role="main" class="main-container container js-quickedit-main-content" id="main-content">

April 3, 2008

39th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2008-Apr-03 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Thursday 3 April 2008 Jeudi 3 avril 2008

PRIVATE MEMBERS'

PUBLIC BUSINESS

POVERTY /

PAUVRETÉ

WATER QUALITY /

QUALITÉ DE L'EAU

POVERTY /

PAUVRETÉ

WATER QUALITY /

QUALITÉ DE L'EAU

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

WILFRID LAURIER UNIVERSITY

HILLIARD GREEN

SHERIDAN INSTITUTE

OF TECHNOLOGY AND

ADVANCED LEARNING

TOWN OF CALEDON

ANTI-BULLYING INITIATIVES

CANCER AWARENESS MONTH

CANCER SCREENING

PALLIATIVE CARE

MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE

VISITORS

ACCESS TO INFORMATION

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

PROVINCIAL ANIMAL

WELFARE ACT, 2008 /

LOI ONTARIENNE DE 2008

SUR LE BIEN-ÊTRE DES ANIMAUX

PEACE OFFICERS' MEMORIAL DAY

AND MEMORIAL ACT, 2008 /

LOI DE 2008

SUR LE JOUR DE COMMÉMORATION

DES AGENTS DE LA PAIX

ET LE MONUMENT COMMÉMORATIF

À LEUR MÉMOIRE

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

ANIMAL PROTECTION

CORPORATE TAX /

IMPÔT DES SOCIÉTÉS

ANIMAL PROTECTION

CORPORATE TAX

ANIMAL PROTECTION

CORPORATE TAX

VISITORS

MEMBER'S BIRTHDAY

MEMBER'S HEALTH

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

ORAL QUESTIONS

ONTARIO ECONOMY

EMPLOYMENT

EMPLOYMENT

EMPLOYMENT

TOBACCO CONTROL

EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS

PROPERTY TAXATION

SCHOOL CLOSURES

LOW-SPEED VEHICLES

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION

ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS

YOUTH ENTREPRENEURS

ONTARIO NORTHLAND

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

PROVINCIAL PURCHASING POLICY

PETITIONS

ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION

ABORIGINAL RIGHTS

EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

LORD'S PRAYER

HOSPITAL FUNDING

HOSPITAL FUNDING

LORD'S PRAYER

HOSPITAL FUNDING

LONG-TERM CARE

EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

LORD'S PRAYER

ORDERS OF THE DAY

ORDER OF BUSINESS

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

ACCESS TO ADOPTION RECORDS ACT (VITAL STATISTICS STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT), 2008 /

LOI DE 2008 SUR L'ACCÈS

AUX DOSSIERS D'ADOPTION (MODIFICATION DE LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE

LES STATISTIQUES DE L'ÉTAT CIVIL)

The House met at 1000.

Prayers.

PRIVATE MEMBERS'

PUBLIC BUSINESS

POVERTY /

PAUVRETÉ

Ms. Sophia Aggelonitis: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to move this resolution today, which reads:

That, in the opinion of this House, the Legislative Assembly of Ontario affirm that an effective plan for a strong economy must include setting targets for, and investing in, poverty reduction.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Pursuant to standing order 96, you have up to 10 minutes.

Ms. Sophia Aggelonitis: Many have experienced or witnessed poverty on some level. I think we could all agree that we need to continue working together to reduce poverty across the province. We need our people at their best, and we therefore have a shared responsibility to help lower poverty levels across the province.

Living below the poverty line is not something that a child has the option of choosing. As residents of this province, we need to protect our children and continue working towards lowering poverty levels. Poor children come from poor families. This simple fact is something we need to be reminded of when building a plan to tackle poverty.

My message today is about creating opportunity, building on what we've already done and continuing to work together. Our government has established a poverty reduction strategy, the first of its kind, with a strict timeline for results. Led by the Honourable Deb Matthews, the cabinet committee on poverty reduction has been diligent in uncovering and bringing to the forefront the issue of poverty today. I respect the hard work that has been done, and I look forward to hearing the recommendations at the end of the year. Great work has been done, but we will do more.

I have talked to many people who are currently living below the poverty line. Specifically, I've had the opportunity to speak to many strong women who find themselves in challenging times. Let me tell you about one such woman. I spoke to her again yesterday to get an update on her situation. This is a strong woman who had to go on Ontario Works to survive. She had everything, and then she had nothing. But here is what has happened. She found a job that she loves and was able to start over. She said to me that she's hopeful and happy that the government has recognized the urgency to deal with poverty. "This is a step in the right direction," she said.

These women need help; their children need help. I'm proud to be a part of a government that is hearing the voices of these individuals. In three out of four of the last provincial budgets, we have seen increased social assistance rates. This government has recognized that help is needed and will continue to build on the progress already made.

As this government has said and has proven, we are committed to investing in people. To assist women in helping them get out of poverty, we must provide them with the necessary tools. Investing in education and providing training programs for women will go a long way towards helping them achieve success. These women and their children deserve every opportunity possible, and we need to continue to provide support to them. Women make up a disproportionate share of the low-income population in Ontario. Women account for more than half of all adults living below the poverty line.

We need to provide the right tools to the women in this province who live in poverty, so that they can have every opportunity necessary to succeed.

Since the government has come into power, we have continued to recognize the importance of educating women living in poverty so that they may learn valuable lessons that will help them achieve success. Investing in our greatest asset is about investing in the people of Ontario. We must empower people to realize their full potential. We cannot forget those who need our help most. Poverty creates a lower quality of life. It often creates poor health and poor educational opportunities, poor employment prospects and a feeling of being excluded from society.

Reducing poverty and it effects on children in particular has been a key initiative of our government. Guided by a strong social conscience, we have advanced, and continue to advance, the poverty reduction agenda by implementing a range of initiatives that are designed to address both the consequences and the causes of poverty.

These initiatives will flow from a poverty reduction strategy that will include policies and measures that will have the greatest impact on those living in poverty in Ontario: initiatives such as the investment of $135 million to provide better dental care for low-income families, the investment of $15 million for capital projects to support Ministry of Children and Youth Services community agencies, the $100-million investment in social housing, and the $10-million investment to create a brand new program to help low-income Ontarians build equity and save for an education.

These demonstrate this government's commitment towards reducing poverty levels and making a real difference in the lives of Ontarians.

I'm also proud to say that our government has committed over $350 million for a second-career strategy, which will help unemployed workers obtain the skills they need for new careers, as well as a $75-million investment to further expand apprenticeship programs across the province.

All of us will benefit when poverty is reduced. Reducing poverty is not only about improving the health and quality of life of those who currently struggle to afford basic necessities; poverty reduction is also about ensuring a strong and prosperous future for our province.

Our poverty reduction strategy will also help those who want to become independent and self-reliant. The best solution to getting out of poverty is often a good job, and the best way to get a good job is to get a solid education. Our government will build upon actions designed to encourage students to stay in school and to help them find ways to further their education and develop skills that will enable them to find good jobs and become self-reliant.

As a past chamber president and a small business owner, I know first-hand that investing in people creates opportunities. By investing in our people, we are creating the strong workforce of today and tomorrow. We must focus on the youth of our province, on our women and other vulnerable groups. For our children, academic success begins with a healthy start to their day, which is why our government has announced that they will be doubling the funding to support the student nutrition program which provides healthy snacks and meals for more than 389,000 children across Ontario.

In my community, we are lucky to have so many community members who have been strong advocates for developing a strong poverty reduction plan. I'd like to take this opportunity to commend their hard work and dedication to this cause. In my riding of Hamilton Mountain, I'd like to commend the strong advocacy and vision of Ms. Denise Arkell of Neighbour to Neighbour and other community members from Hamilton Mountain. We are forming an advisory group to assist the needs that are specific to Hamilton Mountain.

I'd also like to commend the hard work of the Hamilton Roundtable for Poverty Reduction, which has been established by strong, resilient individuals such as Mark Chamberlain, Carolyn Milne, Craig Foye and Tom Cooper, to name just a few. These individuals have been instrumental in raising awareness to this critical issue. These are organizations that I believe can be an invaluable partner with our government, where together we can achieve success.

These individuals and their organizations have narrowed in on children as being one of the key areas that needs to be addressed when discussing poverty, and I'm fully committed to helping them achieve their goal.

The message appears to be the same wherever poverty is discussed: In order to achieve results, we need to invest in our children and provide them with the tools to be successful. We have made great strides, but must all work together. We all need our partners to step up to the plate and commit to lowering our levels of poverty in this province.

Without a doubt, addressing poverty is necessary to improve our economy and to promote an inclusive society. All women and men must be able to participate fully in the social and economic benefits of Ontario. I am committed to working together with my colleagues and advocacy groups across the province to achieve our goal on such an important matter.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Further debate? The member from Thornhill.

Mr. Peter Shurman: This is an interesting resolution. It's kind of like a resolution that might read, "that this assembly affirm that in order for one to have a lovely Saturday afternoon picnic, one must have blue skies"—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Member from Thornhill, you are not allowed to read from electronic devices.

Mr. Peter Shurman: Sorry.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Thank you.

Mr. Peter Shurman: It's the same as a resolution that would say that to have a nice picnic you must have blue skies and white fluffy clouds on a sunny day. It's interesting that a member of the governing party would stand up in this chamber and speak about poverty and the state of the economy when the policies of this government are responsible for the very conditions she now wants to address.

The member wishes to talk about the need for investment in poverty reduction measures and the need for targets. I'm in favour of taking real and meaningful steps to reduce the scourge of poverty, and I'm in favour of establishing realistic targets for poverty reduction. However, I find this supposed concern on the government benches hollow when there is so much that could have been done to help combat poverty in last week's budget, but they chose not to do so.

Let's talk about $390 in overtaxation owed by this government to every single man, woman and child, instead of Santa Claus-type infrastructure allocations welcomed by municipalities but representing no positive ongoing funding source. Let's talk about 194,000 manufacturing jobs lost in Ontario under this government's watch. We have an unemployment rate that is above the national average for the first time in 30 years, and we have business tax structures that are the least competitive in the entire country.

