, our province being dead last for funding post-secondary education, dead last for supporting operating budgets and dead last for contributing a fraction of our GDP on post-secondary education. Now, why is that and how did we get here? Because immediately on taking power, this government started hacking away at colleges and universities. They cut OSAP by 40%. They eliminated the six-month interest-free grace period for students for repaying their loans. They capped funding for domestic students; consequently, right now, there are 20,000 students in public universities for which those universities receive no public funding.

Because our universities and colleges are suffering, because 10 of 23 universities are currently running a deficit because they can’t balance their books, international student admissions have gone up under this government by 82%; and this government has opened the floodgates to private career colleges, with there presently being over 500 of them.

For a government that wants to address mental health challenges, let’s take a moment to reflect on that. Because what we know is that amongst international students—again, I remind you that international student rates have gone up dramatically under this government—we have an epidemic of mental health challenges. We have an epidemic of international suicides right now.

Not only will I point out that these numbers have gone up under the government; I will reiterate my skepticism that this government is interested in doing anything about that because if they were interested, then this bill wouldn’t just touch on public colleges and universities. It would be sweeping enough to ensure that there are mental health supports for students in private colleges and in career colleges, but it’s not. So even if and when this passes, even with the investments from last year, there will remain an epidemic of suicide amongst international students at private colleges and career colleges in our province.

So let’s recap first how we got here in the first place: deliberate underfunding by this government, limited domestic students’ access to post-secondary education because they capped that, the slashing of OSAP, and then they’ve allowed subpar, private diploma mills to take hold in our province. This bill does nothing to address that.

Now, we know a week ago there was an announcement of $1.3 billion to supposedly stabilize colleges and universities. The government’s own task force to look at that, the blue-ribbon panel, the panel that looked at the crisis we have in the post-secondary sector, gave sweeping recommendations that this government is refusing to implement, one of which was an infusion of $2.5 billion and the best that the members on the other side could come up with was barely half of that. This legislation is entirely inadequate and does not come close to meeting the needs of the post-secondary sector.

This bill could have been an opportunity to fix the shortfalls of their underfunding, to give our institutions the support they need, also recognizing that every $1 spent on post-secondary education brings back $1.40 to our province’s economy. This is not about spending; this is about investing.

Now, let’s actually dive into the content of this bill. We should first acknowledge that universities and colleges in this province do have mental health and anti-hate policies; they’re just not properly funded. All this bill does is propose to place a great degree of power in the hands of the ministry, but it implements no requirements to seek input into what those directives should be—not from colleges or universities and not from students or faculty. Mental health policies, anti-hate and anti-racism policies are for helping vulnerable and marginalized groups. They deserve solutions specifically built for those communities, not just handed down from the ministry. So I ask, will the ministry commit to speaking to all affected groups before handing down those policies?

You’ll forgive me for saying, yet again, that skepticism is a central theme of my remarks today for a government that proposes to want to support marginalized, vulnerable and under-represented groups. Let’s not forget that just about 24 hours ago, on the eve of International Women’s Day, they chose to silence the independent female members of our caucus. So how can this government be trusted to wield the power of issuing directives supposedly in support of marginalized and vulnerable communities when they’ve proven time and time again that they fail to do so and use their power in a harmful manner?

By giving the government so much control over universities and the ability to issue directives unilaterally and without consultation, if done poorly, it could also hamper the abilities of universities to act autonomously, and they should be allowed to act autonomously. Their policies and priorities are extensively vetted by governing councils, which include professional students, faculty members and a variety of other members who represent universities and colleges. If done poorly, it will not achieve its intended goal of fighting hatred and racism, and I fully acknowledge and support the ambition for all of us to fight hatred and racism in all of its forms.

We can all agree that mental health and anti-hate are great initiatives and should be strongly supported by every member in this House but, as ever, this government has a habit of pointing fingers at others rather than doing anything themselves. What we hear when we talk to colleges and universities is that policy directives are not what they need. They need actual support. It’s long past time that this government put their money where their mouth is. For example, this government announced money to mental health supports in the form of a mental health app. That’s great. But when a student is in a mental health crisis, what they need is in-person support from a competent and well-funded mental health team. That takes money—again, not policy directives—and this government has not done their share to support that. When students are feeling at risk from hate or racism, universities need more than policy. They need more than words. They need funding for counsellors, for wellness spaces and for all of the wraparound supports.

We value our campuses as safe venues for expressing ideas, but it takes resources—money—to build in the safeguards to bring about those environments. For example, it takes money to hire constables to keep everyone safe on campus, to keep everyone on campus safe during protests, demonstrations or sit-ins. It takes money to bring in campus security for longer hours. For students to feel safe and supported, it costs money.

As it stands, post-secondary institutions in the province are already not receiving enough funding from the provincial government. The recent announcement by the Minister of Colleges and Universities for an investment package of $1.3 billion falls far short of the recommendations set out by the blue-ribbon panel on colleges and universities, which required $2.5 billion over the next three years.

Additionally, a key point is that the $1.3 billion that has been promised is merely a one-time injection. It does nothing to ensure the long-term sustainability of our institutions. It gives universities and colleges no ability to plan their futures, and therein is the key failing. The blue-ribbon panel’s report was on the sustainment of our post-secondaries—not seeing them grow and thrive, just sustaining. It’s the bottom line, the bare minimum, that this government is still failing to deliver. Our institutions desperately need ongoing and reliable support from the government to offer the services that Ontarians need them to. Colleges, universities offer so much to our province and their communities, and it’s a shame that our government cannot see them as the investment that they are.

