Policies

GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR POLICY CREATION

Our faith in Government is ‘broken’… We need a ‘Trillium Solution’ to regain faith in our Government once again!

A Trillium Solution means it comes from the constituents not the Leader of the political party. The fundamentals of what we stand for is we are against Whipped Votes!

With your support we can make Ontario a democracy again!

We have spoken with Constituents and here is what the majority have put forth.

The Guiding Principles for all of Trillium Party of Ontario’s Policy Statements are founded in the following mandates:

  • All Voting Citizens and their immediate family will be prioritized in its creation.
  • Input by the Voting Citizens and their immediate family will be considered in all policy.
  • Policy will always be open for review in order to reflect current real world realities.
  • Common sense will be the principle sounding board for all policy.
  • We believe that any and all legislation created, must be scrutinized to ensure it does not violate or infringe on private property rights.

The Trillium Party believes:

The Political system in Ontario is based on the principle of separation of powers authority is distributed among several branches (executive, legislative and judicial) an attempt to prevent the concentration of power in the hands of a small group of people. In such a system, the executive does not pass laws (the role of the legislature) or interpret them (the role of the judiciary). Instead, the executive enforces the law as written by the legislature and interpreted by the judiciary. The executive can be the source of certain types of law, such as a decree or executive order. Executive bureaucracies are commonly the source of regulations.

Choose a section below for more Information

Trillium Party of Ontario understands that the Liberal Party of Canada has made legislation that forces Ontario to accept the legalisation of marijuana.

The Trillium Party believes that it is the utmost importance to protect society, in particular the most vulnerable group – our children—from the negative effects of this drug.   It is for this reason that we feel that extraordinary strict regulations should be enforced.

To that end, the Trillium Party believes it is imperative to explore the sale of marijuana through private retailers who will feel the severe impact and repercussions of violating any of these strict regulations.

The Trillium Party is not inclined to accept the idea of an “LCBO” or a “Shoppers Drug Mart” distribution system. We would suggest that with an issue as important as this, we would like to initiate a two year pilot project where both methods could be implemented, observed and scrutinized to determine the safest and best way to proceed.

The Trillium Party of Ontario, above all else, wants to ensure that the wholesale distribution of marijuana does not give opportunity for more criminal activity.

  • The Trillium Party of Ontario does not endorse the current Sex Ed curriculum when the principle architect was/is a now CONVICTED CHILD SEX OFFENDER, former Deputy Education Minister, Ben Levin.[1] The Program was initiated by Liberal Leader Dalton McGuinty, stopped by Dalton McGuinty, reintroduced by Liberal Leader Kathleen Wynne, opposed and then endorsed by PC Leader Patrick Brown, who forced the endorsement by the entire PC Caucus. This has also been endorsed by the entire Liberal/NDP Caucus.
  • The curriculum should be based in hard health science, at a later grade, and should not be used as a tool for social engineering.  According to the American College of Pediatricians: “Transition-Affirming Protocol Is Child Abuse – The crux of the matter is that while the transition-affirming movement purports to help children, it is inflicting a grave injustice on them and their nondysphoric peers.  These professionals are using the myth that people are born transgender to justify engaging in massive, uncontrolled, and unconsented experimentation on children who have a psychological condition that would otherwise resolve after puberty in the vast majority of cases.  Today’s institutions that promote transition affirmation are pushing children to impersonate the opposite sex, sending many of them down the path of puberty blockers, sterilization, the removal of healthy body parts, and untold psychological damage.  These harms constitute nothing less than institutionalized child abuse. Sound ethics demand …an end to promoting gender ideology via school curricula and legislative policies.  It is time for our nation’s leaders and the silent majority of health professionals to learn exactly what is happening to our children, and unite to take action.”[2]
  • It is the responsibility of Parents and immediate family to guide the moral sexual direction of their children.

[1] Levin sent a memo on March 6, 2009 announcing he was taking direct charge of the province’s school curriculum. “Dear colleagues, I am writing to provide an update on our sector’s agenda. … I will be filling the ADM (assistant deputy minster) position previously held by George Zegarac,” he wrote. “The division formerly headed by George Zegarac will be renamed as ‘Learning and Curriculum.’ It will have responsibility for curriculum and for Special Education including Provincial Schools.”
A month later, he announced the first fruits of his labours: “Today, the ministry released its new equity and inclusive education strategy paper. … This province wide strategy has been a priority for our Minister of Education Kathleen Wynne and me.”
Two months further down the line he was claiming that the strategy, “Realizing the Promise of Diversity: Ontario’s Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy,” sets out a “vision for an equitable and inclusive education system.” The sex-ed curriculum that stirred a revolt among parents in 2010, with its premature instructions about abnormal sexual activity and its promotion of homosexuality, was an outgrowth of this “equity and inclusive education strategy” and designed to implement it in that subject area.
In a media interview later that year, Levin said,  “I was the deputy minister of education. In that role, I was the chief civil servant. I was responsible for the operation of the Ministry of Education and everything that they do; I was brought in to implement the new education policy.”  https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/child-sex-offender-ben-levin-said-himself-that-he-was-in-charge-of-crafting

[2] I’m a Pediatrician. How Transgender Ideology Has Infiltrated My Field and Produced Large-Scale Child Abuse.  Michelle Cretella / July 03, 2017 / comments
 http://dailysignal.com/2017/07/03/im-pediatrician-transgender-ideology-infiltrated-field-produced-large-scale-child-abuse/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=tds-fb

  • The Trillium Party believes:
  • Tolerance, respect and acceptance should be part of every curriculum. These are recognized Canadian values.
  • The current sex ed curriculum will be cancelled immediately
  • Parents have the right and responsibility to pass on their values to there children and should not have to compete with the governments value system.
  • The “opt out” that government is currently trying to sell us on, is nothing short of “reverse billing” which they themselves deemed to be Illegal.

Carbon Tax Schemes:

 The Trillium Party believes that whether it is called “Cap and Trade” or “Revenue Neutral BC modeled” programs, a carbon tax WILL NOT BE ENDORSED by the Trillium Party of Ontario. PERIOD!

​Ontario has, prior to the 1970 – 80’s, always been the industrial employment powerhouse of Canada.  Any programs which punish manufacturing companies, business or farming, because they are being successful and providing jobs for Ontarians, is the one thing that can actually bring Ontario to its economic knees. We need jobs more than anything else – high paying, skilled trade, labour and support jobs.

This DOES NOT mean that we are not consciences about our environment. In fact, the opposite is true. Like so many other areas in our government there are laws in place regarding emission standards and regulations. These standards simply must be enforced effecting only those that cross the line.  The idea that there are industries that will be exempt, as chosen by the government in office, is creating an environment of winners and losers – this is not government’s job.

    • We will look to join other provinces to challenge the Federal Government’s implementation of a Carbon Tax
    • We will refuse to collect, on behalf of the Federal Government, their Carbon Tax
    • We will seek all avenues to disallow any form of Carbon Tax.

ºA tax on carbon whether it’s called a cap and trade or simply a straight up tax. Is effectively punishing successful manufacturers, entrepreneurs and outside investors. If a business has to choose to start a business or move a business to an environment that will help to get a return on investment, Ontario is effectively saying “Please go somewhere else”

ºIt’s simply an artificial construct created by a desperate money hungry government that is playing on the fears of average citizens. The fact of the matter is this. Ontario contributes less than .75{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771} of all the CO2 emissions in the world and in the almost impossible, unlikely event we lower our emissions by 20{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771} (effectively putting Ontario out of business) we will have lowered our CO2 footprint down to .6{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771}…. THE WORLD WILL NOT NOTICE…and Ontario will have the highest unemployment rates in history.

Candidate Statements

“The Carbon Tax is first and foremost a “job Killer” It will be the final nail in Ontario’s manufacturing Industries coffin.” 