I could go on, but somehow the word "disingenuous" keeps popping into my mind. This resolution is another example of the McGuinty government talking the talk but not walking the walk. They feign concern about poverty, yet the fact is, their policies created an atmosphere in which poverty thrives.

If the McGuinty government was serious about poverty reduction, they would immediately reorganize our business tax structures and reduce tax rates to put us on a level footing with other jurisdictions in the country, and they would not be overtaxing every man, woman and child in Ontario by $390; $390 may not sound like much to the members of the government, but for those Ontarians living cheque to cheque, that $390 may be the difference between having a roof over their heads or not, or perhaps it means a little extra food on the table for a family struggling to make ends meet.

There are families across this province who risk being driven into poverty by the systemic discrimination perpetuated by this government. I'm talking about the families of autistic children I heard at a round table that I convened in my own constituency this past week. Parents go broke spending money on IBI and other therapies. Parents are being forced to give up jobs to take care of autistic children, due to inadequate programming in Ontario schools.

Like all parents, those of autistic children are just trying to give their kids the best possible start in life, yet the government repeatedly throws obstacles in their way and repeatedly hits them in the pocketbook. Perhaps the money spent taking these parents to court could be better used developing sound economic policies.

The population of the GTA and the greater Golden Horseshoe is due to dramatically increase over the next 25 years, and that growth is being driven by immigration. Census statistics released yesterday show an increase in the number of visible minority immigrants by 27% between 2001 and 2006. Driven by this immigration, the visible minority population of Canada now exceeds five million.

These immigrants come to Canada searching for a better life for their family. They are hard-working. They are driven. They share the same values as we do in the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario: individual dignity, hard work, achievement and a strong safety net in case there are unexpected hard times. The changing demographics of Ontario present unique challenges in addressing poverty that must be dealt with in a timely fashion.

A few weeks ago, I met with members of the Colour of Poverty campaign. This campaign, spearheaded by various cultural organizations from across the province, is aimed at raising awareness of the racialization of poverty, and I want to share some of their statistics with you.

The number of immigrants in Toronto who are poor has grown by 125%. Many live in unsafe and inadequate housing conditions. Ethnoracial minority group members, or people of colour, make up over 13% of Canada's population; by the year 2017, it will rise to 20%. By the year 2017, more than half of Toronto's population will be people of colour.

Nearly one in five immigrants experiences a state of chronic low income, which is more than twice the rate for Canadian-born individuals. Ethnoracial minority or non-European origin families make up 37% of all families in Toronto but account for 59% of poor families. Between 1980 and 2000, while the poverty rate for the non-racialized European heritage population fell by 28%, poverty among racialized families rose by 361%; and 32% of children in racialized families and 47% of children in recent immigrant families in Ontario live in poverty.

As our population ages, we will increasingly rely upon immigration to sustain our economy and our workforce. We cannot afford to allow this sizable proportion of our population to fall behind.

This brings me to my next point. This province, and indeed this country, is the envy of the world today because of the determination and sacrifice of our seniors. However, many of our proud seniors are facing a great indignity at the hands of the McGuinty government: the loss of their homes due to increasingly unaffordable property tax rates. We have seen it far too often: seniors forced to sell the home they raised their children in because they can no longer afford to pay property tax. For many seniors in this province, there is precious little to keep them from joining the ranks of the poverty-stricken.

Municipalities are not to blame. The Municipal Act restricts the income streams available to municipalities. Cities and towns are forced to put the cost for infrastructure capital and social services on the backs of ratepayers. When cash does flow from the province for much-needed municipal projects, it is in the form of restrictive and unfair one-off programs that are often lottery based.

As I said during my inaugural speech, if we in this Legislature cannot say the policies of the government are helping people, then it means those policies need to be reworked. This resolution does nothing more than pay lip service to the reality in which too many Ontarians find themselves every day. The people of Ontario cannot put food on their tables with the hollow words of the McGuinty Liberals and the member opposite. The budget does not address this, but throws gasoline on the fire. They need real solutions, and the need becomes increasingly acute day by day.

The opposition has been warning the government that action needs to be taken to save the economy and jobs. Economists have been repeatedly stating that Ontario is on track to become a have-not province. Sadly, this government does not listen, and it is the hard-working people of Ontario who pay the price. Much like Emperor Nero during the days of the Roman Empire, Premier McGuinty is content to do nothing, and Ontario burns.

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: First of all, I want to say thank you to the member from Hamilton Mountain. It's not her fault that she has to stand and defend the indefensible on behalf of the McGuinty government—and it is indefensible.

This is resolution, as we all know—I think we know it's silly. This is a government that just heard from Campaign 2000 yesterday some very startling statistics and some very disturbing ones. First of all, there's not only a situation from 2005 but a situation growing out of the situation that this government found themselves in, in 2005, of increasing poverty. We now have, according to them, one in eight, sometimes one in five—depending how you read the LICO, the low-income cut-off statistics—children living in poverty in this province. This is a disaster. This is something that we should be ashamed about and moving on very quickly.

What does it mean to move on something? What it means to move on something is not to stand up and read a resolution, it's not to strike a cabinet committee; it's actually to do something. If they really were concerned about poverty in this province, what would they do? You know, nothing needs to be studied. We have lots and lots of studies to show us what needs to be done. Here's what all the anti-poverty activists are calling for. They're calling for it with one voice.

First of all, they're calling for an increase in the minimum wage to the poverty line. Is that so difficult to do? It would cost the taxpayers nothing. Raise the minimum wage to $10.25 now, up to $11 in 2011, and then index it to the consumer price index. That's what they need to do.

What else do they need to do? They immediately need to end the clawback of the national child supplement. They have not done that. Instead, they've put in place a slightly less onerous clawback. That's all they've done. They need to do that.

They need to build housing. Again, with one voice, every anti-poverty activist has called for this government to build housing. Are they building housing? No, not one penny, not one penny in the new budget for new affordable housing units. In fact, the only money that appears is $100 million for the repair of existing units—only a third as much, I should point out, as the city of Toronto needs for repair of existing housing units. There's not one penny for new housing units.

What else would they do? They'd certainly help out small business. I couldn't agree more. Are they? No, they're not. What we've asked for is a phase-out reform of the business education tax on small Toronto and municipal businesses that are unfairly taxed. Are they doing that? No. Well, again, crumbs. With this government, it's always pie tomorrow, never pie today; crumbs today. So what do we get? We get crumbs today and a promise that in 2014 that something will change.

We need a Buy Ontario strategy. This is this what our party has put forward. We need more jobs in this province. We need action on the job front. We don't see that. We see retraining of one in 10 workers. What are we retraining them for? Jobs in Alberta; jobs in Manitoba. That's where they're going, and that's where they will go, because this government is not doing anything right here and right at home.

We know, we know, it's incontestable: Hugh Mackenzie of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives has said, and shown the statistics to prove it, that the poor in this province are now worse off than they were under Harris-Eves: in real dollars, worse off. That means those on ODSP, OW, minimum wage—the poor. Again, what does this government do? Nothing. They spin. They have a call-in number; they have a website; they have a photo op. But do they act? Absolutely not.

Inaction is egregious ethically as to make the matter worse. So now they are in this indefensible—and again, apologies to the poor member for Hamilton Mountain, who had to stand up and defend the indefensible—position of making the poor poorer in the province of Ontario.

Mr. Khalil Ramal: I want to stand up in my place and take the opportunity to congratulate the member for Hamilton Mountain for bringing such an important resolution to this House. To the members opposite and to the people of Ontario, what we did during our last mandate, and what we're planning to do in the future in this mandate—as she outlined, the vision of this government is to reduce the poverty level in the province of Ontario. As you know, it doesn't take a great thinker to think we have a problem in the province of Ontario. We have a poverty issue in Ontario. There's no doubt about it.

We're are not going to say, "No, we don't," and just live in a fantasy dream. No. It's a reality, yes, that we do have a problem.

That's why we addressed this issue during our last mandate. Almost the majority of the last budget, in 2007, was catered toward social issues and poverty issues, to address the working poor, to invest more money in this element of our society. Also, due to this strategy, in this mandate our Premier appointed the Honourable Deb Matthews to lead a cabinet committee to do studies and take initiatives in order to reduce poverty in Ontario, and she is doing so.

The member for Hamilton Mountain is a great activist in this group. She's also a member of the women's caucus, who meet on a regular basis to address this issue. As you know, the women in this province play a pivotal role in eliminating poverty in this beautiful province.

Since we got elected in 2003, we put a lot of steps forward in order to increase the minimum wage, to support the working poor in this province. The member from the Conservative Party was speaking. Do you know what they did? They put a freeze on it. They didn't do anything. And guess what? Since we got elected in 2003, we've increased Ontario Works and ODSP levels by almost 9%. Guess what the Conservatives did? They reduced it by 25%. This government cares about poor people.

As you know, the poor come from different elements; some are as a result of mental illness, some as a result of being newcomers to this province who don't know how to integrate, and some are seniors among us. That's why this government pays attention to all of those elements. For example, we increased Ontario Works, as I mentioned, by 9%. In this budget, there is $250 for every senior who makes less than $50,000, and a couple who make less than $60,000 are eligible to earn a certain amount of money and some kind of tax rebate if they want to remain in their homes.

As a member of this government, I'm proud of our initiatives.

Due to the constraint and the economical change in North America, due to the economical shift in this province, we had to restrain our budget; we couldn't do more than we are supposed to do if we had a $200-billion budget. But considering what we have, considering all the elements we are facing in the province of Ontario, we invested a great deal in our social issues like our dental program in order to support the poor among us. We invested more money in social housing: almost $100 million to fix a lot of social housing in the province.

The NDP member was saying that we didn't invest any money in supporting housing, but I want to tell her to go back to her record and our government's record and see how many millions of dollars we invested in many different communities across the province to support housing, to house the poor people among us. We believe strongly on this side of the House that our responsibility as a government is to support the most vulnerable people among us. It is our responsibility to support them, because we believe strongly that we cannot do it alone. All of us have to work together in order to create a productive society.

