Thursday, April 30, 2026

The committee met at 1000 in room 151.

Official source

The Clerk of the Committee (Ms. Vanessa Kattar)

Good morning, everyone. In the absence of a Chair and a Vice-Chair, it is my honourable duty to call upon you to elect an Acting Chair. Are there any nominations? MPP Leardi.

Official source

Mr. Anthony Leardi

I nominate MPP Lorne Coe.

Official source

The Clerk of the Committee (Ms. Vanessa Kattar)

MPP Coe, do you accept the nomination?

Official source

Mr. Lorne Coe

Yes.

Official source

The Clerk of the Committee (Ms. Vanessa Kattar)

Are there any further nominations? There being no further nominations, I declare nominations closed and MPP Coe elected Acting Chair.

Official source

Consideration of the following bill:

Official source

Bill 101, An Act to amend various Acts in respect of education and child care / Projet de loi 101, Loi modifiant diverses lois relatives à l’éducation et à la garde d’enfants.

Official source

The Acting Chair (Mr. Lorne Coe)

Good morning, committee members. I call this meeting of the Standing Committee on Social Policy to order. We’re meeting today for clause-by-clause consideration of Bill 101, An Act to amend various acts in respect of education and child care. Catherine Oh from legislative counsel is here to assist us with our work should we have any questions. A copy of the amendments filed with the Clerk has been distributed electronically. A hard copy has also been provided to you. Before we begin with considering the specific sections of the bill and the accompanying schedules, I will allow members to make comments to the bill as a whole. Afterwards, debate will be limited to the specific amendment, section or schedule under consideration. Committee members, pursuant to standing order 83, are there any comments or questions on the bill as a whole? MPP Pasma, please, when you’re ready. Thank you.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

Thank you very much, Chair. This is not a good bill. The stakeholders that came to speak to us on Monday, who represented only a small subsection of all the people who wanted to make comments on the bill, were very clear that this does not address the real challenges in our education system; that there are serious concerns about the centralization of power in the hands of the minister, including the sweeping liability protections that he is giving himself, which the Canadian Civil Liberties Association said are almost unprecedented. We heard that none of the teachers or education worker unions were consulted, neither were the trustee associations or the principals. These are the people who are on the front lines of our education system every single day, who know the challenges that our kids are facing and what supports are actually needed to support them. They were very clear that it is not the changes that are being put forward in this bill, which doesn’t even contain the words “classrooms,” “class sizes,” “mental health” or “special education.” This is a bill that is going to cause more problems for our education system and drive it into even deeper crisis, not address any of the challenges or actually support or protect student achievement or student well-being. The NDP will be voting against every clause in this bill. We will be voting against this bill. I urge the members on the government side to also listen to the public, to listen to teachers and education workers and principals and trustees, and don’t support this bill. You have an opportunity here to do something good for our kids. You will wear this legacy as much as the minister if you pass this bill, so please, for our kids, do not support this bill.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

I recognize MPP Fraser.

Official source

Mr. John Fraser

I’ll just keep my remarks brief. Our schools are not safe places to learn or to work, and that’s because class sizes are too big. They have grown. Special education has been starved. Boards have had to find $800 million that the government doesn’t give them. There’s a mental health crisis in our schools that the minister actually acknowledged when he was here earlier this week. There’s not one thing in this bill that will make one child’s class smaller. There is not one thing in this bill that will make sure that a child who has exceptional needs will get the help that she needs. There is nothing in this bill that’s going to address the mental health crisis that exists in our schools. The question is, if we’re not doing that, why are we doing this? It’s not right. The bill should be withdrawn.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

I recognize MPP Collard.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

I do have the same concerns, obviously. Incidentally, just earlier this week, on Tuesday night, we had yet another education town hall where we heard from parents, education professionals and teachers. We have heard the same message all over again and it confirms what we have been saying: People are not confident in this government to do what needs to be done to help our class sizes to be smaller, but more importantly, have more adults in our schools. There are not enough adults to support our kids. Il y a également toute la question des francophones. On est très inquiet par rapport à la portée de ce projet de loi, qui constitue une menace constitutionnelle envers le droit des francophones d’avoir une éducation qui est par et pour les francophones, parce que le ministre vient s’ingérer et se donne les pouvoirs et le dernier mot sur des décisions qui devraient revenir aux conseils scolaires. Je vais également proposer des modifications à ce projet de loi pour exactement faire valoir ces droits-là.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

I recognize MPP Clancy.