“A carbon tax” in any form Cap and trade or otherwise, is Ontario’s way of saying GOING OUT OF BUSINESS… TAKE YOUR JOBS SOME PLACE ELSE”

“This Cap and Trade deal as proposed by the Liberals is barely this side of a Ponzie scheme trading magic trading dust for permission to build product”

“The TRILLIUM PARTY” is the only party that says it will not allow any carbon tax scheme to be deployed in Ontario…Period” People need jobs for their families and their future”

Opposition remarks:

 Accusation:  The Trillium party is willing to sacrifice the future of our children by helping to destroy our environment Shame on them

Retort: The Trillium Party of Ontario is the only party in provincial Parliament who are trying to ensure that your children will be able to stay in Ontario;  will have a home, and a chance of having a prosperous future for their family.

 Accusation: The Trillium Party seems to be a “climate change denier” the fact of the matter is this Climate change is real and it is harming this province and burying your head in the sand doesn’t change that fact.

Retort: The real fact is this– Considering the global industrial market, Ontario has little, if any, affect on the world climate. Your government is simply using climate change as a blunt instrument of fear mongering to beat every possible cent out of an already struggling population.   

Blogs from Trillium Party

(Elizabeth Marshall) So Justin Trudeau, and his government, have stated that if the provinces do not implement a carbon tax his government will force the provinces to do so.   

This is quite the statement because it would seem that the federal government cannot tell any province to implement any tax – nor can it tell a province that a province must administer any federal tax.

So question – if the federal government cannot tell a province to implement a tax, and if the federal government cannot force a province to administer a tax – how does he propose to do this, other than hiring on staff to collect said tax? 

Then there is the issue, in the constitution, of section 92A.  This section states that it is the provinces that are to have control over their non-renewable resources.  The only control the federal government has, regarding provincial non-renewable resources it would seem, is under section 92A (2) stating that the federal government’s statutes can determine that the provinces cannot engage in discriminatory pricing or discriminatory supply management. 

But then there is section 92A (4) and (5).  This is where the provinces have control over the taxation of non-renewable resources in their province.  It states that in each province the legislature may make laws to raise money through taxes on non-renewable natural resources and the primary production of said resources.  Subsection (5) brings in what is included in “primary production.”  Primary production includes “refining crude oil, refining upgraded heavy crude oil, refining gases or liquids derived from coal or refining a synthetic equivalent of crude oil – that is in the form in which it exists upon its recovery or severance from its natural state.” 

So does the federal government really have the authority to “force the provinces” to implement a carbon tax?  It’s doubtful.

That is why the Trillium Party of Ontario will seek out the other provinces, that do not want this tax, to stop the implementation of an unconstitutional action by the federal government when it attempts to implement this carbon tax.

The people of Ontario and Canada deserve better.  The Trillium Party of Ontario! 

(Elizabeth Marshall) For decades Ontarians have been condemned to guilt about the climate.  We’ve been told that humans are to blame for extreme weather, harm to the biosphere, that there is global warming, the ice-pack is melting, etc., etc., etc.  We’ve also been told if you don’t believe in man-made global warming and/or man-made climate change you are ignorant and a “denier.”  SERIOUSLY!  So let’s look at some facts. 

In 2012 until present day there have been a number of articles produced that prove that man is not the main contributor to climate change – and that climate is always changing.  It has been for eons…there is no denying there is climate change – the Earth does that…but the science that has been used to bankrupt countries and supportive of “carbon taxes” is flawed.  All one has to do is look at the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to realize this.

The IPCC came out, quite a few years ago with what climate-fear-mongers call the “hockey-stick graph.”  Scientist after scientist have discounted this graph on a number of occasions because this graph did not include the Medieval Warming Period or the Little Ice Age.  Question – how can world governments (i) have faith in any of the science from the IPCC, based on this revelation and (ii) support that (a) man is the cause of weather extremes/global warming/ climate change, (b) and we should be paying a tax on carbon to stop something we have very little or nothing to do with it? 

Then there has been article after article written about global warming and climate change…and it just doesn’t seem to get into main-stream media.  For instance, in 2012 Forbes had an article which stated:

“Are we humans causing the warming by our carbon emissions? Actually, most of the “greenhouse effect” is due to water vapor, which makes one wonder why the EPA hasn’t designated H2O a harmful pollutant that they must regulate. Meteorologist Brian Sussman’s calculations in his book

“Climategate” show humanity’s share of the greenhouse effect as .9 of 1 percent.

It’s even possible that CO2 may not affect global warming at all. During many stretches of planetary history, there has been no correlation between the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere and global temperature. In other long stretches, the variations of the two factors followed a significant sequence: increases in CO2 followed increases in warmth by several centuries. You don’t need to have a degree in climate science to know that, in a temporal universe, cause does not follow its effect.

Even global warming alarmists have tacitly conceded that CO2 is not the primary driver of climate change when they responded to the relative cooling in recent years by changing their story and telling us that the earth is likely to cool for a few decades in spite of still-increasing atmospheric CO2. Translation: other factors outweigh CO2 in their impact on global temperatures. Those other factors include variations in solar activity (accounting for 3/4 of the variability in earth’s temperature according to the Marshall Institute); changes in earth’s orbit and axis; albedo (reflectivity, meaning changes in cloud cover which are influenced by fluctuations in gamma ray activity); and volcanic and tectonic activity in the earth’s crust. For humans to presume that they are more than a gnat on an elephant’s rump in terms of impact on climate change is vain and delusive.”

So why is government harming the world’s population through taxation of something that isn’t even on the scale of impact regarding climate change and/or global warming?  Governments, worldwide, have mismanaged things so badly they need another source of revenue and to justify it they came up with something that we cannot see, feel, taste, sense or respond to.  If you don’t believe this…just ask a geologist about the history of the world – and if he/she is honest they will tell you the Earth’s climate is always in flux and there isn’t a darn thing man – no matter what his/her God complex is like – can change it.  Pollution, on the other hand is an entirely different topic, and it does need to be dealt with. 

The Trillium Party of Ontario supports that pollution needs to be regulated but as for climate change and/or global warming – this is not something that is supported by science and is not something government should be taxing for – therefore the Trillium Party of Ontario will not support, implement and will stand against any and all Carbon Taxes!

Patrick Browns GNU Policy

(Elizabeth Marshall)

The Progressive Conservatives (PCs) continue to shoot themselves in the foot.  Can you imagine that Patrick Brown (Leader) has told the Members of the PC Party (and this would include the MPPs being “whipped”) that there will be NO social conservative policies allowed!?! 

According to Allison Jones of the Globe and Mail – Patrick Brown states:

“social conservative issues will be off limits at his party’s much anticipated policy convention.”

Correct me if I am wrong, but this includes the Carbon Tax!!!  That is one of the main issues that gained him the Leadership – that there would be NO CARBON TAX when he became leader…He makes promises just like the Liberals and the NDP and then as soon as he gets his pragmatic way – forgets those promises…just like any little boy who doesn’t understand the meaning of the word “promise.”

Is this what Ontarians want???  A little boy who makes promises and then out of nowhere violates the trust people had put in him???

And what about all of those PC MPPs?  How do they reconcile with their constituents?  Firstly, they say “trust me – there will be no Carbon Tax,” and now they have to attempt to look you in the eye and say…”well the leader says we have to implement a carbon tax…the Liberals and the NDP are…so we have to…”  Now you know why there is one party in Queen’s Park – the New-Demo-Progressive-CON-Liberal Party.

The Trillium Party will push forward with our policy that there will be NO CARBON TAX and we will not endorse a carbon tax.  We will join with the other provinces that oppose this egregious tax and challenge it – ENOUGH IS ENOUGH…we are taxed into the poor house because of government mismanagement…

In 2018 demand Something Different and Something Way Better – the Trillium Party of Ontario.  We understand that any policy must come from the people because it is the people who must live and pay for that policy…including those who are candidates of the Trillium Party…

Electricity Pricing and Hydro Rates:

“…Electrical energy, once a luxury, has, in Ontario, been so reduced in costs that it has become a common commodity for the service of all. It is the power of the people, made usable for the people, by the people.”[11]

The Trillium Party believes that Ontario produces excess hydro to the point of having to PAY OUR AMERICAN and PROVINCIAL neighbours to take it away for us.  All the while our rates are continuing to be increased. This simply doesn’t make sense!