We have a lot of people among us below the poverty line, not because they want to be poor, but because of certain circumstances they couldn't make it. It's our responsibility as a government and as a society to give them the support, the lift and the ability to walk with us in order to utilize the ability to support themselves, support their families and also contribute to this beautiful economy and society. Only in this fashion and in this way can all of us prosper in Ontario.

The member for Hamilton Mountain brought to this House an important issue that all of us are concerned about. Every one of us deals with it from a different point of view. The member opposite from the Conservatives—they didn't care about poverty issues when they were in power; they slashed Ontario Works, ODSP, and they never built affordable homes or supported any social housing.

Mr. Michael Prue: You never built any either.

Mr. Khalil Ramal: We did a lot to support housing. Our record shows clearly how many millions we spent investing in social housing to support the people who have no ability to rent, because we think it's our obligation to give them the support and a lift.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to speak. I want to congratulate the member from Hamilton Mountain for bringing this important issue to us.

Ms. Sylvia Jones: I'm pleased to speak today on this important resolution. I can't believe there's anyone in this House who would disagree with the statement that your government should have an effective plan for a strong economy and your government should invest in poverty reduction. I also believe, however, that the unfortunate part of today's debate is that in the second term of the Liberal government, we're still talking about the importance of having an effective plan instead of discussing the plan. Where's the vision? Where's the plan? The McGuinty Liberals are in their fifth year and we still hear about the need for further study, further review.

I believe that Ontarians are looking for leadership in how the McGuinty Liberals are going to deal with poverty while our economy is slowing, because we all know that poverty will not be reduced if Ontario's economy is facing a downturn. Some economists are using the word "recession." After four years of high revenue, where does that leave us for the next four years?

As the community and social services critic for the Progressive Conservative caucus, I have been watching and reading with more than a passing interest as the social assistance rolls are increasing across Ontario. In Essex county, social assistance caseloads increased 9% in 2007 and are expected to increase by another 6% in 2008. Now, when I see caseloads increase like that, my first thought is, where are the jobs?

In Windsor, I think we know where the jobs are. Windsor's economy is shrinking because Ontario's manufacturing sector is shrinking because of this government's lack of vision. And now, we have the tragic outcome of Mayor Eddie Francis holding open houses to find ways to assist Windsor residents who are commuting to western Canada. Imagine; I've heard of this long-distance commute before, but never for Ontario. Bless Windsor for their ingenuity, and I wish the workers well, but this is not a long-term plan to keep Ontario strong.

When you start losing large portions of your population as they leave our province for jobs elsewhere, you start losing tax assessment dollars. And don't forget your social services costs continue to rise, because not everyone has the resources or training to find a job elsewhere, and you have fewer and fewer people paying to look after our most vulnerable. The model is not sustainable.

I'd like to highlight some of the points made in a recent paper from the Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity. For those of you unfamiliar with the work of the institute, they are an independent, not-for-profit organization established in 2001 to serve as a research arm for the Ontario Task Force on Competitiveness, Productivity and Economic Progress. Their goal is to continue to increase our standard of living in Ontario. The institute and the task force are supported through the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade, so I'm sure the members on the Liberal benches can receive a copy to peruse. I would recommend it. Some excellent thought has been put into this paper.

The institute states, "Canada has one of the most prosperous and competitive economies in the world," but—there's always a "but"—"we are not living up to our full economic potential that would increase well being for ourselves and future generations." The institute confirms that Canada's economy is one of the most successful, but against the United States, who happen to be our largest trading partner, we continue to fall further behind.

So how do we shrink that gap? The institute has proposed a number of initiatives, but for the purposes of our discussion here today, I will focus on one of their priorities: Build a smarter tax system to raise motivation for business to invest. "Currently, Canada has among the highest tax rates on business investment in the world. The federal government is taking dramatic action to give Canada an environment more conducive to business investment," and Ontario needs to follow Ottawa's lead. That is a direct quote out of the institute's paper.

Finally, the institute has highlighted four areas they would like to see the Ontario government focus on:

(1) Attitudes: Accept the challenge; overcome complacency.

(2) Investment: Focus on people and technology.

(3) Motivations: Pursue smarter taxation; remove capital tax immediately; reduce corporate income tax rates.

(4) Structures: Place a premium on creativity and innovation.

Sounds good, and where have we been hearing this before? From no less than the members of the Progressive Conservative party, of course. My colleague from Niagara West—Glanbrook has spoken often of the need to have a strong economy so that we can ensure our government has the resources needed to protect our most vulnerable citizens.

All of which brings us back to the member from Hamilton Mountain's resolution: that government should have "an effective plan for a strong economy," and our government should invest in "poverty reduction." One of the best ways to have a strong economy and have the ability to invest in poverty reduction, instead of just talking about it, is to remove the barriers so that everyone who can work has a job to go to. Then, collect a reasonable amount of tax to ensure that you can look after vulnerable citizens who cannot work.

I would hope that we stop talking about the need for a plan, and have this government bring forward their vision so that we can debate something concrete.

M me France Gélinas: I also would like to thank the member from Hamilton Mountain for trying her best this morning with this resolution. But as my colleague has mentioned, it is hard to spin when you have nothing to work from.

When the McGuinty government got elected, they were an activist government. They were going to put poverty at the top of their agenda. In 2003, Dalton McGuinty's Liberals promised to end the clawback on the national child benefit supplement. We all know that that promise was broken, but that didn't stop them from making it again in the 2007 election. We are now in April 2008, and the clawback is still happening.

Just as shameful: Families and individuals receiving social assistance, either through the Ontario disability support program, better known as ODSP, or Ontario Works, OW, are actually receiving less in provincial benefits when inflation is taken into account than when the government of Dalton McGuinty took power in 2003. It has gone down, not up. Ontario's poorest citizens fell behind during the Mike Harris years, but when the McGuinty government was elected they continued to fall behind. Nothing changed for them.

En 2000, les libéraux de Dalton McGuinty avaient promis de cesser de reprendre la prime nationale pour enfants du gouvernement fédéral. Ils ont eu quatre ans. Tout le monde sait qu'ils n'ont pas gardé cette promesse. Ils ont refait cette promesse-là en 2007, mais nous sommes maintenant en avril 2008 et la pratique continue. Le gouvernement fédéral donne 100 $ par mois aux familles qui ont des enfants pour les aider, mais pour les familles les plus pauvres, celles qui en ont le plus besoin, le gouvernement provincial reprend ces dollars.

Pour ceux qui vivent soit avec une incapacité, une invalidité ou un handicap, qui ne peuvent pas survenir à leurs besoins et qui ont besoin du programme d'appui aux personnes invalides ou du programme Ontario au travail, ces gens sont forcés de vivre sous le seuil de la pauvreté. Ils ont eu de petites augmentations pendant que le gouvernement libéral était au pouvoir, mais si on tient compte de l'index des coûts de la vie, ils reçoivent moins en ce moment qu'ils recevaient en 2003 lorsque le gouvernement a été élu.

Pendant les huit ans que le gouvernement de Mike Harris a été au pouvoir, les pauvres en ont arraché durâۥcela a été huit ans sans aucune augmentation. Avec le gouvernement McGuinty, ils avaient un peu d'espoir, mais on se rend compte, cinq ans plus tardâۥça fait cinq ans que les libéraux sont au pouvoir, et les gens qui reçoivent Ontario au travail et les gens qui reçoivent des primes d'invalidité sont plus pauvres maintenant qu'ils n'étaient en 2003.

Meanwhile, Ontario's working poor are also falling further and further behind. In Dalton McGuinty's Ontario, 1.2 million working men and women earn less than $10 an hour. Those 1.2 million Ontarians are predominantly women, young people and new Canadians. In fact, people working 40 hours a week at $8.75 an hour are still $4,000 below the poverty line. The NDP believes that aggressive measures should have been taken in the provincial budget to bring the level of poverty down, but it didn't happen.

Pour 1,2 million de travailleurs, ce sont les Ontariens et les Ontariennes qui gagnent moins de 10 $ de l'heure, et on ne se fait pas d'illusion : de ces 1,2 million de personnes-là, la plupart d'entre elles sont des femmes, des personnes jeunes et des nouveaux arrivants. Pour ceux qui travaillent 40 heures par semaine—on parle d'un job à temps plein à 8,75 $ de l'heure ; c'est le salaire minimum en ce moment—ces gens-là sont encore 4 000 $ sous le seuil de la pauvreté. Ça veut dire que tu ne peux pas payer ton loyer, l'épicerie, un petit peu de linge et le transport pour te rendre au travail. Il n'y en a pas suffisamment.

The province announced that they were doubling the meals for children at school and community centres through the student nutrition program. That sounded like good news to me. I was excited about that. Unfortunately, the program is so meagre that even when you double it, all it means is an extra $50 a year for each of the 400,000 students who need that program and are expected to benefit. If you do the math, that means a whole dollar a week. It used to be 50 cents. They've added another 50 cents. It's now a dollar.

Le programme de nutrition va doubler. Au début, ça semble comme une bonne nouvelle : on va doubler le budget. On va y investir des millions de dollars de plus. Donc, au début j'étais assez contente. J'ai dit, « Bon, bien. Voilà finalement quelque chose de bien. » Mais quand on commence à faire un petit peu de maths en arrière de ça, tu te rends compte que ça veut dire 50 $ par enfant, parce qu'il y a environ 400 000 enfants qui vivent dans la pauvreté en Ontario. Ça veut dire un dollar de plus—un dollar par semaine. Ils recevaient 50 sous; ils reçoivent 50 sous de plus—un dollar par semaine.

Est-ce qu'il n'y a pas un libéral qui est allé faire l'épicerie depuis 20 ans ? Un dollar par semaine ne t'achète pas beaucoup de nourriture. Ces enfants-là vont continuer d'avoir faim, vont continuer d'avoir de la misère à bien performer à l'école.