Official source

Ms. Aislinn Clancy

I actually acknowledge that I think the government understands some of the problems that kids are facing in our schools. I know that the minister has gone to lots of schools and visited and listened to teachers. My concern is that when we come up with solutions, we have to come up with solutions that are rooted in widespread consultation. If you have a good process, you can stand by that outcome every day of the week. What we hear with all the experts that came—these are folks who represent hundreds of thousands of education workers. My experience in schools since COVID is that the kids are not okay, the teachers are burned out and the ed workers are spread too thin. Our kids need those caring adults. We call it co-regulation. They learn how to regulate their emotions through the caring adults in their environment. When they don’t have access to those caring adults in their environment, they don’t learn how to regulate. We’re seeing unprecedented amounts of Internet addiction, mental health crises and kids’ special education needs not being met, and that’s because there are too few caring adults, who are struggling. This is a canary in the coal mine. I probably see that this bill will pass and it will go forward, but I hope if you walk away today thinking that next time an education bill comes forward and we want to solve a problem—we’re going to talk to the people who work in that sector. We’re going to talk to the folks who do this job every day in a meaningful way, in a good process and we’re going to do it with the evidence and data that jurisdictions across the world are doing to solve these problems. Our kids really need our help right now and our kids are our future. If we don’t invest in their well-being, if they don’t get to learn how to read, they don’t get their special education needs met, we’re going to have a generation of kids who have been failed and abandoned by us. I urge the government that, going forward, we start from a good place, with meaningful, respectful and not-token conversations with stakeholder groups, those that represent them, that we dig deep into the evidence and research around these issues so that we can come up with solutions that will be effective. I don’t see in this bill solutions to these problems and things that will affect good change for our kids and the caring adults that support them. I worry about the impact of that. I think it’s going to have a ripple effect that I don’t think any of us really want to realize and we don’t want to process. It’s going to happen, I think—these kids become adults, and we’ll have to reckon with what we have left them with today in terms of our education system. I believe in an education system that provides the support that kids need to learn and thrive, that there is access to care, access to support in a meaningful way that ensures that they get to learn, just like we all did when we went to school. I won’t be supporting this legislation because it wasn’t rooted in the real experiences of ed workers and it’s not supported by evidence.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

I recognize MPP Glover.

Official source

Mr. Chris Glover

We’re here to discuss and to vote on amendments to Bill 101, but the entire bill should be thrown out. This bill is about dismantling our public education system. It’s a power grab by the Minister of Education to control everything that is said and done in every school. He’s already put out a notice to school boards that if a student speaks out and makes a statement—so for example, a student makes a political statement, like they criticize the OSAP grant cuts that this government has made at their graduation—the school board will be penalized for that. He’s trying to dictate what every student says in every school in the province. This bill here extends that power. This government’s record on education is abysmal. They have increased class sizes. They have cut $6.5 billion—an inflationary cut of $6.5 billion from our schools. They negotiated pay for teachers and expenses for special education and then underfunded by $900 million. Then they say the trustees are being fiscally irresponsible because they’re not making the cuts fast enough to make up for the funding shortfalls that this government is handing them. Then they seize control of the school boards. They have taken control of eight school boards. They’ve displaced the elected trustees and replaced them with the minister’s appointed superintendents. Now they have got this bill to even further extend the minister’s powers. One of the big attacks on our democratic rights here, not only that they have displaced the trustees that we elected in Ontario but now, with this bill, they’re going to cut the pay, they’re going to increase the responsibilities and they’re going to leave the trustees as basically scapegoats for the abysmal education policies of this government. But if nobody runs, the minister will be appointing his henchperson to be a trustee. This is an attack on our democratic rights. This bill is an attack on our students. It is an attack on our public and Catholic schools in the system. It’s an attack on our democratic rights. The Conservative members there, you’re going to be voting on this clause by clause, and I encourage you to stand up for the students, the parents and the staff in our schools in this province and vote against this bill. Vote for our kids. Don’t just raise your hand when you’re told to raise your hand because what you’re doing is going to be harming children in this province.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further comments? I recognize MPP Pasma.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

I just want to make sure that we also mention on the record the serious equity and accessibility concerns, along with the constitutional concerns about this bill. There were multiple stakeholders. The AODA Alliance and Ontario Autism Coalition were able to come to speak but we know that there were other organizations representing persons with disabilities and Parents of Black Children and the Black Trustees’ Caucus of the Ontario Public School Boards’ Association, who all raised concerns that this bill does not even mention accessibility or equity and that the measures that are in this bill have the possibility of making even greater challenges, putting even greater barriers in front of students with disabilities and Black and racialized students within our system. I think we also have to recognize that there are constitutional concerns about this bill. Obviously, the government should never be infringing on the Constitution or the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. If they go ahead with this bill, that could be costly to the Ontario taxpayer because, all of the liability provisions in this bill notwithstanding, there are serious constitutional concerns. The Catholic trustees and the Catholic teachers raised concerns about the lack of respect for denominational rights. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association said that there are serious concerns about section 2(b) of the charter and freedom of expression. If the government forges ahead with these changes without consultation, then the Ontario taxpayer is going to end up paying once again for court cases that drag on and on, because this government just wouldn’t consult or listen to people up front. So, again, I think it’s very important that we withdraw this bill, go back to the drawing board, work with education stakeholders and partners who represent the people who are working in our schools every single day, the students who are in our schools, and actually reflect their needs and their rights.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

I recognize MPP Glover.