​This has been caused in large part because of the extremely poor business contracts made regarding the wind/solar generation and FIT programs, with wind/solar power costs at approx., 83 cents per kw/hr, and with the government having made deals to pay EVEN IF WE DON’T USE THE POWER, that’s 24/7 paying for something that we don’t use.

  • In approximate numbers: Water generated hydro costs 2.5 cents per kw/hr, and Nuclear energy costs 4.5 cents per kw/hr.
  • Our homes need less expensive power and our manufacturers need less expensive power to keep jobs in Ontario.
  • The Green Energy Act will be repealed.
  • FIT contracts will be lawfully cancelled.
  • Any corporate monopolies created, that are not completely publicly owned and operated, will be cancelled as in violation of the law, unless it can be proven to be of greater benefit to the people of Ontario.

[11] Hon. G. H. Challies. Ontario Legislative Assembly – Hansard Vol 4, 1946, p. 2007 – 2019

  • Those involved in any breaches of the trust or in violation of the provincial and/or federal law will be brought forward to the justice system for full investigation and charges will be laid to ensure public confidence in government.
  • There will be no payment for “stand-by” producers and they will only be paid when and for what they are producing.
  • There will be no charge created to “force people to conserve.” That is the individual’s decision and government is not to be in the business of indirectly taxing the people for use of energy/electricity.
  • Industrial wind turbines that effect neighboring property owners will be dismantled and/or decommissioned at the cost of the energy company.
  • All set-backs which over-lap someone else’s property will be considered as an expropriation and full, fair compensation shall be paid by the company.
  • Anyone can install private solar and small wind or water turbines for their own use, which does not affect others, and any extra electricity produced beyond the owner’s use can be fed back into the grid for credit or payment.
Candidate statements:

“The Trillium Party is the only party that has a plan for reducing hydro rates…It’s solid comprehensible and can be done”

“Cheap energy means good jobs… and above all else we need jobs; our families need security” 

“The Liberals have made us the most expensive hydro in North America, Patrick Brown of the Pc’s has said that hydro rates will likely go up after he is elected. The Trillium Party says we can get back to the cheapest power in North America.”

“Energy Costs are the number one job killer in Ontario. Only the Trillium Party has a plan to STOP THE BLEEDING”

Opposition remarks:

Accusation: The Trillium Party can say whatever they want because they know that they won’t be in government. 

Reply: That’s exactly the type of arrogance that one would expect from a party that has been at the trough for too long. This election will hopefully fix that”

Accusation: (Liberal) “The Liberal Party is leading the way for a cleaner future, and building an energy infrastructure based on renewable resources is the foundation of that plan. The Trillium party wants to throw it all away” 

Reply: “Turning down the generating capacity of the ultimate and cleanest energy generation — water powered hydro –and selling off the turbines, such as in Port Hope, is bordering on criminal hypocrisy. THE LIBERALS SHOULD BE ASHAMED”

Blogs from Trillium Party

(Elizabeth Marshall) Fair Hydro Plan that isn’t fair to Ontarians:

During Committee on the Liberal Fair Hydro Plan, to cut the cost of electricity pricing for 4 years to Ontarians, one of our Candidates made a presentation to the government committee on this Bill.  Our Candidate brought in the fact that government was in violation of the purpose of the Electricity Act and was violating government’s fiduciary duty to the people of Ontario.

At the same Committee the Auditor General also did a presentation about the accounting principles that the government was going to be implementing which is not standard accounting principles that public entities should be using.  The Auditor General now has a Special Report on the Fair Hydro Plan for the province of Ontario.  From this report we have found:

  • The government has passed its own accounting rules to obfus­cate the impact of their financial decisions;
  • The accounting rules that the province is using on this file are not actually in accordance with Canadian Public Sector Accounting Standards;
  • The accounting practices remove transparency and accountability;
  • The accounting practices are unnecessarily cost Ontarians billions of dollars.

According to the A.G.’s report – “The Ministry of Energy signed a contract, with a retainer of $500,000, to receive help from a law firm to provide search services and to compile emails before providing them to us. At the time we completed this Special Report, the Ministry had still not provided us with all of its emails, which we requested on May 31, 2017.”

The A.G’s Office does not question the government’s Policy Decision to reduce Ontarians’ electricity bills, but it has concerns that the intention, of government, was to avoid showing a deficit in the Province’s budgets and consolidated financial statements for 2017/18 to 2019/20, and to likewise show no increase in the Provincial net debt.  The A.G. states that this action by government is incorrect and the planned financing structure could result in significant unnecessary costs for Ontarians.

The A.G.’s report states that ratepayer’s electricity bills will be lower than the cost of the electricity and that the power generation will still be owed at full cost.  This means that the government will have to borrow to cover the debt created.  The debt should become part of the deficit but government is not property accounting for the impact of this debt in the budget and is “not planning to account for it property in its future consolidated financial statements.”  In her words ” government is making up its own accounting rules.”  One would think this is so wrong on so many levels its almost criminal, wouldn’t they?

From the A.G.’s report:  “According to the government’s current plan, the only electricity rate reduction lasting beyond 2027 will be a 9{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771} reduction mainly from the HST rebate and other taxpayer-funded programs. From 2028 on, ratepayers will be charged more than the actual cost of the electricity being produced in order to pay back the borrowings. The total borrowings to be repaid will be an estimated $39.4 bil­lion, made up of $18.4 billion borrowed to cover the current rate reduction shortfall and $21 billion in accumulated interest over the term of the borrowings.” 

And based on the A.G’s numbers we will be on the hook for $4 billion more than is needed just because of this accounting scheme.   

Is this FAIR?  Obviously not…that is why the Trillium Party of Ontario is looking to strengthen the Auditor General’s Office so that this office can perform value-for-money audits and seek out government fraud.

The Trillium Party of Ontario – Something Different Something Way Better for Ontario!

Bill being introduced by MPP Jack MacLaren

Talking Points:

  • Ontario residents and businesses deserve to purchase electricity at the lowest price that it is offered to anyone in other provinces or in the U.S.A.
  • We will eliminate subsidies for non-reliable renewable electricity sources.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Bill directs the Minister of Energy to take steps to ensure that electricity is provided to consumers at the lowest possible price by taking a number of steps as follows:

Section (2) (a) requires that the highest priority is placed on ensuring that residents and businesses get electricity at the lowest possible cost by making maximum use of the extremely valuable electricity generation facilities that the public already owns and by establishing real transparency in the process that influence the price of electricity with a view to making it possible to reduce or eliminate unreasonable costs.

Section (2) (b) directs the Minister to take all possible steps to eliminate preferential treatment for high-costs non-reliable renewable electricity sources

Section (2) (c) directs the Minister to terminate the conservation subsidy programs that the Auditor General has confirmed have added significant costs to the electricity bill of businesses and residents in Ontario.

Section (2) (d) directs the minister to establish regulations to improve the efficiency and to reduce the costs of running the electricity grid and to ensure that cost reductions and the opportunities for future savings are passed on to electricity users.

Section (2) (e) aims to ensure that electricity prices are set in a rational way by preventing the lowering of prices now by pushing even higher payments which include additional interest costs into the future.

Section (2) (f) aims to have energy bills show the real effect on the price that consumers will have to pay for electricity in the future – and to tie those future prices to specific policies that have already been imposed by government to defer current costs, to add interest charges and to make consumers pay more in the future.

Section (2) (g) aims to have energy bills clearly identify the portion of current electricity bills that is caused by specific decisions by government that have burdened customers with higher electricity bills today – to cover the costs of arrangements made to hide past debts.

Section (2) (h) aims to ensure that the electricity system in Ontario is operated in a way that will provide maximum benefits to the citizens and businesses of Ontario – by modifying smart meters to allow customers to get minute-by-minute real time pricing and by ensuring that Ontario residents and businesses can purchase electricity at the lowest price that it is offered to anyone in other provinces or in the U.S.A.

Affordable Electricity Act, 2018

EXPLANATORY NOTE

The Affordable Electricity Act, 2018 is enacted.  The Act imposes a duty on the Minister of Energy to ensure that residents and small businesses in Ontario have access to clean electricity at the lowest possible cost and sets out several requirements that must be met by December 31, 2018, in order for that duty to be fulfilled.