The NDP moved a number of motions outlining an ambitious anti-poverty program. We talked about the elimination of the national child benefit clawback and immediately implementing the full Ontario child benefit, which would provide equal benefit to all low-income families, regardless of resources. We talked about publicly funded child care. We talked about Ontario Smiles, which would provide dental care to the poorest. We talked about increasing minimum wage to $10.25 an hour, and to $11.25 by 2011. We talked about increasing ODSP and annexing it to the cost of living. But none of this happened. Le gouvernement n'a pas écouté les recommandations des néo-démocrates.

On voulait arrêter d'enlever la prime nationale aux enfants les plus pauvres. Ils ne nous ont pas écoutés.

On voulait que le supplément de l'Ontario soit appliqué à son plein potentiel tout de suite. Mais non ; on devra attendre un autre quatre ans.

On voulait également un système de garderies publiques qui permet à toutes les familles qui ont besoin d'un système de garderies d'y avoir accès à un prix modique, un peu sous le régime qui est au Québec en ce moment à 7 $ par jour.

On avait un plan ambitieux pour s'assurer que nos dents étaient inclus dans le système le santé. C'est à dire que s'il y a une personne qui ne peut pas aller chez le dentiste, on aurait un programme pour l'aider.

On voudrait également augmenter le salaire minimum à 10,25 $ maintenant, l'indexer au coût de la vie, et le monter à 11,25 $ par 2011. Rien de ça n'a été retenu.

When the McGuinty government promised poverty was going to be at the top of the agenda, we thought we would see leadership. What we saw was a big letdown of the poorest in Ontario.

Quand les libéraux de McGuinty nous ont dit qu'ils seraient sérieux face à la pauvreté et qu'elle serait au-dessus de l'ordre du jour, ça nous a donné bon espoir. Mais ce qu'on a vu, ce n'est pas du leadership pour les personnes les plus pauvres. Cela a été un abandon total. Ceci n'est pas acceptable.

Mrs. Laura Albanese: I am very pleased to rise today and speak in support of this resolution put forth by my colleague from Hamilton Mountain.

My own riding of York South—Weston has some things in common with Hamilton Mountain. Both of these ridings have historically been places of arrival for many newcomers to our province. These hard-working people contributed to Ontario's growth over the decades, often by working in the manufacturing sector. Today, due to the changing dynamics of global markets and the emergence of new technology, my riding of York South—Weston has been affected by the migration of manufacturing jobs to the greater Toronto area and even beyond. For example, the Kodak plant, which opened in 1913, actually closed in 2005.

The residents of Hamilton Mountain and York South—Weston want to provide for themselves and their families. They have a strong work ethic and are ready to roll up their sleeves. But many are in need of help. Many residents continue to lag behind the economic growth and prosperity that are enjoyed by so many other Ontario communities. We know that the small business sector in particular is in need of revitalization. Many in our workforce must have innovative retraining opportunities if they are to continue to be productive and self-sustaining citizens in the future.

One of the key pillars of our government's budget approved just yesterday is retraining. We intend to give people who are eager to work the tools necessary to acquire the skills so that they may contribute by partici-pating in the growing field of today's economy.

An effective plan for a strong economy must include investing in poverty reduction. That is why we are moving in the right direction by working on a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy. We need a long-term vision. The area of Weston-Mount Dennis in the riding of York South—Weston is one of the 13 priority neighbourhoods identified by the city of Toronto and the United Way. This is one of the areas which can greatly benefit and be positively affected by a poverty reduction strategy. My riding is also home to many single-parent families who would benefit from such a strategy.

Our government strives to have a balanced approach. History teaches us that an inclusive and compassionate society—a society that reaches out and helps people when they are most in need—is a society that works and can grow. Leading thinkers like Richard Florida remind us that the most important aspect in the new economy is the creative capital inherent in each person. Our government's goal is to help each person realize their potential, give families a chance to get ahead and give people who need it access to programs so that they may overcome temporary economic challenges and not get caught up in the vicious poverty cycle.

The residents in ridings such as Hamilton Mountain and York South—Weston are particularly vulnerable in these changing economic times. Therefore, I support the resolution put forth by the member from Hamilton Mountain. This is an important issue. I think it's important that everyone has a chance at success, regardless of temporary shifting economic paradigms.

Mr. Michael Prue: I only have a minute and a half, so I would like to quote one of my favourite authors on Liberals and what they try to spin. It's 75 years old. It's a guy by the name of Goerwell, and he writes as follows: "Anyone who relishes empty phrases, who believes in catchwords, ornamental

preambles and in the supreme power of humbuggery, will always find persons available to give an hour's bombastic talk on any subject between the remotest star and the centre of the earth." I think what we have here today is a very good example of what Goerwell said in 1931.

I grew up in a place called Regent Park, and people know what that place is like today, as it was when I was a boy. There was poverty everywhere and people talked about doing something about it. In fact, it was talk and talk and more talk, and in the end very little was done.

I read this today, the well-meaning phrase, I'm sure, from the member from Hamilton Mountain: to invest in poverty reduction. With the greatest of respect, the government had an option to do that in the budget and failed. They gave 2% for those poor people on ODSP, and then when the questions were asked, it's only in the last quarter of the year. They have to wait nine months to even see the 2%. They said they were giving some money to people on ODSP, but in fact there is absolutely nothing at this point.

Ms. Leeanna Pendergast: I rise today to support the resolution brought forward by my colleague the member from Hamilton Mountain, to support the McGuinty government's commitment to poverty reduction and to reiterate that an effective plan for a strong economy must include setting targets for and investing in poverty reduction.

The McGuinty government is committed to improving the quality of life of all Ontarians. This includes families and vulnerable citizens. This government is taking action under the government's poverty reduction strategy: dental care for low-income families; a student nutrition program—when I'm talking to my communities in Kitchener—Conestoga, $32 million is not meagre; a 2% increase to benefits under Ontario Works and the Ontario disability support program, increasing the comfort allowance for residents of long-term-care homes in 2008-09; a new property tax grant over five years for low- and moderate-income seniors, homeowners.

The McGuinty government is committed to its people. Ontario's advantage is its people. We've made a commitment to children and youth to give them the best possible elementary, secondary and post-secondary education. We are giving workers of all ages ongoing opportunities to upgrade their skills and pursue lifelong learning. We're giving workers facing change the support and long-term retraining they need, not just to find new jobs but to find better jobs. We're giving newcomers to Ontario the information, access, training and language skills they need to reach their full potential.

We're giving the unemployed and underemployed the literacy skills, the academic upgrading, the training and the support they need to enter the workforce.

The McGuinty government is committed to new measures to tackle poverty and to build opportunity. Ontario's plan for a strong economy includes supporting low-income families so that everyone can have the opportunity to succeed in the 21st century. Premier McGuinty outlined this when he stated, "Ontario is only at its best when all of us are working, building and dreaming together. Supporting each other is not only the right thing to do, it is also the smart thing to do and part of our plan for a stronger economy."

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Ms. Aggelonitis, you have up to two minutes to respond.

Ms. Sophia Aggelonitis: I'd like to thank the members from Thornhill, Parkdale—High Park, London—Fanshawe, Dufferin—Caledon, Nickel Belt, York South—Weston, Beaches—East York and Kitchener—Conestoga for their very insightful comments this morning.

Poverty is in all of our communities, and I firmly believe that we need to continue working together to achieve our goals. I am committed to helping the cause of poverty reduction across this province, and I look forward to working with all of my colleagues in the House and the community members to achieve further success. This is an important issue for all of us. It is something we have made great strides in, but there is more to do, and we will do more.

WATER QUALITY /

QUALITÉ DE L'EAU

Mrs. Carol Mitchell: I move that, in the opinion of this House, the Green Ribbon beach program, an important environmental initiative proposed by the Lake Huron Centre for Coastal Conservation, be supported.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Pursuant to standing order 96, Mrs. Mitchell, you have up to 10 minutes.

Mrs. Carol Mitchell: I rise this morning to speak on a matter of significant importance, not just to my constituents in Huron—Bruce, but to all of those in the province who are concerned about water quality and the condition of our Ontario beaches.

Members of this Legislature are very concerned about the state of the province's drinking water and the role that the Great Lakes play in that equation.

As you know, the entire western coast of my riding runs along Lake Huron, from Grand Bend to Southampton, making the issue of beach standards an important matter for my constituents. The quality and safety of the beaches in my riding also goes a long way toward supporting the local tourism industry in many of the coastal communities, and it certainly has a direct impact on our local economy.

The green ribbon beach program is proposed as a framework to recognize excellence in environmental stewardship for beaches located in rural communities. This program has been based on the very successful but more urban-focused Blue Flag program. The Blue Flag program is an internationally recognized beach water quality program that is sponsored and administered by Environmental Defence here in Canada.

Before speaking to the green ribbon program, I just want to discuss some of the key considerations of the Blue Flag program and several of the requirements that have made it successful in many of the urban regions of this province. This will also help to illustrate how the green ribbon program would be successful in a similar manner but with a differentiation in the requirements that will make for a stronger focus on the province's rural beaches.

As I stated before, the eligibility requirements for the Blue Flag program have a decidedly more urban focus when it comes to beach protection. To offer credence to the green ribbon program, I just want to use a few examples.

With the Blue Flag program, there's a necessity for lifeguards. When we think about the rural areas, being able to provide the life-saving equipment and the lifeguards at a given beach area becomes very problematic. The presence of lifeguards at a Blue Flag beach is recommended in order to increase the beach's safety level, especially in beaches with a higher number of beach-goers. For rural areas, this specification simply would not be possible.

The beachfront along Lake Huron in my riding extends far past the urban boundaries of the towns, and the cost in both dollars and human resources to have lifeguards and safety equipment at all beach locations is simply not achievable.

Another of the requirements for the Blue Flag certification is that the beach in question must be constantly patrolled by authorized and adequate security personnel. While this is a very necessary element for safety at urban beaches, as my previous point indicated, it's untenable in smaller rural communities, from both a fiscal and human resource perspective.