Official source

Mr. Chris Glover

I just want to emphasize what my colleague MPP Pasma has said about that. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association has said that this bill potentially violates freedom of speech in our schools because it will give the minister the power to dictate what students and staff and teachers can and cannot say in our schools. That’s an abysmal attack on our democratic rights in this province. When you look at this power grab in this bill—the minister is extending his powers. In Bill 30, in the fall, the minister gave himself the power to sell schools to anyone any time he wants. Then you look at what’s happening here. I was in Calgary in the fall, and I was visiting a friend in Calgary–West. There are 30 schools in that riding, and only 12 are public schools; the rest are all private schools. They’ve had right-wing, Conservative governments in power in Alberta for decades, and they’ve privatized the education system. I think that’s what this bill is another step towards—dismantling our public and Catholic schools and privatizing the system. So I strongly encourage the Conservative members here to vote against this bill.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

I recognize MPP Fraser.

Official source

Mr. John Fraser

This government has been in power for eight years. How did our schools get into this state—how did they become not safe places to learn or to work? How did class sizes get bigger? How did special education get starved? How are we not addressing the mental health crisis in our schools? Why? Because the government is not focused on the right things. It’s focused on doing things like buying luxury jets, acquiring an airport, things like that—not focused on the 5,000 schools or the two million students in this province.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further comments? I recognize MPP Clancy.

Official source

Ms. Aislinn Clancy

I just want to highlight what I’ve been learning about the root causes of why we’re in this state. I hear again and again—they’re called fail-to-fills. If a teacher is sick, a lot of boards don’t fill in that sick person’s post. That class ends up getting taught by a principal or a special ed teacher or rolled into something else. It means that most kids are missing out on their special education supports. I also learned from the EAs and ECEs and CYWs that when they call in sick, they don’t replace them either. So boards, because of these short funds, the gaps in funding, are actually trying to balance budgets—and sometimes it’s not a choice; there are no people to fill in those posts. They end up balancing the budget by not filling in those posts. That means those kids are not, maybe, at school, because the EA who supports them isn’t there that day. It means kids aren’t getting their special education help, so they don’t get their literacy support. I talked to a special education teacher the other day who said she got to teach her reading recovery program twice in the month because she was fighting fires. We know that, when I talk to principals, they are also fighting fires instead of doing the work that they need to do. So it’s kind of like we’ve spread ourselves so thin by not funding our sick days and making sure that we have staff to fill those in that the place is just trying to survive, and it’s at a breaking point. I do worry about the control that this government is taking. The minister doesn’t have a background in education, and I don’t know what his intentions are. I think he’s trying to create a distraction where he’s blaming these budgetary gaps and shortfalls on a trustee’s milkshake or on governance. Don’t get me wrong; I think we need to make some improvements to how we do governance. That’s part of what I’ve put forward today, amendments to try to make this bill do some good things in terms of how trustees function and how we deal with attendance. But I worry that this is more of a distraction and it’s not going to address the root causes. I think that, more and more, as the wheels fall off in terms of education, we’re at a point where we need to sit down and think to ourselves what we really want our education system to look like, because I know that the people in the system really care and it’s a moral injury to them to not be able to do their job in the way that they want to. The problem is gaps in funding and a lack of recognition for how the system works and how it can work well. I think the solution includes meaningful collaboration with experts in making evidence-based decisions and meeting the moment of this mental health crisis. Whether it’s gambling addictions, pornography addictions, social anxiety, depression, it’s hitting kids at a younger and younger age and in a more serious way. We do not have the supports in the community to address the needs of kids with special education needs, autism, developmental disabilities, mental health issues. I worry that this will further marginalize racialized students without recognizing the root causes of why they might not always fit the education system. We need to address their voice as well. So I hope we can make some amendments to make lemonade somehow, but I worry we’re trying to make lemonade out of rocks.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Are there any further comments? As you will notice, Bill 101 is comprised of three sections and five schedules. In order to deal with the bill in an orderly fashion, I suggest that we postpone the first three sections of the bill in order to dispose of the schedules first. This allows the committee to consider the contents of the schedules before dealing with the sections on the commencement and short title of the bill. We would return to the three sections after completing consideration of the schedules. Is there unanimous consent to stand down the three sections of the bill and deal with the schedules first? Please put your hands up. Okay. Schedule 1, Child Care and Early Years Act, amendment number 1, section 1 of schedule 1. I recognize MPP Collard.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

I move that section 1 of schedule 1 to the bill be struck out and the following substituted: “1. Subsection 54(1) of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014 is amended by striking out ‘and’ at the end of clause (b) and by adding the following clauses: “‘(d) provide services to support operators of child care and early years programs and services and service system managers in carrying out their functions and duties under this act; and “‘(e) develop a full continuum of French-language education that is adapted to the reality of francophone communities.’”