Bill                                                                                                                                             2018

An Act respecting affordable electricity

Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Ontario, enacts as follows:

Duties of the Minister of Energy
(1) The Minister of Energy shall ensure that residents and small businesses in Ontario have access to clean electricity at the lowest possible cost.

Same
      (2)  In order to fulfil the duty under subsection (1), the Minister shall, by December 31, 2018,

(a)    ensure that all regulations and policies that relate to the generation, transmission, distribution and sale of electricity in Ontario are amended to place the highest priority on minimizing the cost of electricity to customers, including by,

(i)    requiring publicly owned water-powered and nuclear-powered generating stations to be used to maximum advantage,

(ii)    ensuring that electricity that is distributed through the electricity distribution grid is supplied on the basis of competitive bids from all potential suppliers,

(iii)    establishing full transparency in the electricity regulation process to ensure that all decisions that affect electricity pricing are open to public scrutiny and to ensure that electricity pricing is not subject to hidden interference by any government entity or any private party, and

(iv)    requiring all pricing arrangements and payments between electric utilities and electricity suppliers to be made available to the public, including all cost agreements that relate to the funding of electricity suppliers for remaining on stand by and for refraining from putting electricity into the electricity distribution grid at times of surplus supply;

(b)    eliminate all preferential treatment for new wind and solar electricity generation projects and terminate all existing subsidies for wind and solar electricity generation projects at the earliest possible opportunity;

(c)    cancel all conservation program subsidies paid by the Independent Electricity System Operator;

(d)    establish procedures to ensure that the electricity distribution grid is regulated in a way that provides maximum benefit to electricity customers in Ontario by,

(i)    requiring the grid to be maintained in an efficient state to serve all customers,

(ii)    ensuring that the costs for maintaining and operating the grid are reduced to levels that are comparable with costs in the most cost-effective private operations,

(iii)    requiring all costs associated with operating the grid to be open to public scrutiny,

(iv)    ensuring that electricity customers receive the full benefit of cost savings that arise from more cost-effective management of the grid,

(v)    removing every restriction that limits the ability of a potential supplier of electricity to use the grid to transport electricity to any willing customer, and

(vi)    ensuring that the cost that is charged for the use of the grid is proportional to the actual cost of providing the service;

(e)    prohibit any measure that results in electricity prices being artificially lowered by borrowing money today that must be paid back in the future;

(f)    require all electricity bills to itemize the amount of deferred costs that customers will have to pay in the future as a result of the Ontario Fair Hydro Plan Act, 2017 and all other Ontario Acts, regulations or policies;

(g)    require all electricity bills to itemize the portion of the bill that deals with the repayment of sunk costs and to identify the Act that requires such repayment and the year the requirement came into force; and

(h)    ensure that surplus electricity generated in Ontario is made available to Ontario customers on a first priority basis, and that customers in Ontario can purchase that surplus electricity at the lowest rate at which it is being offered to customers in neighbouring provinces or neighbouring states of the United States of America, by,

(i)    modifying metering systems to allow electricity customers to take advantage of the actual costs of production at any particular instant, including at times when users are paid to take surplus electricity out of the grid,

(ii)    conducting a study to identify other ways to allow Ontario residents to benefit immediately from more efficient use of the electricity system, and

(iii)    implementing regulatory and policy changes to ensure that customers benefit from reduced costs that result from more efficient use of the electricity system.

Commencement

2.  This Act comes into force on the day it receives Royal Assent.

Short title
3.  The short title of this Act is the Affordable Electricity Act, 2018.

The Trillium Party of Ontario believes we must allow for quality, affordable and sustainable daycare for working parents. There are many qualified persons who are responsible and in many cases, have had thousands of hours of experience in dealing with and raising children.

​​Our mission will be to provide comfortable, competent and safe daycare to working families across Ontario. Our focus is based on providing work opportunity for caring daycare providers without the onerous burden of over government regulation.

We will remove the barriers that intimidate and prevent good people from opening Home Daycare Facilities:

  • Every home daycare facility will be registered/licensed using a central database. This licensing will be done every year at a minimal cost and pending a facility inspection.
  • EVERY person residing and/or working in/at the home daycare address MUST HAVE A POLICE BACK GROUND CHECK.
  • A basic first aid course must be completed by every employee/caregiver at a minimum of every two years.
  • Every child that is being cared for in the facility, must be updated as the children are registered or leave the day-care facility.
  • It is important to bring the “underground” daycare industry to the light by offering tax incentives to parents for enlisting their children in registered daycare providers.
  • Parents will receive any updates regarding complaints or concerns regarding their daycare providers as they occur.
Candidate statements:

“The Trillium Party wants to put family back into daycare by removing the multiple layers of bureaucracy that makes it all but impossible for a mother or grandmother to open a private daycare”.

“This Province and this Country grew strong by having parents raise their children.  There is absolutely NO REASON TO STOP THAT NOW.”

“Everyone pretty much agrees that the government can’t do anything better than the private sector. And now they expect that that will change when it comes to looking after our most precious responsibilities…our kids.” 

Opposition remarks:

Accusation:  This Government is committing millions to quality daycare to help struggling families. And the Trillium party wants to cut it back.

Reply:  This government is committing millions of taxpayer dollars to getting re-elected. Fact is, there are not enough children to fill the current daycare positions in most areas. Why does this government insist on cutting family out of our children’s lives? Co-parenting in our schools. Before-school breakfasts.  Lunch programmes.  Preschool.   Kindergarten.  And now, more government funded daycare operated by government educated programmers … I mean daycare workers.

There are issues that are of paramount importance to the citizens of Ontario, and these issues should be allowed to be voted on directly by the citizens, and this vote will be binding.

Getting people involved with the political process will help us re-establish confidence in our government once again.

  1. Health Care:  

The Trillium Party believes the World’s finest Healthcare should be available to every citizen of Ontario.  

  • TheTrillium Party suggests that we create an “equivalency” scale for foreign credentials.  Followed by a residency program that is completed IN ONTARIO, rather than outside Ontario/Canada to upgrade to a Canadian equivalent status.
  • TheTrillium Party of Ontario has an ardent belief that the vast proportion of citizens of Ontario are responsible and will make better choices given accurate information.  To keep track of what could be, instead of hospital visits, clinics or doctor visits, a statement would be offered to show some alternatives that could have been utilized rather than, for example using a hospital for a really bad cold.
  • Fundraising is something that Ontarians should be proud of, but fundraising for equipment, facilities, etc., should not be the norm.  Many hospitals are now employing full time administrators (and their assistants) to fundraise – this is an added cost to the health-care system.  The money, for those wages, could be saved in a future capital fund accruing interest, for purchases of equipment, facilities, etc.  Not to mention the Chief Administrative/Financial Officer of each hospital should be competent to engage the province through the application process for grants, etc., without the need for fundraising staff.

Towards Affordable and Efficient Health Care

  • The Trillium Party seeks to ensure that all health-care funding is far more directly tied to the services that are provided to individuals who need them.
  • This new approach would be implemented through the use of a new “Smart OHIP Card” that would be used by all Healthcare Service Providers to bill the government for all services that are provided to all citizens of the province.
  • A Smart Ohip Provider card would be able to allow for comparative service analysis. Therefore allowing for in-depth service-to-fee analysis.

Healthcare accounts for the largest portion of the budget of the Province of Ontario and the demand for healthcare services will continue to grow as the population ages and as more services are required for hospitals and for long-term care.

About 40{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771} of the healthcare budget is directly tied to the services that are provided to individual citizens – and those directly-funded services to doctors and for drugs are largely paid for through the OHIP card.

The remaining 60{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771} of the health care budget is distributed as block funding to the Local Health Integration Networks (LHINs) which fund hospitals, some long-term care facilities and  other services to those in need as well as to other institutions that provide common services to the health-care community.  Since those funds are not directly linked to the amount of healthcare that is provided to individual citizens, there is little transparency in the use of a very large portion of the provincial healthcare budget.

The Trillium Party seeks to ensure that all health-care funding is far more directly tied to the services that are provided to individuals who need them.