Another condition of the Blue Flag program is the requirement that a supply of potable drinking water must be available at the beach at all times. It's specified that this source or water can be by way of fountain, pipe or faucet, but that it must be protected from contamination by animals. While this, again, is a very noble and often necessary requirement for a public beach in a populated area, I would again argue that it would become a near impossibility for those requirements to be followed on many of the vast beachfronts along Lake Huron.

Despite my previous statements—I want to be very, very clear on this—I am by no means not lending very, very strong support to the Blue Flag program. I feel that it is a very worthwhile program and one that adds a great deal of value to the communities across the province that have achieved certification.

For just one moment, I want to talk about who has achieved certification within my riding. The municipality of Kincardine has received accreditation as a Blue Flag beach. Another beach in the town of Goderich is currently a candidate for certification.

However, as I alluded to earlier, the Blue Flag designation is simply not attainable for many of the smaller rural areas that have beaches along Lake Huron. That is why the green ribbon award is of great benefit to the small communities where environmental sustainability of their beaches is certainly needed.

This brings me back to the green ribbon program. This award, which proposes to recognize those beaches which are prized for their high quality, where care is taken to preserve their natural, unspoiled environment, offers many similar benefits to the Blue Flag designation, but its centre focuses on helping small rural beaches reach the certification. The green ribbon program proposes a central, integral role in the protection of beaches for those people who live near the beach. The program is unique and it emphasizes local stewardship by volunteers.

Eligibility for the green ribbon program award involves five key requirements. The first requirement is that the eligible beach must be managed carefully and in consultation with the local conservation organizations as part of a stewardship plan that respects the environmentally sensitive nature of the beach.

Secondly, the program distinguishes eligible beaches as those areas that have received active community contribution in implementing numerous beach stewardship practices.

A third requirement the green ribbon program indicates is that eligible beaches must be relatively free from structures and erosion protection that serve to harden the coast and restrict natural process.

The green ribbon beach program award has also set out 15 desired objectives that this program can achieve, if implemented. Due to constraints on time today, I cannot go into specific details, but I would encourage you to go to the website for the Lake Huron Centre for Coastal Conservation.

I'd like to recognize the Lake Huron Centre for Coastal Conservation, which is the organization that has taken the time and the effort to propose the green ribbon beach program award. The Lake Huron Centre for Coastal Conservation, which is celebrating its 20th anniversary this year, has set forward the goals of protecting and restoring the coastal environment of Lake Huron and further promoting a healthy ecosystem along the coast.

The coastal centre, which is a registered, not-for-profit charitable organization, has benefited from the work of thousands of community volunteers dedicated to the conservation of Lake Huron's natural shoreline environment. It functions as the local coastal management resource team for lakeshore communities, partnering conservation authorities, government agencies and the public.

The centre has also been the sponsor for an annual public seminar in the community, including last year's It All Ends Up in the Lake conference, which was also very well attended. This year, the centre will host a conference entitled Is the Coast Clear? on May 23. This will commemorate the 10th anniversary of this conference within Huron—Bruce.

Mr. Jeff Leal: You should attend that one.

Mrs. Carol Mitchell: I will be there, as I have been at all the other conferences. It is certainly a very worthwhile day.

I believe that programs such as the proposed green ribbon award are setting their objectives towards helping to maintain and protect our Great Lakes. This is one of the central reasons why I'm here today supporting this very important program, and I'm asking for your support as well.

The protection of our Great Lakes through such programs is yet another way in which we—all of us today, as legislative members—can help this very worthy cause: to recognize the thousands of volunteers that have dedicated good portions of their lives, their children's lives and their grandchildren's lives to ensure that we have a water system that will meet the needs of all Ontarians into the future. It's something that is a constant work-in-progress.

Whatever we can do to raise the awareness of what we can do as individuals, what we can do as groups and what we can do as legislative members—let's all support it today.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Further debate?

Mr. Randy Hillier: Good morning. I have to say that when I was seeking election and looking forward to coming to Queen's Park, I thought we would be debating the great subjects and topics of interest and concern for Ontario: the high unemployment, the half a million people without family doctors, the need for mental health assistance and care and so many important subjects. I'm beginning to believe that the more ridiculous the subject, the more importance we place on it down here.

I was reading through this green ribbon program the other night and it sounds very good. We're here for debate right at the moment, but of course, in order to have debate there must be a subject of substance, not just fluff. This sounds good, it sounds fluffy, it sounds like motherhood and apple pie, but really, it's somewhat disturbing.

First off, when you look up in the dictionary the words "coastal" or "coast," you'll see that it is a saltwater shoreline. I've been living in Ontario all my life. I have never found a saltwater body here in Ontario. Maybe there is—

Mr. Michael Prue: Hudson Bay.

Mr. Randy Hillier: Oh, you're right. I don't think the honourable member was thinking of the beaches of Hudson Bay when this was done, though.

Anyway, we have to really look at this. Cleaning up a beach, cleaning up your property—public property, private property—is a good and honourable thing to do. I know in my own neighbourhood—I live on a road that's called the dump road in Lanark county. From time to time, litter and debris get thrown on the road; it falls out of trucks, whatever. We don't have a committee and we don't get a green ribbon, but everybody in the community goes out and picks up the garbage as it falls off the trucks. That really is what people in rural Ontario and in all of Ontario are all about. People don't need to be legislated or get a little green ribbon on their forehead for picking up some garbage.

I think the important things here that we have to talk about in this House are getting lost in the fluff. Here is a binder, and on every page in it is a young man or woman from Ontario who has been denied an apprenticeship job because of the government's restrictive policies on apprenticeship ratios.

I have another note here. In my area alone, 235 people with intellectual disabilities cannot find a home; 273 people are on wait-lists for program services such as respite care, therapy, clinical assessment, and the list goes on and on. And what does this government come up with? Fluff. Where is the substantive debate? Where is the honest and forthright discussion about the real concerns and subjects of interest and importance to the people of rural Ontario?

Let me read something out of this green ribbon program. "Litter removing is accomplished without mechanical equipment, thereby leaving all naturally occurring debris, such as driftwood and other strandline debris, to interact with the natural beach process, unless it becomes contaminated with a substance that is hazardous to public health."

That's a long-winded way to say pick up the Tim Hortons cup if you see it on the beach. Really, do we need to direct people to do that? Do we need to give them a little green star or ribbon on their forehead if they did pick it up? I know the people in my community, and I think the people in the honourable member's community as well, are thoughtful, respectful people who don't need Big Brother giving them a little push and a little pat on the back to pick up some flotsam or jetsam that has landed on our coastal environment.

I could go on and on, but the people of Huron—Bruce, just like the people of Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, expect a higher calibre of debate and discussion. They expect the people in this House to stand up and represent them, to fix the economy where it has been broken, to get family doctors where there are none available. They expect more from us than just fluff.

We need to deliver more to the people of rural Ontario. We need to deliver more to all people in Ontario. Let us raise our awareness, let us raise the calibre of our discussion, and let us do what is right for everybody in Ontario and fix the real problems.

Mr. Michael Prue: It's a pleasure to be here today to speak to this issue. How can one say one cannot support any environmental initiative, no matter how small, that is going to help our communities, help have better beaches, help people to swim and have safer surroundings?

The green ribbon initiative, as the mover has stated, is part and parcel of the larger Blue Flag initiative. If I can speak about how effective that has been, to add some credibility to her motion, the Blue Flag initiative, which has been adopted in and around the city of Toronto, has proved to be an amazing vehicle to bring people into our city and to have Torontonians recognize the clarity of the water, the safety of the beaches and that it is a good and safe place to take one's family on a hot summer day.

In fact, most of the beaches that have been recognized and have blue flags flying above them are in my riding of Beaches—East York. The safest beach of all, I understand, is Clarke Beach which is in the adjacent riding of Toronto—Danforth, but Woodbine Beaches is a very close second.

We go each year at the start of the Blue Flag season to raise the blue flag to ensure that the beach is in pristine condition, that the workers have been out there picking up the bottles, cans and winter detritus that are strewn around. It looks very nice, and when you go into the water, although it is a little chilly when we go in there toward the end of June, it is clear and safe. At the beach, we'll have something I think the green ribbon does not, and that is excellent washroom facilities, facilities for people to have barbecues and family picnics—picnic tables, drinking water and all those other things.

I support the initiative, but I have to question whether or not the initiative is going to deliver what people actually want and need. I agree that rural municipalities do not have the wherewithal or the monies or the staff to ensure that a green ribbon beach will meet the same conditions of a Blue Flag beach in a large municipality like my own.

What I would like to see, which is not contained within the body of the motion and perhaps cannot be contained because it involves money—and I understand the constraints that all members have in private members' business—if this member is successful in having her bill passed today, is that the McGuinty government properly fund beach safety, that the McGuinty government properly fund the protection and restoration of Ontario lakes, particularly the Great Lakes, and that the McGuinty government in a budget at some point properly fund the municipalities, particularly the small ones along Lake Huron where this initiative is going to take place, so that they can actually do more than just declare it a green beach.

Perhaps they can do as much as meet the requirements of a Blue Flag beach; they can put in picnic tables and washroom facilities, they can put in clean potable drinking water in all of the areas, so that they can meet the international standard.

To state that simply, you want to have an environmentally sound beach is a good thing, but to do something to ensure that the entire world knows about it is certainly something else. If this member is serious, then I would suggest not only is it the passage of this motion, but it is forcing the government to do the right thing and to fund those small municipalities so that they too can meet international standards.

I have occasion from time to time to spend some of my holidays along Lake Huron. My wife in particular thinks that the town of Goderich and the town of Bayfield are two of her favourite places not only in this province, but in the world. She would recognize that on the beaches of those communities, as well as those in Southampton, Grand Bend, Kincardine and all the other beaches and towns up and down that wonderful coast, they have a similar opportunity to what we enjoy in Toronto.