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Collard.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

Just to briefly explain if it’s not obvious enough, it is very important to protect Franco-Ontarian rights to access francophone education, and that includes the development of a full continuum of French-language education from early childhood to the beginning of their careers. This amendment just ensures that this right is clearly protected in this bill.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Is there any other further debate on this section? Are the members ready to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. It’s lost. Shall schedule 1, section 1, carry? Is there any further debate? I recognize MPP Pasma.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

We know that the government didn’t consult on this bill, but daycare operators raised concerns about this schedule because of that lack of consultation, that there are no details on what this actually means, what difference it will make and how child care providers will be involved in the changes that are made. We also know that it doesn’t actually address the challenges that our child care system is facing, which have a lot to do with the lack of funding, which is impacting recruitment and retention of child care workers, addressing the actual cost of the materials that they need to provide to their kids in order to offer them a safe, healthy and stimulating environment. So we are going to vote against this clause to tell the government that they should go back to the drawing board and actually consult with child care operators and staff on what is really needed to support our kids.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? Are members ready to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. Carried. Shall schedule 1, section 2, carry? Is there any debate on this section? Are members ready to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. Carried. We’ll now go to section 2.1, NDP amendment 2. Go ahead, MPP Pasma.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

I move that schedule 1 to the bill be amended by adding the following section: “2.1 The act is amended by adding the following section: “‘Information and Privacy Commissioner “‘73.1(1) The Information and Privacy Commissioner may set requirements regarding the collection, use, disclosure and production of a person’s Ontario education number. “‘Same “‘(2) If requirements set by the Information and Privacy Commissioner under subsection (1) conflict with the requirements of section 73, the requirements set under subsection (1) shall prevail. “‘Same “‘(2) The Information and Privacy Commissioner may, from time to time, review the collection, use, disclosure and production of Ontario education numbers by the Ministry of Education.’”

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate on this section? I recognize MPP Pasma.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

I want to explain why we’re moving this amendment, Chair. We’ve heard concerns from parents—most particularly, parents of Black children—that they’re concerned about the expansion of Ontario education numbers into early-year systems because of risks related to profiling and early streaming and increased surveillance without clear safeguards or demonstrated benefit. We know that they were here earlier at Queen’s Park calling for the government to finally implement the Dreams Delayed report from the Ontario Human Rights Commission, which stated clearly that there is systemic anti-Black racism in our system, and one of the concerns that they had was surveillance of Black children, along with streaming. I think that the government needs to take these concerns seriously. They should definitely implement all the recommendations of the Dreams Delayed report. But I think they need to, once again, go back to the drawing board and actually speak with and consult with parents and ensure that, when we’re making changes, we’re actually minimizing the risk of harm, addressing equity concerns and making sure that all children in Ontario receive the respectful education that they deserve, whether it’s in K-to-12 or whether it’s in early childhood education.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? Are members ready to vote? NDP amendment 2: All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. It’s lost. So now we’ll go to schedule 1, section 3. Is there any debate on this section? Are members ready to vote? Did you have something, MPP Collard?

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

Sorry, can you repeat where we’re at? We’re on schedule 1 or schedule 2?

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Schedule 1, section 3.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

Okay. I’m good. Thank you.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Are members ready to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. Carried. Is there any debate on schedule 1? Are members prepared to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. Carried. This is going to be a long day. Schedule 2, section 1: Is there any debate on this section? Are members ready to vote? MPP Collard, go ahead.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

I have an amendment to move. Interjection.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

I’ll wait.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Are members ready to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. Carried. Liberal amendment, new section 1.1. I recognize MPP Collard.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

Je propose que l’annexe 2 du projet de loi soit modifiée par adjonction de l’article suivant : « 1.1 La Loi est modifiée par adjonction de l’article suivant : « “Respect des droits linguistiques « “1.1(1) L’exercice des pouvoirs conférés au ministre en vertu de la présente loi et de ses règlements doit se faire dans le respect des droits garantis aux titulaires des droits liés au français. « “Idem « “(2) Il est entendu que les droits visés au paragraphe (1) comprennent le droit à la gestion et au contrôle des établissements d’enseignement de langue française.” »

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Collard.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

Cet amendement-là vise, encore une fois, à assurer que les droits des francophones soient respectés et cela inclut le droit des francophones de gérer et de contrôler ses institutions d’éducation.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? Are members ready to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. Lost. We’ll now go to NDP amendment, adding subsection 0.1. Go ahead.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

I move that section 2 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection: “0.1. Subsection 8(1) of the act is amended by adding the following paragraph: “‘reports “‘1.1 request a report, “‘i. from the Auditor General with respect to any costs to the province of Ontario that would result from the passage of schedule 2 to the Putting Student Achievement First Act, 2026, and “‘ii. from the Ombudsman with respect to any actions the minister takes or intends to take under an authority under this act that resulted from the Putting Student Achievement First Act, 2026;’”

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? MPP Pasma again.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

I’m moving this amendment because there were some significant concerns raised about the costs of all of the new layers of bureaucracy that the minister is adding to the Education Act, including all of the various reports and requests for permission that are going to need to be sent in to the minister, along with the new layers of bureaucracy at school boards. This adds the costing from the Auditor General so the public actually has a sense of how much we’re going to be paying for all of the minister’s new bureaucracy It allows the Ombudsman to weigh in on the equity and accessibility concerns about the many new measures that are being introduced in this act, all the powers that are being centralized by the minister and the new CEOs.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Glover.