To achieve this, the Trillium Party supports a new model for funding non-OHIP healthcare services – by tying the funding that is provided through the LHINs and the common-service institutions, to the services that are actually provided to individual citizens who receive care.

This would replace the current practices of cost-based annual budgetary allotments to institutions for all non-OHIP healthcare with a more transparent and accountable model that is comparable to what already exists under OHIP for payments made to physicians and for prescription drugs.  This new approach would be implemented through the use of a new “Smart OHIP Card” that would be used by all Healthcare Service Providers to bill the government for all services that are provided to all citizens of the province.

The intent of this change in the allocation of provincial healthcare funds is to ensure that expenditures in the largest and fastest growing area of the provincial budget is directly tied to the healthcare services that are actually provided to citizens rather than being tied to the institutions and to their administration.

Support Materials Re: LHINs – Elizabeth Marshall

1 POLICY 2018 2 10

MAKING GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT THEY SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR!

Public Healthcare
Local Health Integration Network (LHIN)

Why are Ontarians paying over $90 Million dollars per year for the oper­ational expenditures of all 14 LHINs, when in 2015, 90{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771} of patients who were referred to CCACs [community care access centres] by their family or primary-care physician received their first CCAC in-home service in 28 days (as opposed to being referred by a hospital after a hospital stay)?[i]

LHINs wait time for CCAC in-home services (days)      Worst 82days, Best 12 days depending on the LHINs.

The $90 Million that the LHINs spent breaks down as:

  1. half of their operational expenditures on salaries and benefits;
  2. one-third on one-time, LHIN-led initiatives for specific projects, such as those on diabetes, emergency departments and critical care;
  3. and the remainder primarily on administrative expenses such as rent, consulting services, and sup­plies and equipment.[ii]

In 2015 the expenditures for the Ontario Health System were $50 Billion of which the LHINs administered $25 Billion and the Ministry of Health administered the other $25 Billion.

So how does this break down?  Firstly, the LHINs do not provide health services – all health care providers, such as such as hospitals and long-term-care homes, still maintain their own boards of directors [iii]  and are still administered under the Ministry.[iv]

In 2015 the break down was:

  • Hospitals (156) – $16.9 Billion
  • Long-Term-Care Homes (631) – $3.5 Billion
  • Community Care Access Centres (14) – $2.5 Billion
  • Mental Health and Addiction Centres (400) – $936 Million
  • Community Support Service Agencies (584) – $834 Million
  • Community Health Centres (76) – $378 Million

And the Ministry’s break down, which the Ministry’s $25 Billion is spent, is:

Working relationships with LHINs managed by the Ministry

  • Primary Care
  • Family Health Teams
  • Independent Health Facilities

Provincial Health Agencies (duplicates of LHINs)

  • Cancer Care Ontario[v]
  • eHealth Ontario
  • Health Quality Ontario[vi]
  • Public Health Ontario[vii]

 

HEALTH QUALITY ONTARIO

Health Quality Ontario[viii] that is a scientifically rigorous group with diverse areas of expertise. It works in partnership with health care providers and organizations across the system, and engage with patients themselves, to help initiate substantial and sustainable change to the province’s complex health system.

It defines the meaning of quality as it pertains to health care, and provides strategic advice so all the parts of the system can improve; analyzes virtually all aspects of Ontario’s health care. This includes:

  • looking at the overall health of Ontarians,
  • how well different areas of the system are working together,
  • and most importantly, patient experience,
  • produce comprehensive, objective reports based on data, facts and the voices of patients, caregivers and those who work each day in the health system,
  • makes recommendationson how to improve care using the best evidence
  • support large-scale quality improvements— by working with our partners to facilitate ways for health care providers to learn from each other and share innovative approaches.

Is this not what the LHINs were to do?  So why are Ontarians wasting $90 Million plus per year for 14 entities that aren’t even needed, considering they aren’t even fulfilling their contractual obligations?  It’s pretty sad when the Ministry has to lower the standards for the LHINs, in their various contracts/MOU, so they can pass the grade, isn’t it?[ix]

[1] Across Ontario, 90{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771} of the patients who were referred to CCACs by their family or primary-care physician (as opposed to being referred by a hospital after a hospital stay) received their first CCAC in-home service in 28 days. However, depending on where a person lives in the province, the wait time could be as short as 12 days to as long as 82 days, a differ­ence of more than two months. LHINs—Local Health Integration Networks, Auditor General Report 2015 section 3.08, p. 323 (17 of 56).
[1] 1.1.5 Operational Expenditures of Local Health Integration Networks
In the year ending March 31, 2015, the total oper­ational expenditures of all 14 LHINs combined were $90 million. About 0.4{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771}, or 40 cents on each $100 of the Ministry’s LHIN funding (including payments destined to health service providers such as hospi­tals and long-term-care homes) were spent on LHIN operational expenditures. In that year, LHINs spent about half of their operational expenditures on salaries and benefits; one-third on one-time, LHIN-led initiatives for specific projects, such as those on diabetes, emergency departments and critical care; and the remainder primarily on administrative expenses such as rent, consulting services, and sup­plies and equipment.  LHINs—Local Health Integration Networks, Auditor General Report 2015 section 3.08, p. 308 (2 of 56).
[1] In moving toward a regional model, Ontario took a somewhat different path than that of some other provinces. The most significant difference between the LHIN model in Ontario and the regional health systems in other parts of Canada is that, in Ontario, LHINs neither directly govern nor provide health services: all of the health-care providers, such as hospitals and long-term-care homes, still maintain their own boards of directors. In contrast, in Alberta and Manitoba where all or most of the local boards of the individual health-care providers were dissolved, the regional health authorities themselves directly employ health-care workers, and directly provide health services, some­times including primary care.  LHINs—Local Health Integration Networks, Auditor General Report 2015 section 3.08, p. 307-308 (1-2 of 56)
[1] See attached graph.
[1] it is Cancer Care Ontario, a provincial government agency, that is primarily responsible for planning and allocating resources for cancer surgery and works with health service providers in every LHIN to improve cancer care for the people they serve.  LHINs—Local Health Integration Networks, Auditor General Report 2015 section 3.08, p. 327 (21 of 56).
The Ministry accepts this recommendation and is implementing strategies to manage capacity and demand for community-based services. For example, Access to Care at Cancer Care Ontario is developing an MRI capacity-planning tool designed to advise the Ministry on LHIN capacity and need for MRI services. The tool considers wait time, population growth and existing services and will be used to support MRI services based on provincial need.  LHINs—Local Health Integration Networks, Auditor General Report 2015 section 3.08, p. 330 (24 of 56).
[1] QUALITY MATTERS: REALIZING EXCELLENT CARE FOR ALL
Contents
Foreword
Introduction
Executive Summary
12The Case For System-Wide Quality
24Quality Matters: A Health System Quality Framework
34Delivering Quality Care
48Understanding Quality Health Care
58Fostering A Culture Of Quality
70Conclusion
71References and Further Reading
77Appendix 1: Committee Terms of Reference
80Appendix 2: Committee Membership
82Appendix 3: Key Informants
[1] Public Health Ontario (PHO) keeps Ontarians safe and healthy. With our partners in government, public health and health care, we prevent illness and improve health. We provide the scientific evidence and expert guidance that shapes policies and practices for a healthier Ontario. PHO has locations across Ontario, including 11 laboratory sites.
PHO protects the health of Ontarians. We monitor, prepare for, detect, and respond to infectious disease outbreaks and environmental incidents.
We improve Ontarians’ health by providing evidence to address challenges like smoking, healthy eating, and physical activity.
We transform data into interactive tools and resources to monitor population health.
Our educational program builds the skills, capacity and competencies in Ontario’s health workforce to face tomorrow’s public health issues.
Our experts guide and support health professionals with evidence and case studies on topics like immunization, environmental and occupational health, health promotion, infection prevention and control, and potential health emergencies.
Our research informs health policy, transforms clinical and public health practice, and advances laboratory science.
http://www.publichealthontario.ca/en/About/Pages/Organization.aspx
http://www.hqontario.ca/Evidence-to-Improve-Care/Quality-Standards/View-all-Quality-Standards
[1] http://www.hqontario.ca/about-us/who-we-are
[1] The Ministry’s role is to provide overall direction and leadership for the health system, focusing on devel­oping legislation, standards and policies to support its strategic directions, and ensuring that the LHINs fulfil the Ministry’s expectations. Those expectations are outlined in two agreements it established with each of the 14 LHINs: the Ministry–LHIN Memoran­dum of Understanding, and the Ministry–LHIN Per­formance Agreement (accountability agreement). The Ministry also manages provincial pro­grams that are not managed by LHINs.  LHINs—Local Health Integration Networks, Auditor General Report 2015 section 3.08, p. 311 (5 of 56).
In practice, when LHINs do not perform accord­ing to expectations, the Ministry takes a collabora­tive approach, working with LHINs to identify issues and determine next steps to improve per­formance. Although there may be valid reasons for this approach, it has often resulted in performance shortfalls continuing year-after-year. One factor contributing to LHINs’ varying performance is that the Ministry has negotiated different targets for each LHIN to achieve in the 15 performance areas.  LHINs—Local Health Integration Networks, Auditor General Report 2015 section 3.08, p. 326 (20 of 56).
For 11 of the 15 performance areas, the Ministry has established what it calls “provincial targets” that serve as long-term goals for LHINs to work towards . In most cases, these targets are more stringent than the targets the Ministry has negotiated for individual LHINs to meet. For example, the Ministry’s provincial target for ALC [Alternative Level of Care] days is 9.46{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771}, meaning no more than 9.46{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771} of the total days a patient spent in hospital should have been due to them waiting for care elsewhere or to be discharged. Only two LHINs had this specific target to meet. The other 12 LHINs were held to tar­gets that were less challenging than the provincial target for ALC days. Using the overall provincial performance in the year ending March 31, 2015, only four of the 11 provincial targets were met that year. Further, the Ministry has not set any timelines for when all 14 LHINs are expected to meet the 11 provincial targets.  LHINs—Local Health Integration Networks, Auditor General Report 2015 section 3.08, p. 337 (31 of 56).