So I encourage the member not only for having put this forward, but I also encourage her to go the extra mile and convince her government that funds should be spent on this worthwhile endeavour, and not just to be content with having a green ribbon beach. As good as that may sound, it's not going to bring people and tourists into that area, because they're not going to understand the importance of green ribbons,

whereas internationally, they certainly will understand when they see a blue flag flying above each of these cities and towns and their respective municipal beaches.

I would be remiss, though, if I did not talk about something else in my community, which is the effect that the wonderful Blue Flag beaches have in bringing people in our communities down to the waterfront in the summer months, in bringing people from around the world to discover how beautiful Ontario and Toronto are in this respect—and then to have again an assault on our neighbourhoods in close proximity to those beaches.

I'm speaking about the assault that is taking place just west of Beaches—East York and the riding of Toronto—Danforth, but certainly within eyesight of the border, of big-box retail moving along Eastern Avenue and all of the lands south of Eastern Avenue which were supposed to, in Toronto's dream, be used for parks and recreation and beachfront. Instead, what we are seeing is developers moving in, in a great way, with the support not of the city of Toronto, but with the support of some provincial agencies, to turn what was supposed to be parkland and beachfront into big-box retail.

I don't have to tell you what that's going to be like, because I have been to many small towns where I have seen the downtowns completely gutted. I remember in particular going to Brantford and seeing not a single store open in that once-vibrant community, and everybody is out by the Wal-Mart. I have to tell you, we don't want that experience around our Blue Flag beaches.

We don't want the experience of having Queen Street, which is probably the finest shopping street in all of Canada in terms of small stores and individual, friendly service, turned into a ghost town, that has been visited upon so many small towns in Ontario, where big retailers have built on the outskirts of the town and literally siphoned and sucked the life right out of the communities. We do not want the deleterious effect in our community of neighbourhoods being destroyed, of traffic increasing, of parking and pollution, the loss of potential parkland.

We have already seen a great opportunity lost when this government chose to steamroll ahead with the Portlands Energy project, a place that was supposed to have been parkland, a place that was right on the waterfront, and a place which has now been lost for generations. We are asking this government not to lend your support and your credibility to those who would build big-box retail.

The city of Toronto is not supporting it, but the developers have said that they intend, with their army of accountants, their army of planners and their army of lawyers, to descend upon the Ontario Municipal Board where they intend to get what they want. We are asking, if this government is serious about Green Ribbon beaches, is serious about blue flags and the environment, is serious about neighbourhoods, to do one more thing other than pass this motion, and that is to put a stop to the abomination that is about to be descended upon my community.

I think that's all I have to say on this particular issue. I wish the member well. I hope that the green ribbon program will make even better those communities along Lake Huron, but I ask that the members of her government really take a close and serious look at what doing nothing in terms of environmental initiatives in my community and doing far too little in her own is wreaking upon the people of this wonderful province.

Mr. Khalil Ramal: I want to stand up and support my colleague the member from Huron—Bruce and her resolution, the green ribbon initiative. It's a very good initiative, especially because the member comes from the area. It's also important to me as a member from London, where we're trying to create a water project called HELP. This project is going to feed London and the surrounding area. It's going to provide for almost 6,500 square kilometres in the whole region. I think it's important for us to have Lake Huron protected and safe and clean.

Before 2003, the environment was all about Walkerton; after 2003, there are many different initiatives. You have the greenbelt, which is the best-protected area in the whole world, and initiatives including the Clean Water Act—which is, I believe, the most important bill in the whole history of the province of Ontario—to protect wells and water in our province.

I remember when the member from Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington was in Cornwall. He stood up in his old capacity with his group to protest that bill. He doesn't want the government to pass that bill, because he believed strongly back then that it's not our responsibility as a government to interfere in any issue concerning the people of Ontario. Despite his position and his party's position, we passed that bill to protect our environment, to protect our water sources, and to make sure the people of this province drink safe water.

That's why this resolution is important to us as a government, to us as a society, and to me as the member from London—Fanshawe. We are going to benefit a great deal from this project, because we want to make sure that the sources of water we're going to drink from in the future will be clean and also safe.

I want to congratulate the member from Huron—Bruce, who always brings forward great initiatives, and also for being a great advocate for her constituents and the whole area. She brings a different perspective because she served as a municipal councillor for a long time, and she knows first-hand the important issues for her community, especially when it comes to protecting lakes and water shores. Many people come from across the province of Ontario and sometimes the United States to visit and enjoy the beaches in her riding.

I think she has a vested interest in creating initiatives to protect those shores and beaches, because it is important. She wants tourist activity in her area. She wants people to come from across Ontario, the United States, wherever, to enjoy clean beaches. She also wants to recognize the people who protect those waterfronts and make sure they are clean and safe for all the people who want to visit.

Mr. Speaker, thank you very much for allowing me to speak. I want to end by congratulating the member for Huron—Bruce, and also to say that I'm going to support this resolution.

Ms. Laurie Scott: I'm pleased to join the discussion this morning on private members' business and the resolution brought forward by the member from Huron—Bruce: that, in the opinion of this House, the green ribbon beach program, an important environmental initiative proposed by the Lake Huron Centre for Coastal Conservation, be supported. I just wanted to get that on the record for those watching at home so they can catch up to the debate.

With respect to some of the qualifications the member spoke about, we always want to praise those people who want to gather in our communities to help us have cleaner beaches in our areas. This is proposed by her riding. It's a good plan. What can you say that we cannot praise and we cannot encourage? This is what we want to do, encourage and educate people about the need to work together to have a cleaner environment. I certainly have a lot of wonderful areas in my riding of Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, beaches along my rivers and lakes, some right in the downtown sectors.

Bobcaygeon and Fenelon Falls have public beaches. I know Fenelon Falls had a bit of a problem last year with their public beach, but we're going be open for business, we hope, this year.

Mr. Jeff Leal: I've got to tell you, they love that in Kinmount.

Ms. Laurie Scott: Yes, the member from Peterborough always likes to engage in conversation: We certainly have a lovely beach area in Kinmount, in a park area, a rehabilitation that I can say was community driven by the Austin Sawmill, and their family, and how that cleanup has occurred. It's a beautiful park that they all bike, and the trails go through. So that's good.

We had a little bit of a tough issue last year. I'll remind the members about the carp issue and the challenging time that invoked in our waters when we had many factors aligning. We had a large carp die-off and they washed up on shores and beaches and went through many of our lake systems on the Trent system. It was great that the community—the permanent residents, the cottage owners who are seasonal, the municipality—worked very hard. We were hoping for a little bit more assistance from MNR, but they did what they could with the resources they had to help clean up the issue and not affect our tourism.

The health unit was involved. An unpleasant situation, it took a while to clean it up, but as I have mentioned, everyone came together and worked really hard at disposing of the carp issue.

The member for Huron—Bruce mentioned in her remarks the importance of stewardship, and I'd like to comment for the hard-working farmers. I know she has many in her riding, as I have in mine. They're certainly the stewards of the land. Obviously, they want to do the best practices possible on their land. They reap their income, or they try to these days, from the resources of the land, and they are great environmental stewards. They want to work with government. I know there are a lot of regulations out there that certainly make it a little more difficult.

A program that the member from Haldimand—Norfolk—Brant often talks about is the ALUS program, more of the carrot-engaging education approach,

whereas the last few years the farmers have felt it has been regulation and more hammers. I think that's just something we need to keep in mind.

The member for London—Fanshawe brought up the Clean Water Act. Many of us in the Legislature this morning were on tour with the Clean Water Act. The points that were made—and a lot came out, especially in Peterborough, which certainly was the closest hearing that we have to my riding. A lot of what was brought forward—and they were correct—was the downloading on to the municipalities. They're saying source water protection should be a provincial responsibility, so we want to make clear that the studies go out, the committees are set up.

We're hoping that the government watches very closely, because we felt, and the municipalities certainly felt, it was another download on to the municipalities and it really should have been the provincial responsibility for source water protection. We fought that battle many times here, but I just wanted to highlight that again it was more of a stick approach, not the carrot approach that we would like to see, especially in rural Ontario.

I know my colleague for Simcoe—Grey wants to speak in a few minutes, so I'll start to wrap up. The last couple of Auditor General's reports have been titled Neglecting Our Obligations and Reconciling Our Priorities. There are some good points in both of those. It speaks to this bill we're supportive of. Why would you not be supportive of this private member's resolution coming before us this morning? But the Liberal government really has to have some accurate policies and make the environment more of a priority than it has in a lot of respects. There are a lot of priorities in the environment out there. Today we're supporting the resolution brought forward by the member for Huron—Bruce.

M me France Gélinas: The Lake Huron Centre for Coastal Conservation does important work protecting and restoring the Lake Huron coastal environment and promoting a healthy coast system. New Democrats support these goals, not just in regard to Lake Huron, but with respect to all lakes across Ontario.

The Lake Huron Centre for Coastal Conservation fait un travail important afin de protéger et de restaurer l'environnement riverain du lac Huron et de faire la promotion d'un écosystème riverain sain et en santé. Nous, les néo-démocrates, appuyons et faisons la promotion de ces buts, pas seulement pour le lac Huron mais pour tous nos lacs en Ontario.

It is for those reasons that we have taken such a strong stance against the actions of the McGuinty Liberal government which have put our lakes in jeopardy. One such example is the infamous Highway 404 extension in northern York region.

Nous, les néo-démocrates, nous sommes opposés avec vigueur contre les actions du gouvernement McGuinty qui mettent nos lacs en péril. Un bon exemple est la fameuse extension de l'autoroute 404 au nord de la région de York.

This $250-million extension of Highway 404 carves through the greenbelt and will fuel sprawl along the northern boundary of south Simcoe county. Mr. Speaker, $250 million would protect and restore a lot of degraded lakes and shorelines in Ontario, including Lake Huron and Lake Simcoe.

Le gouvernement dépense présentement 250 $ millions pour l'extension de l'autoroute 404, 250 $ millions qui pourraient être utilisés pour protéger et restaurer plusieurs de nos lacs, de nos environnements riverains du lac Huron, du lac Simcoe, et, laissez-moi ajouter, du lac Simon, du lac Charles et du lac Kelly.