Official source

Mr. Chris Glover

I just want to echo what my colleague MPP Pasma says about this amendment. This government, with this bill, instead of cutting red tape, as they always talk about doing, is actually increasing the red tape. They’re demanding that the school boards provide a whole bunch of documentation to the minister so that the minister can control everything that happens in every school like a puppeteer. And all those additional positions, all of that additional documentation that’s going to be required, all the people that are going to be required to pay for it—that’s all going to come out of the existing education budget, which has been slashed over the last number of years under this government and under the previous government as well. Our schools are grossly underfunded in this province. The class sizes have increased. Every school board in the province pays more for special education services than they receive, and yet students with special needs are still stuck at home because there aren’t enough staff in the schools to actually provide them with the service that they need in order to attend. So this government is violating their right to actually attend school, and yet the government is downloading the cost of more red tape so they can control more without providing better service to the students. When the minister says that he’s going to focus on getting funding into the classroom, this is the exact opposite of that. This government is creating more red tape so the minister can demand more documents and have more control over our schools and take more money out of the classroom so the service in our classrooms will be even worse for students. This is an NDP motion to actually fund all the red tape that the government is creating. I hope the Conservative government will recognize that they’re creating a whole lot of red tape and that they should fund it from the central provincial budget rather than taking the money out of the classrooms.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? Are members ready to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. The motion is lost. We’ll now go to the NDP amendment amending subsection 2(1) of schedule 2. Is there further debate on this, or comments? I recognize MPP Pasma.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

I move that subsection 2(1) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out paragraph 3.3 of subsection 8(1) of the Education Act and substituting the following: “policies, guidelines: assessment of student achievement “3.3 after taking reasonable steps to facilitate student attendance, including steps with respect to special education, mental health, transportation, class sizes and alternative high schools, establish policies and guidelines for the assessment of student achievement with respect to pupils attending schools under the jurisdiction of a board and require boards to comply with the policies and guidelines;”

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Is there any debate on this section? I recognize MPP Pasma.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

This section of the bill allows the Minister of Education to determine how students will be assessed, and he has already made it clear that he intends to include attendance in part of a student’s grade. We’ve heard concerns from students—both student organizations and individual students contacting the committee—along with teachers and education workers, that this has a negative impact on our students who are already on the margins and struggling because it doesn’t address any of the reasons why students are not actually in class, which has to do with the fact that they’re not getting academic support in large classes, that special education supports and programs are being cut, that there is not enough mental health support in our schools. Only one in 10 has regularly scheduled access to a mental health professional. The government has broken funding for student transportation, and so in far too many places in the province, there’s not reliable student transportation or students are travelling far too long, or because of the state of northern roads and the government’s failure to address them, the buses can’t actually get to school because of accidents on the road. We are also seeing around the province many boards cutting alternative programs, including alternative high schools, which really help students who are on the edge of dropping out to remain in school with increased support so that they actually are able to get the credits they need to graduate from high school and move on to post-secondary education or into the labour force with a high school diploma. I don’t think it’s fair for the minister to punish students when it’s the ministry that is failing these students, and that’s not even getting into the more than 20,000 students who are not attending school in Ontario at all because they have disabilities and there aren’t supports to keep them safe or support their learning in school, or the tens of thousands of students who aren’t allowed to attend for a full day or a full week because—the number one reason is that there aren’t supports to keep them safe or that principals are calling for parents to come and pick the child up because they’re not able to support the student for the rest of the day. Until we address all of these reasons why students are not at school full-time, the minister should not be including attendance in grades. So this amendment states that the minister has to address all of these reasons why children are not at school before he is allowed to make attendance a mandatory part of a child’s grade.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Glover.

Official source

Mr. Chris Glover

I’m obviously speaking in favour of this motion. The minister, in this bill, is saying that he wants to be able to deduct marks from students whose attendance is too low. My question to the Conservative members here today—there are special-needs students who are not allowed to attend school because they do not have the staff supports in the school so that they can actually attend the school safely. So how many marks will this minister be deducting from their report card because they’re missing school because the government is not providing the funding for staff so that they can actually attend? It’s for any of the Conservative members.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Fraser.

Official source

Mr. John Fraser

Just further to MPP Glover’s comments: When the minister was here, we did ask him what the top three reasons for absenteeism are in schools, and he couldn’t provide a clear answer or any answer—it was very anecdotal, very regional. If you don’t fundamentally understand the cause of a problem, how can you propose a solution? I just wanted to add that in.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Clancy.