The Trillium Party believes that education up to secondary education is a “right” to be enjoyed by all Ontarians.

  • We also believe every student should be supplied with ALL the educational tools (books, notebooks, writing instruments, computers etc., to be used by various students, in/on school property, through-out the life of the supplied “tool”) required to participate and excel in graduating to grade twelve.
  • We believe a much more generous scholarship program should be implemented. A program that involves a sliding scale of awards that directly reflects a students learning abilities, individual efforts, and in particular grades.
  • The Ontario Educational system or its employees should NOT be considered “co-parents” of children in school.  Being a parent is a most valuable privilege and yet a huge responsibility. This honor is to instill a moral code that reflects the parent’s values and ideals instilling in their child the foundation of what is morally, ethically and lawfully “right from wrong.” As always Respect, Courtesy and Responsibility are an ideal foundation to work from.
  • Eliminate the policy of social promotion in Ontario’s schools.Students will be expected to meet certain standards, (grading system, including a “fail”) in order to be promoted to the next grade. This grading system assists in preparing the student for successful integration with a stronger work ethic extending to their interaction in society.  Social promotion is for the parent to decide – not government.
  • Initiate a more streamlined approach to acquiring a trade or a hands-on profession.  With a new approach young people could be “up and running” as a fully contributing qualified tradespersonby their 21st birthday.
  • The College of Trades will be repealed as it serves no purpose but partisan appointments.

 

Executive, Legislative, Justice Branches of  Government and Policing Principles: 

The Trillium Party believes:

The Political system in Ontario is based on the principle of separation of powers – authority is distributed among the three branches of government, being – executive, legislative and judicial.

  • There should not be a concentration of power in the hands of a small group of people as established under our founding constitution.
  • In such a system, the executive does not pass laws – that is the role of the legislature.
  • The Courts are there to interpret the law and to strike down bad and/or unconstitutional law, not make law. They also do not have the constitutional authority to demand that the legislature create law.
  • The executive is to enforce the legislative statutes, as written by the legislature, which have been interpreted by the judiciary. Unfortunately, the executive bureaucracies are commonly the source of too many regulations.
  • It is for this reason theTrillium Party believes an individual who is currently employed by a police force, or other type of Executive office, responsible for the enforcement of statutes, made by a legislative body, should not be allowed to run for a publicly elected position.

Executive Branch

The Trillium party of Ontario believes Police/Peace/Game Wardens/By-Law enforcement officers should be respected and admired.

  • These two qualities cannot and should not be legislated. We believe respect and admiration for Officers has been eroded because these officers have been moving from their core duties of protecting and serving the people and are being perceived more as a form of revenue generators for their governing bodies.
  • The Trillium Partybelieves that sufficient funding should be provided to police forces to fight serious crime not to be used for enforcement of unlawful statutes.
  • There needs to be more in-depth training in the law and less “crowd control” or “use of force” training as the first offence/defence. They are there to protect the people, by upholding the law – not to take the side of by-law, OSPCA, Conservation Authorities, etc.
  • There needs to be more psychological examination of cadets to ensure they have the moral, ethical and a grounded mental ability to fulfill their obligations to the people. More and more often Peace Officers are accused of bullying tactics and abuse of power – this needs to be corrected so the people will have restored faith in these officers.

Legislative Branch

The Trillium Party believes that the legislation which is being created today, and over the past 50 to 60 years, has grown to an unmanageable portfolio. On top of these hundreds of pieces of legislation there are thousands of pieces of regulation, which, based on continued expansion of said regulation, does not reach debate in Queen’s Park because in many pieces of legislation it states that the “Minister may make regulation.”

  • All pieces of legislation and regulation must be reviewed to ensure that these pieces do not violate the rights of Ontarians; do not violate the Constitution; do not violate the Criminal Code of Canada, etc.
  • Any piece of legislation must be read by all MPPs to ensure they fully understand the piece – they cannot use explanatory notes any longer because these notes do not perform full disclosure as to what is or is not in the Act.[3]

[3] Example – Bill 68 explanatory notes states nothing regarding “Green Roofs…”:
A new section 97.1 of the Act provides permissive authority for by-laws respecting the protection or conservation of the environment that require buildings to be constructed in accordance with prescribed provisions of the Building Code. (see new section 108.1 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006).
The Building Code Act, 1992 is amended to authorize regulations relating to new section 97.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001 and new section 108.1 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006.
Municipal Act, 2001 – Amendment:
Environmental standards; construction of buildings
    97.1  (1)  Without limiting sections 9, 10 and 11, those sections authorize a local municipality to pass a by-law respecting the protection or conservation of the environment that requires buildings to be constructed in accordance with provisions of the building code under the Building Code Act, 1992 that are prescribed under that Act, subject to such conditions and limits as may be prescribed under that Act.


  • The only piece of legislation which can be an omnibus is the Budget and that is only to amend amounts of money for public use, as in Education, Health-care, Roads, and the like. Again this must be fully debated and every MPP will/must read it to ensure they understand the document.
  • All regulation must be brought forward for debate in the “House.” This is the only way the elected officials can ensure that they are fully informed of the regulations being presented.
  • No government ministry, agency, department, non-government corporation created to fulfill government obligations, can regulate what does not belong to it. There has been an unlawful expansion of regulation created which attempts to place government and/or non-government jurisdiction over private corporations and private property – this includes licences, permits, denials of land use, planning, fines, fees, etc., this is not what government is incorporated to do – government is to work for the people not to fund public employment at the cost of the rights of the people.
  • We, as legislators, must remember – “The rule is the public interest is always paramount but NEVER when it is at the expense of a private individual ”[4] We are part of the people and we must remember that every piece of legislation, regulation and policy applies to us because we are a member of the “People” and we, like everyone, must live and pay for these policies.
  • Urban MPPs must defer to rural MPPs when it is apparent that legislation, regulation and policy will be detrimental to rural living and communities. Legislation which may be applicable in urban areas may not reasonably be implemented in rural areas.  Funding, legislation, regulation and policy must reflect that there are two very different areas of life-style – urban and rural – and this needs to be reflected in the Municipal Act, as well as various other documents.
  • All expenditures which were downloaded onto the Municipalities during the Harris-McGuinty-Wynne era must be uploaded. This includes social housing costs, hospital costs, educational costs, transit, etc., etc., etc.