In my riding, hundreds of constituents are meeting regularly to try to restore and protect Kelly Lake, Simon Lake, Mud Lake, McCharles Lake. Every summer, all of those lakes are so full of algae that you could walk across them. The people have gotten together, pooled their resources, and have tried everything. They've tried raking the algae out and letting it dry on the beach; that didn't work. Then the next year, Science North helped us a little bit by giving us one of their scientists. They thought that bales of barley could help.

So here we are putting chicken wire around bales of barley, and Javex bottles to make them float, to try to protect the shores of all those lakes—mainly Simon Lake and McCharles Lake. It helped a bit, but by the end of summer the lake was green again. They've banned fertilizer completely. Nobody on the shores of those lakes or the feeders will use fertilizer, but to no avail.

There are solutions, but those solutions take money. They turned to the municipalities. Well, the municipalities are having a tough time balancing their books right now. With all of the downloading of provincially mandated programs that are now being funded by our municipalities, they don't have the cash to help people who want to improve their lakes, who want to do the type of work that the member is suggesting happen in our ridings. In the riding of Nickel Belt, people would like those environmental projects to take place, but the municipalities can't help, and the provincial government is not helping either.

But we have $250 million being invested in a project that would actually be detrimental to Lake Simcoe and they have no problem with that.

Dans mon comté, nous avons une série de lacs qui commence avec le lac Kelly. Ça s'en va dans le lac Mud, ça s'en va dans le lac Simon, puis le lac McCharles. À chaque été, le lac devient plein d'une espèce d'algue bleue-verte qui remplie le lac. On dirait vraiment que tu pourrais marcher sur l'eau comme dans la Bible. Les gens qui demeurent dans mon comté, les gens de Nickel Belt, se sont rassemblés, ont tenu des réunions publiques, et ont essayé une série d'options.

La première option, c'est que tout le monde a raclé les algues. On les a raclés sur la plage pour essayer de les laisser sécher et voir si cela pourrait aider. Ça n'a pas aidé. L'année suivante, Science Nord nous a aidés avec un de leurs travailleurs qui s'y connaît beaucoup en écosystèmes riverains, et il nous a proposé d'y mettre des balles d'orge. Donc, on a mis de la broche à poulet autour des grosses balles et on les a mises sur la glace en hiver avec des bouteilles pour savoir où elles étaient. À l'arrivée du printemps, tout ça a coulé au fond du lac.

Cela aidait un peu à enlever des algues, mais il y en avait encore beaucoup. Tous les gens sur la rive ont arrêté d'utiliser des fertilisants pour être sûrs que ça ne se retrouve pas dans le lac, mais ça ne marche pas. C'était des solutions que les gens ensembles pouvaient faire. Cela n'a pas marché.

Mr. Michael A. Brown: I am delighted to be able to stand here today and support this significant and important resolution put forward by my friend the member for Huron—Bruce, a member who has shown great interest in the health of the Great Lakes and a member who has shown great interest in the opportunities that the Great Lakes provide all of us who share a coast on Lake Huron.

In my particular constituency of Algoma—Manitoulin, I have the pleasure of representing the largest coast in all of Ontario. My coastline goes from about halfway across Lake Superior, through to Sault Ste. Marie, and all around the north shore of Lake Huron. It includes all the shoreline for Manitoulin Island, Cockburn Island and St. Joseph Island. It includes many of the islands in Georgian Bay.

For my friend from the official opposition who didn't understand "coast," I'm sure that his friend from Halton might remind him of the Great Lakes Heritage Coast, which describes most of my constituency.

About 75% of the coastline in my constituency is protected, either through a provincial park, a federal park or a First Nation. Less than 25% of the coastline within the constituency is actually in private hands. It is important for us to preserve this. This is the largest single repository of fresh water in the world. This is important for us to do, and it is important for us to understand what the member is proposing. She is proposing a volunteer program. This is not big government in action; this is community volunteers who will develop and encourage beach stewardship.

A candidate beach will have a beach stewardship committee of local people who are interested in looking after their particular beach. It seems to make great sense in the rural areas. As the member has said, there are restrictions on what a small municipality, a small group of people in a county or a district, can do. They can't beat the standards of the Blue Flag program, but they can demonstrate to local residents, to the tourists who visit all of the Lake Huron coastline, to those who come and spend time along the Lake Huron coastline at their summer residences, that it is an important thing to do.

I commend the member for this very, very important resolution today; I think that it deserves the support of all members here.

Mr. Jim Wilson: I'm also delighted to stand for a few minutes and to recognize the work that the member for Huron—Bruce is doing to promote the green ribbon beach program. Contrary to what one of my other colleagues said, that it was fluff, I think it's a great program. He made a point that there are other things to debate, but this is private members' hour and a great opportunity for her to come forward and to promote Lake Huron, the part of the Great Lakes that she represents.

Of course, I want to spend a couple of minutes thanking the government for the $100,000 to market Wasaga Beach, which we received last week. We did have a fire that removed many of the historic buildings going back to the 1940s, but I want people to know that the buildings have all been demolished. There's a clean slate there. We look forward to new and exciting times at Wasaga Beach, in terms of redeveloping, and we have a lot of proposals.

I want to thank the very able council, led by Mayor Cal Patterson, who have taken a very sensible approach not only toward marketing Wasaga Beach for the summer season coming up, but also toward dealing with the requests from developers and really involving the community; and the committee led by Bonnie Smith, our economic development officer, under the auspices of the economic development committee of council, is moving forward, involving the community, and making sure that we not only get the message out that we're open for business on the world's longest fresh-water beach—and I think it would be fantastic to at some point be able to designate parts of this beach under the green ribbon program.

It can't hurt. It's another way to put Wasaga Beach and other beaches on the map. I think it would be great for tourism. When people look at a tourism guide in the future and they may be able to see the designation of a green ribbon, they'll know it's a clean beach that's protected, that volunteers care about it, that the world-famous Wasaga dunes are protected, and the long grasses and bushes that help to avoid erosion along the Great Lakes. Those are world ecosystems and they need to be protected. A green ribbon designation, I think, would go some way towards that.

So again, congratulations and thank you. This is the first time in my 17½ years that a member of an opposing party actually gave me their speech to read. Unfortunately, I don't have enough time, but very good speech-writing there, I'll say to Carol Mitchell.

I just want to say I hope there will be some money coming to those municipalities that decide to participate in this program. They won't be able to do it on their own.

Finally, I just want to say that today is a good step in recognizing what volunteers can do and what a program can do to put you on the map, as I said, but the Great Lakes water levels are a very, very serious issue. Not a week goes by where, I'm sure for all of us who are around the Great Lakes, our constituents don't mention to us that they're very concerned. The real estate agents up in Wasaga Beach will tell you, "We're selling mud rather than beach right now." Certainly in my 15 years—almost 16 years—of living in Wasaga Beach, raised in Alliston, I've never seen the levels so low. That's something the government needs to address, with the federal government.

Mr. Jeff Leal: Indeed, I appreciate the opportunity to speak about the resolution here today from my colleague from Huron—Bruce. I certainly know that she has been a real leader in water quality and restoration of beaches in her community for many, many years.

I'd like to get on the record this morning that previous to her election here in 2003, she is the only person in the 100-year history of Huron county to have two terms as a warden. During those two years that she was the warden of Huron county, this was one of the key issues that she put forward—this whole issue of stewardship, making sure that beaches were in top quality, that indeed all of the community that surrounds the area of Huron—Bruce has an opportunity to get access to beaches, that her citizens and all citizens of Ontario know that they can be very, very safe and rely on the water quality at those beaches.

You might ask why a member from Peterborough would be supporting this resolution. Interestingly enough, I like to give credit where credit is due: to the Honourable John Baird, the federal Minister of the Environment. About a year ago, he launched a study to review the Trent-Severn system in east-central Ontario. The Trent-Severn system, of course, starts in Trenton, Ontario, and works its way up through to Port Severn, which drains into Georgian Bay, an integral part of the ecological system in eastern and east-central Ontario.

One of the individuals who has been part of that panel, that study, was the founding president of Trent University, Tom Symons. Through a whole series of public round tables over the last number of months—and I understand this report will be coming forward in the not-too-distant future—beach quality and the quality of water through the Trent-Severn system as it enters both into Lake Ontario and to Lake Huron via Georgian Bay was a topic of great discussion.

We know that the proposal we have here this morning is a volunteer approach. It will allow for that call to arms for people in those communities. We all know that part of our legacy to future generations is to provide an environment that is of pristine quality. Part of that environment, of course, is water quality, and associated with that is beach quality. I know the member from Huron—Bruce, through various conferences in her community, is certainly taking this initiative forward.

She is taking that message to the various communities in the riding of Huron—Bruce and actively seeking out those volunteers who will, when the call to arms is put out, come forward because they know this is an important thing to do.

In 2007, Peter Lougheed predicted that the United States will be coming after our fresh water in three to five years. So we know that there is a real challenge, a real responsibility for us here in Ontario to make sure that water quality within the five Great Lakes, and water quality in all our systems across the province, affords those tourism opportunities and provides those opportunities for high-quality water that you and I can enjoy each and every day.

This is a very serious issue, and all members of this House should be on board to support this resolution.

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn: It's a pleasure to join the debate. I'll say right from the outset, I'm a very strong supporter of this resolution that has been put forward by the member for Huron—Bruce. I think if any member of the House has ever had the opportunity, or has not availed themselves of the opportunity to go and see a sunset in the town of Southampton, Ontario—everybody should experience that at least once in their life. I've seen it on a number of occasions and every time I see it, it's like I'm seeing it again for the first time.

There are a few things I think all members in this House would agree with, and that is the legacy we pass on, from an environmental sense, to our children. There are a few basic things. I think we'd all agree that children should be allowed to walk in the woods in the future. If you extend that, you would say that children should also be allowed to play on the beach and that children should be allowed to swim in the water that adjoins that beach. I'm sad to say that in my own town of Oakville—we have some wonderful beaches—children aren't allowed to swim in the water.