Official source

Ms. Aislinn Clancy

On one hand, I am grateful that the government is acknowledging the problem of chronic absenteeism in our school system. It’s something I’ve been raising for two years, since I got here. I was an attendance counsellor for 11 years. Our social workers in schools are our attendance counsellors. Our caseloads are enormous. Before, we had to help kids who were kind of struggling; now a lot of our attention goes to kids who are struggling to come at all, with very few days each month. When you look at the stats, since smart phones were introduced in 2012, suicidality and social anxiety and depression have gone on the extreme—and we’re not even really fully analyzing violence in schools. Violence in schools is because of trouble with regulation. When you look at what social anxiety really means, it means that kids struggle to look at people in the face, they struggle to talk on the phone; they’d rather message or text. We see kids who are not getting a good night’s sleep. I think the way in which we’re addressing the issue is where things fall apart. Experts say the main reason that kids miss school is because they’ve had a traumatic incident—they’re part of a Black, Indigenous, racialized community; they’re living on low incomes and they have to help their family members; or they don’t have a lunch. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve sat with a family and tried to explore why their kid is not at school and they say, “I don’t have food to send with my child.” I think by the time somebody gets to high school, those habits can become very entrenched. We should be putting a lot of time and energy into grade 9, to make sure those kids have really good habits when they transition from elementary school to high school. And we should be putting in a lot of resources in kindergarten, to make sure kids have a really good start. Because I’m letting you know that the groups that I’ve identified, not to mention kids with developmental disabilities and special ed needs—we see those patterns emerging, of them feeling stupid, not feeling motivated to go to school and not thriving, and having other behavioural things that come from that, and that starts at a very young age. So this is trying to use a Band-Aid for a gunshot wound. It also could further diminish people’s motivation. A lot of kids need to find hope. If you think about a semester system, for example, kids have marks—it’s the first time that they’ve been graded and they could fail. They’ve gone through all of elementary school with staff trying to buoy them up and help them continue on with their studies. Now they end up in high school, and if they’ve missed a number of days in September and October, they’ve already lost hope, and that’s when their report card comes out. So by the time the report card comes out, they’ve lost all their hope, and then if we add a participation mark on that to boot, we’re behind the eight ball. That’s what alternative schools really do. They find a flexible, non-semester type model so that kids can learn at their own pace and they can get more individualized support. The marks just aren’t supported by evidence. In fact, if we took the time to look at the Attendance Works data—they’re the experts. They’re an American organization but they have decades and decades of data. The thing that they say is, don’t punish people for attendance. Whether it’s suspensions and truancy, whether it’s courts or whether it’s lost marks, those three things only add insult to injury for folks who are already struggling to get by day to day. We have to invest in the root causes.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? Are members ready to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. Lost. We will now go to independent amendment 6. Do you want to go ahead? I recognize MPP Clancy.

Official source

Ms. Aislinn Clancy

I move that section 2 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection: “(1.1) Subsection 8(1) of the act is amended by adding the following paragraph: “‘policies, guidelines: student absenteeism “‘3.3.1 establish policies and guidelines to address frequent absences by pupils and, for the purpose, the minister shall, “‘i. require communication strategies and team-based supports for pupils and families of pupils experiencing attendance challenges, “‘ii. require a board to annually collect and publish data on the number and types of absences by pupils attending schools under the jurisdiction of the board, and “‘iii. require a board to annually publish the data collected under subparagraph ii broken down by race, ethnicity and students with disabilities;’”.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Can you read the first part of the motion, please?

Official source

Ms. Aislinn Clancy

The “I move” part? I move that section 2 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Clancy.

Official source

Ms. Aislinn Clancy

If we want to address absenteeism, and I think we all do, this is where it’s almost like health care—a team-based approach with folks who have expertise and early intervention is essential. If we do that, it will cost us less and it will help kids to thrive. The data is essential. I have been anecdotally seeing a difference in the amount of students missing more and more days. I think we have heard about it from people we have had conversations with. We really need to ensure that that data is up to date on a regular basis. For example, most parents don’t even know that their kid has been missing a lot of school until the first report card and, by then, maybe two months have passed. We’ve really missed a lot of time. Not only do we need data early on and early intervention for kids in the beginning of a semester—those who are parents in the room will know that they want to know what’s going on with their kids and try to get help as soon as possible. We need that team-based approach, but the data will help us identify what are the root causes. Are there low-income kids who don’t have lunches? Could we institute a food program? Will that help attendance? Are we seeing a disproportionate number of kids with special education needs who are missing school? Is that because of staffing issues? Is it because we didn’t do an assessment early on? Do we have enough supports in kindergarten? Most times, a kid shows up in kindergarten maybe with complex disabilities and the school really doesn’t have a lot of information. We’re starting off the kid’s first year in kindergarten, right off the bat setting this kid up to fail because we don’t have a lot of those screening tools early on to make sure that we have supports in place when that kid starts kindergarten. The data is essential and that’s what Attendance Works really talks about. If you are interested in learning about how to seriously address attendance issues, they have amazing resources. Jurisdictions, states and provinces across the world are addressing absenteeism in a really meaningful way and finding great results and that’s because they base their solutions on team-based care and good data. I hope you will support this amendment.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? Are members ready to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. Lost. We will now go to Liberal amendment 7. Go ahead.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

Je propose que le paragraphe 2(2) de l’annexe 2 du projet de loi soit modifié par adjonction de la sous-disposition suivante à la disposition 3.7 du paragraphe 8(1) de la Loi sur l’éducation : « iii. tiennent compte des réalités géographiques, linguistiques et représentatives qui sont propres aux conseils scolaires de langue française. »

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate?