 Conflict
   (2)  Despite section 35 of the Building Code Act, 1992, if there is a conflict between that Act or the building code under that Act and a by-law to which this section applies, that Act or the building code prevails.
Green roofs or alternative roof surfaces
   (3)  Without limiting sections 9, 10 and 11, the power described in subsection (1) includes the power to require the construction of green roofs or of alternative roof surfaces that achieve similar levels of performance to green roofs.
Definition
   (4)  For the purposes of subsection (3),
“green roof” means a roof surface that supports the growth of vegetation over a substantial portion of its area for the purpose of water conservation or energy conservation. 

[4] Ontario Legislative Assembly, February 11, 1965 – Vol. 1, p. 478.


  • Provincial Policy Statements must not be implemented as legislation because policy is not statute and therefore cannot be used as statute. This has been determined in the courts.[5]
  • The only taxation to go into General Revenue is provincial sales taxes. All taxes collected with a specific duty is to be dedicated to that specific topic – example, gas tax is for road construction, maintenance and (in the urban areas) public transit, therefore it must be dedicated to that department.  This must be dispersed based on kilometer and not population so that the rural communities have the financial ability to fund for transportation infrastructure.
  • In all legislation there must be one determined and assigned Minister. There cannot be the statement of: “Minister” means the member of the Executive Council to whom the powers and duties of the Minister under this Act are assigned by the Lieutenant Governor in Council.[6]  There must be a Minister and Ministry responsible for the piece of legislation so that there is accountability of that Minister and the Ministry.
  • There can be no computerized artificial intelligence used in the creation of legislation, regulation or policy. This is to ensure the ministry creating the legislation, regulation and policy are accountable for the document they are creating.  This also includes the Attorney General’s Office and their obligations to not place the Crown in disrepute and/or create legislation which violates the Constitution or the Criminal Code of Canada.
  • The legislature cannot do indirectly what it could not do directly therefore if the courts strike down a bad law the legislature is obligated not to amend said law in its own favor. That has also been determined by the Courts.[7]
  • Legislation must be created to ensure there is procedural fairness in the judicial system. This includes the removal of various tribunals and that procedure in the courts are simple to allow the average person to represent themselves.  To many times there are motions, procedural blocks etc., and the procedure in the Court system needs to be simplified.  See Judicial Branch.
  • Administrative Penalties will be banned. Constitutionally every person has the right to have their day in court therefore government cannot remove this right through implementation of administrative penalties.  See Judicial Branch.

[5] “…, that policy or guideline is not prescribed by law. It is simply that; it is MNR guidelines for enforcing the Act and, as such, it cannot be relied upon as the law.”  Ministry of Natural Resources v. Janssen, Reasons for Judgment – February 12, 2015.
[6] Schedule 2 – Local planning Appeal Support Centre Act, 2017, Bill 139 – Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017.
[7] “It is an evasion of the Act from which the Local Legislature derives its power. The Local Legislature cannot, no more than private individuals, act as it were in fraud of the law, that is, do by indirect means what it cannot effect directly…”  Constitution of Canada. The B.N.A. Act, 1867; Its Interpretation, etc., p. 209.
“It is a well settled proposition of law that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent. None of these bodies can be vested directly or indirectly with powers which have been denied them by the B.N.A. Act, and which there fore are not within their constitutional jurisdiction.”  Case name:  Attorney General of Nova Scotia v. Attorney General of Canada.  Collection Supreme Court Judgments, Date:  1950-10-03, Report:  [1951] S.C.R. 31.


Judicial Branch

The Trillium Party believes, as stated above, there needs to be procedural fairness in the Courts; there needs to be less Tribunals; there needs to be simplification of the process when attending court so that an individual has the ability to represent themselves; and that Administrative Penalties must be abolished.

• All Tribunals must be banned, saving the Ontario Municipal Board because its original mandate was to ensure Municipalities did/do not become financially embarrassed; to take over financially impaired municipalities; and, at one point in Ontario’s history, was an entity that people could petition to create a village, hamlet or town. Therefore, all Tribunals, except the OMB must be abolished because this has become onerous on the people of Ontario. The Superior Court of Ontario is, an example, already legislated in section 273and 2749 of the Municipal Act, therefore there is no need for added Tribunals.


[8] Application to quash by-law
            273. (1)Upon the application of any person, the Superior Court of Justice may quash a by-law of a municipality in whole or in part for illegality. 2001, c. 25, s. 273 (1).
Definition
           (2)  In this section,
“by-law” includes an order or resolution. 2001, c. 25, s. 273 (2).
Inquiry
           (3)  If an application to quash alleges a contravention of subsection 90 (3) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, the Superior Court of Justice may direct an inquiry into the alleged contravention to be held before an official examiner or a judge of the court, and the evidence of the witnesses in the inquiry shall be given under oath and shall form part of the evidence in the application to quash. 2001, c. 25, s. 273 (3).Other cases
         (4)  The court may direct that nothing shall be done under the by-law until the application is disposed of. 2001, c. 25, s. 273 (4).
Timing
          (5)  An application to quash a by-law in whole or in part, subject to section 415, shall be made within one year after the passing of the by-law. 2001, c. 25, s. 273 (5).
[9] Investigation by judge
             274. (1)If a municipality so requests by resolution, a judge of the Superior Court of Justice shall
(a) investigate any supposed breach of trust or other misconduct of a member of council, an employee of                           the municipality or a person having a contract with the municipality in relation to the duties or                                          obligations of that person to the municipality;
(b) inquire into any matter connected with the good government of the municipality; or
(c) inquire into the conduct of any part of the public business of the municipality, including business                                      conducted by a commission appointed by the council or elected by the electors. 2001, c. 25, s. 274 (1).
Powers
     (2)  In making the investigation or inquiry, the judge has the powers of a commission under Part II of the Public Inquiries Act, which Part applies to the investigation or inquiry as if it were an inquiry under that Act. 2001, c. 25, s. 274 (2).
Report
     (3)  The judge shall report the results of the investigation or inquiry to the council as soon as practicable. 2001, c. 25, s. 274 (3).
Counsel
     (4)  The council may hire counsel to represent the municipality and pay fees for witnesses who are summoned to give evidence at the investigation or inquiry. 2001, c. 25, s. 274 (4).
Representation by counsel
     (5)  Any person whose conduct is called into question in the investigation or inquiry may be represented by counsel. 2001, c. 25, s. 274 (5)
Costs
      (6)  The judge may engage counsel and other persons to assist in the investigation or inquiry and the costs of engaging those persons and any incidental expenses shall be paid by the municipality. 2001, c. 25, s. 274 (6).

  • Another reason Tribunals need to be abolished is because the majority of the Tribunals are partisan appointments by the sitting government, therefore there is an underlying question of biasness of the appointees which undermines justice.
  • Tribunals, in the majority of legislation, are allowed to make their own rules. This is not for the Tribunal Board of Directors to determine – this is for the legislature to determine the rules of procedure in any court, therefore Tribunals are not accountable for their actions because they are granted authority to determine (i) how they operate, (ii) whether their rules are “just,” and (iii) can be prejudicial for or against any individual and/or discriminatory.[10]
  • In 1989, Premier Peterson change the Justice of the Peace Oath, this needs to be amended to represent that a Justice of the Peace is an Officer of the Queen’s Courts and is not merely to do a good job.  The Oath states now:  “3. Every justice of the peace, before beginning the duties of office, shall make the following oath or affirmation in French or in English:  I, ………., solemnly swear (affirm) that I will faithfully and to the best of my skill and knowledge, execute the duties of a justice of the peace, and I will do so without fear or favour, affection or ill will. So help me God. (Omit last sentence in an affirmation.)”  Prior to 1989 it was:  “4. — (1) A justice of the peace, before acting, shall take the following oath:  I, …………., of the of in the County (or District) of do swear that I will well and truly serve Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth (or the reigning Sovereign for the time being) in the office of justice of the peace, and I will do right to all manner of people according to law,

