Interview about this topic I posted earlier as a background.

Just reporting this so that people are aware of what’s going on. I think, if it’s true, then it’s very sad and disappointing for all of us. Again, the interview above explains more.

Note: The member for Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston refers to Randy Hillier.

Member’s conduct

Mrs. Belinda C. Karahalios: My question is for the Premier. On Tuesday, the minute I left this chamber, and without notice to me, the PC government tabled a motion to condemn the member for Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston for inflammatory social media posts encouraging people to engage in conduct that this government has repeatedly claimed they disapprove of. But what the government won’t say is that the actions of the member in question have been funded by this government for months through changes in election laws which provide this member, for the first time ever in Ontario’s history, a riding association with an annual taxpayer subsidy of $66,000—and the governing party granted itself $5.9 million per year in the same deal.

If the government opposes the member’s actions, why don’t they stop sponsoring the political operations for him and all MPPs by cancelling the per-vote subsidy for all members in this Legislature, which has cost taxpayers more than $100 million in 10 years?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): And to reply for the government, the government House leader.

Hon. Paul Calandra: I am sure you can appreciate that it is not my job, as government House leader, to monitor the attendance of the members of the House. This chamber sits most days from 9 o’clock till about 6:40, and it is the expectation that if members are interested in the proceedings of this House, they will attend to this House. I will endeavour to tell the honourable member that, in future, if the member is concerned about motions that may be coming forward or the work of this House, the best place to hear about that is in this chamber itself.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question.

Mrs. Belinda C. Karahalios: In justifying the government’s most recent emergency measures and the Premier’s seal of approval for Justin Trudeau’s, the Premier called the Ottawa protest an “illegal occupation.” But those in Ottawa who were trying to lead a safe withdrawal of the protest and to safely negotiate with the city were hijacked by the government’s own agent provocateur, the member from Lanark. It was reported by one of the leading protesters that the member from Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston encouraged the convoy to talk to the mayor of Ottawa, but once the talks became public, the member said they were abandoning the protesters, thus making the possibility of a peaceful withdrawal impossible. In fact, the Premier’s own first chief of staff was reportedly in the back talking to all leaders involved.

Can this government tell us how many other sponsored actors it has infiltrating peaceful protest movements, with the job of sabotaging the efforts, so the government can use the actions of its own agents as justification for imposing authoritarian measures on all Ontarians?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to caution the member on her use of language, and allow the government House leader to respond.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Mr. Speaker, we just talked yesterday about the importance of elevating the level of debate around this place, of people on both sides—the opposition and the government, frankly—better understanding what happened in Ottawa, what happened at some of these protests. We were all very clear. We spoke unanimously on the fact that the aims of the protest leaders to overthrow a democratically elected government were not something that any of us could ever support. In fact, they were idiotic, and we all stood up against that.

But within that protest movement there were other people who had other concerns: the cost of living, the cost of fuel, the carbon tax, other issues that impact some of the things that we are doing, the mandates. We all talked and we all said that we had to find a better way of communicating so that all people feel part of the decision-making process.

So I would ask the honourable member to reflect on the question that she just asked and ask how that can help elevate the level of debate in this place. This House spoke unanimously yesterday when it came to the member for Lanark, and I am proud of how this House reacted to that member and the nonsense that he has been spewing.

Comment: The particular allegations he is talking about were made on February 22 under the heading “Member’s Conduct.”