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

Le changement ici vise la disposition qui adresse les politiques sur les dépenses. Un contrôle sur les dépenses, pour les francophones, ça interfère avec le droit constitutionnel des conseils scolaires de se gouverner, et il y a un risque constitutionnel si on ne modifie pas la disposition pour s’assurer que les francophones vont être tenus en compte dans leurs réalités géographiques, linguistiques ou représentatives. C’est pourquoi l’inclusion spécifique de cette disposition est importante.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? Are members ready to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. Lost. Now, we’ll go to NDP amendment 8. Go ahead. I recognize MPP Pasma.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

I move that section 2 of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by adding the following subsection: “(2.1) Paragraph 6 of subsection 8(1) of the act is amended by striking out ‘approve for use’ and substituting ‘approve, but not require, for use’.”

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Go ahead.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

I’m moving this amendment because this section of the act allows the minister to determine which books and resources teachers will be allowed to use in the classroom. We’ve heard concerns from teachers who came to the committee on Monday that this does not respect the professional expertise that teachers bring to their jobs. We know that there are concerns from other groups as well that, if we’re talking about a centralized list, a restrictive list that is created by the Minister of Education in downtown Queen’s Park, that does not reflect the diversity of the communities around the province, whether that’s demographic diversity—areas with newcomer populations, Black and racialized populations or Indigenous populations—but also the geographic diversity. Not every community is the same, not every student is the same and teachers should be able to use their professional judgment to determine what are the best resources to support the students who are actually in their classroom. We’ve also seen in Alberta how dangerous it can be for a government to give itself sole and exclusive power over what books and resources may be in schools, where 200 books were removed from the shelves of schools after the Premier gave herself the power to dictate what books schools could and could not have—books that included 1984 by George Orwell and The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood. We don’t want to see book bans here in Ontario. We want to see respect for the professional expertise and experience of teachers. We want to see all children reflected in the materials that they use. We want to see Franco-Ontarian children have access to materials in their own language—Franco-Ontarian French, not badly translated English materials—that also reflect their history and culture. So we want any list of approved resources, books and textbooks that the minister creates to be prescriptive, not restrictive.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Glover.

Official source

Mr. Chris Glover

Okay. I just want to echo what my colleague MPP Pasma has said. This section of this bill gives the Minister of Education the power to ban books in our schools. She mentioned what has happened in Alberta, where the Premier has banned 1984 and The Handmaid’s Tale. Both of those books are about a dictatorial takeover of democratic societies. And so, why is the Premier of Alberta banning books that are about a dictatorial takeover of democratic societies? And then you look at what this bill also does. It also gives the Minister of Education the power to appoint trustees if nobody runs for the position. In another bill before the House, the government is taking the power to appoint regional chairs in eight different regions of the province. These regional chairs will be able to govern with one third of the votes of the elected councillors, and those elected councillors will not have one vote each. The minister will be able to determine how many votes each of those elected councillors actually has. It’s a dictatorial takeover of the regional councils in the province of Ontario. So why does this government want to give the Minister of Education the power to ban books, especially books that are about a dictatorial takeover of democratic rights when they have anti-democratic legislation before us today, and they have other bills that are anti-democratic in the Legislature? I’m asking the Conservative members: If you vote against our amendment here, then you are voting for the Minister of Education to have dictatorial powers to ban books in the province of Ontario. Is that something that you want to support?

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Clancy.

Official source

Ms. Aislinn Clancy

So when this bill came out, I consulted with the education unions. This was one of their major red flags. I want to thank OECTA, OSSTF, AEFO and ETFO. Definitely, if you talk to a new teacher who is just getting started, they’re feeling overwhelmed and they want help. They often go to a more-senior teacher to get resources. If the government wants to help teachers access resources not out of their own personal budgets, but by providing maybe some textbooks or resources, like Teachers Helping Teachers, and some resources that can help to financially access those teaching tools—by all means. I think a lot of new teachers would be extremely grateful. People get bounced around from grade 8 to grade 3 to grade 4 to kindergarten and so on, so you have to create your own treasure trove of tools every time you switch grades. But by mandating curriculum in this way, it really takes away from a teacher’s autonomy. People have to be themselves and practise in a way that’s authentic to them. This will take personality away from the teacher and not recognize that they went to school for—I mean, it was two years—12 months to learn how to do their job well. We have to give them that flexibility to do their job well. I think every classroom has very different dynamics. We have very complicated classrooms right now, so we can’t have a one-size-fits-all when it comes to curriculum. We need to make sure that the curriculum or the way we’re delivering materials—whether it’s using more tangible items or using more up-and-down movement, rather than written exams and things like that—fits the population of students in their classroom. I have heard the minister say some offensive things when it comes to populations: a lack of understanding about mental health and how we, as professionals, kind of explore how kids are feeling; a misunderstanding about questions we might ask that are totally legitimate; and also minimizing the importance of ensuring that kids can fully express their sexual orientation, gender orientation, their culture, their language. All these things risk being omitted, silenced and oppressed if we don’t ensure we can meet kids where they’re at. I do caution the government on taking steps to centralize their power more and micromanage. This feels like an operational issue rather than a governance issue. I think our role is to be government, not to tell people what to read. I caution against this move. Thank you. I support this amendment.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Collard.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