As a result of this shaky, unreliable support, we are seeing the consequences. As we speak, programs have closed in Guelph, at Queen’s, TMU, Nipissing, University of Ottawa, Laurier, Saint Paul, Western, Trent, Brock. These are strong universities that should be confident in their ability to offer world-class programs, but this government’s half measures have left them unable to offer the education that Ontario students want and need.

Madam Speaker, I want to use the last of my time to draw attention to the beginning of the bill. It reads, “This section applies to every college of applied arts and technology and to every publicly-assisted university.” What’s noteworthy in that is what is not said. There are hundreds of private career colleges in Ontario that are entirely left out of this bill, hundreds of colleges for which this government is paying no attention to their mental health challenges, no attention to the proliferation of hatred and racism, no care whatsoever, likely because putting those requirements on private colleges would be cutting into their profits.

While I’ve spent my time discussing the shortcomings of the bill, I can say, of course, it is essential to support the expansion of mental health supports and the expansion of measures to fight against hatred and racism in all of its forms. But I’m baffled why this government would decide to exclude around 45,000 students from these standards. These colleges have the lowest level of regulation in the industry, and that seems to be continuing under this government.

As I reflect on what is offered in this bill, it is incredibly superficial. It skips the underlying challenges that our post-secondary sector faces. It doesn’t come with the necessary, substantial infusion of funding that is required in order to fight hatred and racism in all of its forms and to deliver the mental health supports that our students need.

For as long as students are struggling to make their next rent payment, struggling to make their next tuition payment because OSAP is so desperately underfunded—no matter how many policy directives come down from the Minister of Colleges and Universities, we will continue to see mental health challenges and we will continue to see our colleges and universities stumble from month to month, year to year. They deserve better. I thank you for your time.

It’s a pleasure to rise in the chamber today to speak on an issue of paramount importance to people in Ontario, to patients in Ontario and especially the northern and rural communities in our province.

I speak today, of course, as the member of provincial Parliament for Don Valley East, but also has an emergency and family physician that has worked throughout the province, and in particular, for a large part of my career, in northern, rural and remote Ontario. I can say first-hand, from having helped my patients, helped to navigate them through this process, I can speak to the urgent and pressing need for us to look at how we can improve it, because if we don’t, it will, unfortunately, impact clinical care and patient outcomes.

I want to start by outlining the five principles of medicare: comprehensiveness, universal, portable, publicly administered and accessible. It doesn’t matter if we have the best health care in the world in Toronto or in Ottawa; if you live in Moose Factory and can’t access it, we are not honouring the spirit of the Canada Health Act—frankly, the letter of the law, of the Canada Health Act—until we make sure that health care in our province is accessible.

What we know right now, based upon the Auditor General’s report on northern hospitals just released about two and a half months ago, on December 6, 2023: There is a significant imbalance in health care access between the north and the south. Not only that, the Auditor General identified that that significant imbalance is only expected to accelerate because of worsening staffing shortages. And yet, even going beyond that, the pressing need to address the Northern Health Travel Grant is only more relevant as we face in our province an affordability crisis, as we face a government that has introduced repeated waves of legislation that will centralize a variety of government services, including, under Bill 60, health care services that will drain surgeries and health care access from rural communities into urban communities.

And then, of course—and very relevant to something that just happened—as we see the growing spectre of climate change, that will make it more difficult for people to travel. We just learned a week or two ago that a number of northern communities declared a state of emergency because their ice roads are melting. When I worked in Moose Factory, those ice roads were a vital pipeline for patients to be able to come down to Moose Factory and continue their travel onto other places. For all of these reasons, we can expect that the travel, which is already expensive, will only become more expensive.

The people of our great north are not an afterthought. They have value. They contribute immensely to our history, our culture, our heritage and our province’s prosperity, and they need to be treated as such. When they can’t get access to the health care that they need, this is what happens: They don’t apply for the grants, because they don’t believe that they’re going to get it, and their health suffers. They apply and they’re denied, so their health suffers. Or they apply, they’re denied, and they appeal, and eventually, they’re approved, but in the process, their health suffers. Their health outcomes go down, and it ultimately becomes more expensive for all of us.

What the member from Algoma–Manitoulin has proposed is very fair. There is no reason that anyone could possibly disagree with this. He’s not saying, by some edict, let’s give everyone $10,000 or $100,000—no. He’s saying, let’s strike a committee that will look at the challenges that northern communities and northern patients face right now and look at ways, through those consultations, to improve the Northern Health Travel Grant. For a government that says that it is for the people, there could be no better suggestion for how to improve that health travel grant than by speaking to the people.

We have a grant that is well-intentioned. I can tell you from my own clinical experience working with a large number of patients throughout northern Ontario that the grant isn’t meeting their needs. We have a very reasonable proposal to show the patients of northern Ontario and rural Ontario that they are not an afterthought. I hope everyone can support this.

Good morning, Speaker. Thank you for acknowledging me. I’d like to welcome to the chamber today the Medical Laboratory Professionals’ Association of Ontario, as well as the Ontario Association of Medical Radiation Sciences, and thank them all for their incredible services to patients and health care in our province

I’d like to introduce a number of visitors to the chamber this morning.

First, I’d like to introduce Michau Van Speyk, an important autism and mental health advocate.

I’d like to introduce Rameez and Sana Mufti, who are the siblings of my outstanding OLIP intern, Alia Mufti.

Finally, I would like to introduce the following people from the community of Chesley and the Ontario Health Coalition: Brenda Scott, Ian Scott, Hazel Pratt, Jennifer Shaw, Faye Bell McClure, Sharon Burley, Doug Walsh, Audrey Walsh, Isobel Bell, and Natalie Mehra.

Welcome to the chamber.

This morning, I rise to welcome Michau Van Speyk from the Ontario Autism Coalition.

Welcome to the chamber.