[10] Section 1 of Schedule 1 of Bill 139 – Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017“rules” means the rules made by the Tribunal under section 32;
Rules
32 (1)  The Tribunal may make rules governing its practices and procedures.
General or particular
(2)  The rules may be of general or particular application.
Other rules
(3)  Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), the rules may,
(a)  provide for and require the use of hearings or of practices and procedures that are alternatives to traditional adjudicative or adversarial procedures;
(b)  provide for and require notice to be provided in a particular manner;
(c)  authorize the Tribunal to hold hearings or other proceedings in writing or by any electronic or automated                means;
(d)  authorize the Tribunal to combine two or more proceedings or any part of them, or hear two or more                          proceedings at the same time;
(e)  authorize the Tribunal to appoint a person from among a class of parties to a proceeding to represent the                  class where, in the opinion of the Tribunal, the parties have a common interest; and
(f)  provide for when and how the Tribunal may hear from a person other than a party.
Legislation Act, 2006
(4)  Part III (Regulations) of the Legislation Act, 2006 does not apply to the rules.
Failure to comply with rules
(5)  Unless the Tribunal’s failure to comply with the rules or its exercise of discretion under the rules in a particular manner caused a substantial wrong that affected the final disposition of a matter, neither the failure nor the exercise of discretion is a ground for setting aside a decision of the Tribunal on an application for judicial review or an appeal.


without fear or favour, affection or ill will. So help me God. …………..” The same must be re-established for all Justices, Judges, Officers of the Court, etc.

        • The responsibilities and obligations of the Judges, Justices, Officers of the Courts and Courts are:
          º     (i) to ensure justice is served for the benefit of the defendant and the                  individual – not the state;º     (ii) ensure that the Crown is not placed into disrepute by the actions of the Legislature, and that is accomplished by striking down “bad law”;º     (iii) to assist an individual when self-representing and not to show bias of any form;º     (iv) society has a right to expect those appointed as judges to be honourable and worthy of its trust and confidence;º     (v) Judges should not be influenced by partisan interests, public pressure or fear of criticism. Judges should maintain their objectivity and shall not, by words or conduct, manifest favour, bias or prejudice towards any party or interest;º     (vi) Judges have a duty to follow the law. Judges have a duty to apply the relevant law to the facts and circumstances of the cases before the court and render justice within the framework of the law;º     (vii) Judges will endeavour to maintain order and decorum in court. Judges must strive to be patient, dignified and courteous in performing the duties of judicial office and shall carry out their role with integrity, appropriate firmness and honour;º     (viii) The Judge and the Court should approach their judicial duties in a spirit of collegiality, cooperation and mutual assistance;º     (ix) Judges should conduct court business with due diligence and dispose of all matters before them promptly and efficiently having regard, at all times, to the interests of justice and the rights of the parties before the court;º     (x) Reasons for judgment should be delivered in a timely manner;º     (xi) Judges have a duty to maintain their professional competence in the law.  Judges should attend and participate in continuing legal and general education programs;º     (xii) The primary responsibility of judges is the discharge of their judicial duties.  Subject to applicable legislation, judges may participate in law related activities such as teaching, participating in educational conferences, writing and working on committees for the advancement of judicial interests and concerns, provided such activities do not interfere with the judges’ primary duty to the court;º     (xiii) Judges should maintain their personal conduct at a level which will ensure the public’s trust and confidenceº     (xiv) Judges must avoid any conflict of interest, or the appearance of any conflict of interest, in the performance of their judicial duties.  Judges must not participate in any partisan political activity. Judges must not contribute financially to any political party;º     (xv) Judges must not abuse the power of their judicial office or use it inappropriately;º     (xvi) Judges are encouraged to be involved in community activities provided such involvement is not incompatible with their judicial office.  Judges should not lend the prestige of their office to fund-raising activities.[11]
      • The law schools need to teach law and not just how to think like lawyers. There is a systemic problem in Ontario brought to the people’s attention by the Treasurer of the Law Society, Laura Legge, in 2004.  She states:  “I was concerned about the core courses in the law schools that were not being taught. And I’m still concerned about it. And my one concern, and it’s an ongoing concern, is the lack of teaching of equity and legal history…. And every time the Law Society seems to ask the law schools to start teaching some basic courses we get nowhere. I couldn’t get anywhere, and I tried very hard. And the one law school that has consistently taught, or have, I don’t know if they still do or not, twelve basic courses was the University of Western Ontario. And I think they’re still teaching, I know they’re still teaching, equity law. And, in my opinion, having been a lawyer for fifty-six years, if you don’t understand the law of equity, as well as the common law, how in the world can you be a lawyer in our legal system? And I think it’s a real problem, and I think it’s still a problem, and an ongoing problem. And I blame the Law Society for this one because we’ve allowed the law schools to teach a lot of courses that have really no relevance. And you don’tteach people to think like lawyers, you have to give them some tools with which to think! And I had one eminent law dean tell me that their only role was to teach people to think like lawyers. Now come off it! You have to give them some basic tools to start thinking. However, … So, that was one of my very real concerns as Treasurer: that was the education of lawyers. I must say I failed: I got nowhere, and nothing has happened since. “[12]  The curriculum in the law schools must to changed to include historical, constitutional, criminal, law of equity and common law to ensure that all graduates are fully capable of representing their clients on all issues brought before the Courts.  All judges, justices, etc., must be re-educated to ensure they fully understand the law as it would seem they have not been fully instructed by the law schools.

[11] http://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/ojc/principles-of-judicial-office/
[12] DATE: JULY 6, 2004
PLACE: LEGGE AND LEGGE, BARRISTERS AND SOLICITORS
65 ST. CLAIR AVE. E., TORONTO
INTERVIEWER: ALISON FORREST
MEDIA: 2 MINI-DISKS APPROX. 58:23 AND 13:42 MINUTES IN LENGTH AND ONE MINI-CASSETTE OF SAME.
http://www.lsuc.on.ca/uploadedFiles/PDC/CR_and_A/Virtual_Archive/LAURA{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771}20LEGGE{6537e2c5e90886174a35e7df588d32ffb5e71aa7e4d91fe4a304914caca0b771}20TRANSCRIPTS(1).pdf

Establish an independent agency to determine the compensation, pension, and severance packages of elected governmental officials. We have to make sure that severance packages are in line with the private sector,  and get away from the “golden parachute” packages that seem to be the case now.

Implement full disclosure of all financial expenditures of public funds. Require organizations that receive public funding from the Provincial Government to disclose annually, the positions, salaries, and total taxable benefits of employees paid over a certain level in a calendar year. This would apply to the Provincial Government, municipalities, hospitals, school boards, universities, colleges and other public sector employers who receive significant funding from the provincial government.

WASTEBUSTER PROGRAM

The Trillium Party would institute a wastebuster program where any Ontarian, but especially public sector workers, would be encouraged to advise government of where tax dollars are being misspent.

Often it is front-line workers who not only know the system best, but are the ones most frustrated by mismanagement and waste. This website and hotline would serve as a means of empowering these workers to identify wasteful spending, redundant programs, and unnecessary projects and consultants, anonymously. It is imperative that tips provided under this program be protected by Whistleblower legislation so government employees are protected, rather than the governing party.​


INDEPENDENT AUDITS – FULL DISCLOSURE 

Strengthen the Auditor General’s  Office: 

The Trillium Party believes that the Auditor General’s resources should be for reviewing reports and updates provided by government departments and agencies ensuring accounting accuracy, it should be expanded to perform value-for-money audits and seeking out fraud.

  • Increase resources to the auditor general’s office and focus on value for money audits.
  • Ensure that the authority of the Auditor General’s office is sufficient to keep government under control – particularly when government is in violation of accounting standards and is breaching the trust of Ontarian’s through wasteful spending.

Compensation, Pension and Severance Packages:

Through the Auditor General’s Office there is a need for:

  • Full disclosure and review of all financial expenditures of public funds.
  • Requiring organizations that receive public funding from the Provincial Government to disclose annually the positions, salaries and total taxable benefits of employees paid over a certain level in a calendar year. This would apply to the Provincial Government, ministries, municipalities, hospitals, school boards, universities, colleges, any private-public partnerships and other public sector employers who receive significant funding from the provincial government.