I also want to speak in support of this amendment. I find this new power very concerning. The minister has not given any explanation as to why you would need to remove some books, or what kind of books that would be. Books are very culturally oriented when it comes to different schools, different regions and different-speaking schools, as well. Obviously, I am very concerned about the impact that this may have if the minister was to decide, one day, to just remove books that talk about the history of the fights that the Franco-Ontarians had to lead and the detrimental policies that past governments have made with regard to francophone rights. That would be devastating and change the way francophones can understand their own history. I find this very concerning, very overarching without any kind of logical explanation for this.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Pasma.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

I also want to raise some concerns about the use of third-party platforms, especially if the minister is going to start requiring that these platforms be used. We know that, with the minister’s recent announcements about financial literacy courses, he’s requiring students to use modules developed by TVO rather than that content being delivered by a professional teacher in the classroom. Students are going to have to pass a test that’s developed by TVO as well. In this case, TVO is a public entity, but nothing stops the minister from requiring schools and teachers to use third-party platforms that could be owned by any company, even American companies, which would then have access to our children’s data. As a parent, that concerns me greatly. I think that when the minister is recommending any platforms, obviously we shouldn’t be recommending private, for-profit platforms and resources to be used in our schools, but we should certainly allow teachers and principals the discretion of determining whether or not it’s appropriate for our children’s data to be held by this private company.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? Are members ready to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hands. All those opposed, please raise your hands. Lost. We’ll now go to the Liberal amendment on page 9. Go ahead.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

I move that subsection 2(3) of schedule 2 to the bill be amended by striking out paragraph 7.1 of subsection 8(1) of the Education Act and substituting the following: “policies and guidelines: educational materials “7.1 establish and require boards to comply with policies and guidelines, “i. respecting the use of educational materials approved under paragraph 6, such as textbooks and other learning materials, in instruction, “ii. respecting the establishment, content and adoption of rules and procedures, by boards, to govern the selection and use of educational materials for instructional purposes, “iii. requiring consultation with francophone teachers and educational professionals on educational materials, and “iv. requiring that any policies, evaluations and resources for French-language education be developed and adapted for and by the French-language education system;”

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Is there any debate? I recognize MPP Collard.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

Simply explained, the addition of the two last paragraphs would require the consultation with francophone teachers and educational professionals on learning materials for francophone boards. It’s very important that the material be adapted, culturally adapted and approved by francophones who know the importance of the materials. It’s also important that it can’t be just translated materials but truly written French material.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Pasma.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

I do want to say that I think any attempt by the minister to govern educational materials should be done in consultation with teachers and educational experts. The minister has no education experience himself. He has no professional qualifications. I don’t know on what criteria the minister would be determining what materials are acceptable other than ideological, and so any list of materials should be developed in consultation with experts. But I also recognize that Franco-Ontarians have a particular constitutional right to manage their own education system “par et pour.” One of the things I hear frequently from francophone students and teachers is that the materials that they have in their classrooms are not appropriate. Sometimes, they don’t have French-language materials at all. They are using English-language resources and, far too often, they are using badly translated English resources that don’t reflect their culture, their history, their context but also are not helping to develop a strong knowledge of their own language because they are being taught with materials that use bad French. The minister definitely needs to respect that constitutional right of Franco-Ontarians and any selection or approval of resources should be done in consultation with francophone teachers and education experts.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? Are members ready to vote? All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. Lost. We’ll now go to the independent amendment on page 10. Go ahead, MPP Clancy.

Official source

Ms. Aislinn Clancy

I move that subsection 2(5) of schedule 2 to the bill be struck out.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Debate? Go ahead, MPP Clancy.

Official source

Ms. Aislinn Clancy

One concern I have is sometimes when we don’t pay people well, we run the risk of not having good, qualified people. There are some challenges to some of the mandates that have been done, and I’m not sure if they were fully explored. That’s my concern.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Collard.

Official source

Mme Lucille Collard

This amendment is actually the same we were going to propose as well, which concerns the removal of climate surveys. We believe that climate surveys have a purpose. They are useful to know what’s happening in our schools in order to adapt the allocation of funds or resources where it’s needed. I think it’s important to understand what’s happening—how kids feel, but also the professionals that support our kids. I think that the removal of the surveys is problematic. If the minister wanted to maybe control them better to make sure that they are actually useful, he could have gone with some requirements to make them useful at another time. But removing them altogether is just wrong.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Pasma.

Official source

Ms. Chandra Pasma

I support this amendment. Far too often from this government what we see is that, if we can eliminate the data that shows there’s a problem, then they don’t need to do anything about the problem. There’s a move across a whole variety of sectors to remove any collection of data or public reporting of data. I’m concerned that now we’re going to remove one of the only tools that we have to actually find out what is happening in our schools, to listen to students about what challenges they’re experiencing, to be able to track over time whether decisions are making those challenges better or worse so that we can make evidence-based policy. I think that we have heard very clearly from students, teachers, education workers and principals that those surveys are a very important source of data, even at the school level. So I don’t support any move by this government to remove those climate surveys.

Official source

The Chair (Mr. Brian Riddell)

Further debate? I recognize MPP Clancy.

Official source