Children aren't allowed to go in the water and on the beaches in Oakville because of activities that have taken place in recent years. Under all three parties, activities have taken place that have harmed that water, and we haven't done enough to protect that resource.

I was fortunate, before I became an MPP, to serve 18 years as a member of regional council. One of the things that afflicted the Lake Ontario shoreline in Oakville was algae. We had a huge algae problem, algae washing ashore and rotting on the beaches, washing up on the shoreline and rotting and smelling, disturbing the normal activity that you would see along a lakeshore or beach. We're starting to see that in other areas of the province now.

I chaired a committee called the Lake Ontario Shoreline Algae Action Advisory Committee. It came up with a number of great recommendations, working with the Canada Centre for Inland Waters and with the University of Waterloo. We're starting to see the same initiatives now taking place in Lake Simcoe.

When you look at the importance of the issue, when you look at the importance of this resource to the future of our province, both economically and recreationally, from a sport fishing and commercial fishing point of view, there are a number of very important reasons why all members should be supportive of this resolution that is put forward.

Once again, I'd like to thank the member for bringing it forward because it gives us a chance to talk about environmental issues as well. At the same time, you can see where you can make a successful program, such as a blue flag program in the urban areas, which has been, by one member's admission, a very successful program. You can adapt that to the rural areas and make it even more successful in the areas that simply don't have the facilities or the amenities that you would find in an urban area.

I heard the remarks—and I thought they were excellent remarks. I want to compliment the member for Simcoe—Grey. I think private members' time is a time where you can put some of the partisan politics aside and you can speak on behalf of your own constituents. Certainly, I thought the remarks that he came forward with, after some of the remarks by other members of his party, were a saving grace, and he deserves to be complimented for them.

I know in my own riding, for example, in recent elections, the third party isn't the NDP any more. The third party in the riding of Oakville is now the Green Party. The NDP is now the fourth party. When you look at the type of debate that is taking place, when choices are being made about environmental issues, those people who are engaged in those issues look to two parties to provide them with the sort of debate and the sort of choices they're looking for. One, of course, is the Liberal Party, to which I belong, and the other is now the Green Party. I think in my riding and I think in a number of other progressive ridings, the issue of the environment has certainly risen to the fore.

When you see a resolution that is drafted the way this one is, in a very sensible way, in a practical way, involving an organization with the credibility of environmental defence, it's worthy of support of all members of the House. So, in closing, I would like to compliment the mover, and I would also like to urge all members of this House to give their utmost support when the vote is taken.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Ms. Mitchell, you have up to two minutes to respond.

Mrs. Carol Mitchell: I want to thank all the speakers today, but I just want to make a very short comment about the comments that were made today. I'm very disappointed in the member for Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington. I think it's very unfortunate that one does not understand the difference between rural and urban communities. We rely on our strong volunteer base; we rely on our grassroots community. It's unfortunate that he simply doesn't get it. I'm going to let it go at that.

But that's it. The other members, the kind words, the recommendations that you've made, strengthening the green ribbon program, I thank you for that. The member for Simcoe—Grey: Quite frankly, I found your comments refreshing and I wanted to make special note. I thank your for that.

The member for Beaches—East York as well. I want to remind the member for Beaches—East York that we have two Blue Flag designations in the riding of Huron—Bruce. We want to work the two programs together, which I know the member understands, but I just want to strongly reinforce it: We simply don't have the resources to do Blue Flag in all of our communities, but my communities want to work together because they understand that a strong ecosystem is the future for our riding.

Mr. Speaker, I have the distinct honour of having my daughter here today. I want to recognize my daughter Jas. For all of you who have heard me talk repeatedly, this is the one who's the chef, who keeps me eating better now.

For all those who spoke, I really do sincerely appreciate it. This is a very important initiative in the riding of Huron—Bruce. We want to ensure that our coastline is there to enjoy and to prosper for years to come.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): There being no further debate, the members will note that we're a little bit ahead in

schedule this morning. In private members' public business, other members can expect the vote to take place at noon. In that case, I will suspend proceedings until 12 o'clock, at which time we will deal with the two ballot items.

The House suspended proceedings from 1152 to 1200.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): Thank you for your patience and understanding.

POVERTY /

PAUVRETÉ

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): The time allowed for private members' public business having expired, we'll deal first with private members' notice of motion number 22, standing in the name of Ms. Aggelonitis.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Agreed to.

WATER QUALITY /

QUALITÉ DE L'EAU

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): We shall now deal with private members' notice of motion number 23, standing in the name of Mrs. Mitchell.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Agreed to.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): All matters relating to private members' public business having been dealt with, I do now leave the chair, and the House will resume at 1:30 of the clock.

The House recessed from 1201 to 1330.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

WILFRID LAURIER UNIVERSITY

Mr. Ted Chudleigh: I rise today to pledge my enthusiastic support for the proposed expansion of Wilfrid Laurier University to Milton. A satellite campus on a beautiful 150-acre plot of land near the Niagara Escarpment—and that will be part of a 450-acre development—would be beneficial to many people. Students would be able to learn in a natural and modern setting, benefiting from Milton's quaint yet cosmopolitan charm. The town of Milton would inherit of burst of youthful energy and the incentive to develop a modern and sustainable student village.

The construction, maintenance and operation of the campus would create many local jobs for the residents of Halton, bringing new commercial opportunities within and without the university.

Truly, I can think of nothing more fitting for this rapidly growing community than the presence of an established and reputable university like Wilfrid Laurier. I encourage both the university and the town of Milton to come to an agreement as quickly as possible, and I expect significant support from this government in the future.

HILLIARD GREEN

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: There are times in this job when you have to say farewell to a friend, a friend who provided you support when you first started out, a friend who saw your community for what it could be, not just what it is. Nepean—Carleton recently lost a good friend, on March 3, when Hilliard Green departed this life for his great reward.

Hilliard saw something in me when I was just 30 years old. He was one of the first people to believe that I could be a member of provincial Parliament, so he made that happen, just as he has done for so many other provincial and federal Conservatives in Nepean—Carleton throughout his lifetime.

Hilliard succumbed to the dreaded cancer. His battle with the disease was even more stressful when his beloved wife, May, passed away from the very same illness two years before he did. He was a good man. His farm, Abby Hill Farms, has some of the best sweet corn around, though I privately prefer the apples during the fall. Hilliard was a big Ottawa Senators fan and he was ever the horseman, showing his horses at the Royal Agricultural Winter Fair, among other venues. Hilliard also loved the Richmond Fair. He was a director and a former president there. He knew everyone in Richmond, and when I first started out as a politician, it was there that he and others gave me my start.

Hilliard leaves behind two sons, Neil and Graham, and his mother, Fern. He also leaves behind several in-laws in the Preston family who loved him like a brother.

Nepean—Carleton lost one of its finest on March 3, and for that I'm sad, but I will forever be grateful for having known Hilliard Green.

SHERIDAN INSTITUTE

OF TECHNOLOGY AND

ADVANCED LEARNING

Mrs. Amrit Mangat: I rise to inform this House about a recent visit Minister Smitherman and I made to the Sheridan Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning. Sheridan's Davis campus recently opened its new Centre for Healthy Communities, a unique facility that brings together innovative wellness and community safety disciplines in one location. This centre will train students to become personal support workers, security officers, pharmacy technicians, practical nurses and experts in health promotion.

Our government's strategic investment in Sheridan has not only improved access to post-secondary education in Peel, but it has also created jobs in my riding of Mississauga—Brampton South. Our government understands that in order to create the workforce of tomorrow, we need to invest in education and skills training today. That is why in last week's budget we proposed $1.5 billion for skills training through the skills-to-jobs action plan. We want to ensure that more Ontarians have access to student aid, apprenticeship training and well-paying jobs.

I would like to thank the staff and students at Sheridan for their warm welcome, and I'm very proud to have the centre in my riding. I look forward to continuing to work with Sheridan to ensure that our government continues to invest in our students.

TOWN OF CALEDON

Ms. Sylvia Jones: Today I'm pleased to rise to inform all members of the Legislature about an honour that was recently bestowed on the town of Caledon, in my riding of Dufferin—Caledon. Maclean's magazine, in their March 24 issue, named the town of Caledon the safest place to live in Canada. The "safest place to live" designation is based on per capita crime data from the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. I would like to ask all members of the House to congratulate the town of Caledon on receiving this recognition.

I would especially like to acknowledge the work of the Caledon OPP and the volunteers who serve with the Policing Advisory Council of Caledon. There has always been outstanding community support for the Road Watch, Citizens on Patrol and Youth Leadership programs. Hundreds of volunteers have dedicated many hours to making Caledon a safe community to live, work and raise a family.

Mayor Marolyn Morrison, when asked why Caledon deserved this honour, said, "Our residents get involved in our community; our police listen to our community and we have a wonderful group of volunteers who care and work hard for our community." I couldn't agree more.

Congratulations to Detachment Commander Andy Karski and the Caledon OPP, who serve us so well in Caledon. It really is a very special place to live, and I am proud to acknowledge them in the chamber today.

ANTI-BULLYING INITIATIVES

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: The Toronto Sun last November noted that Ajax teen Shaquille Wisdom hanged himself after being viciously cyber-bullied by classmates about being gay. Bullying of LGBTTIQ teens is well documented. Due to prevailing homophobia and harassment, gay teens are 14 times more likely to attempt suicide than other teens and have a death rate three times higher than other teens. Egale Canada says that LGBTTIQ teens are more likely to be threatened with weapons, drop out because of harassment, and feel forced to leave home because of conflict.

Today I stand demanding action on behalf of at-risk children from the McGuinty government. We need assurance immediately that programs for equity education, anti-bullying programs and disciplinary programs be instituted before another death occurs. The Toronto board of education has pioneered equity education and anti-homophobia programs. These need to be applied province-wide now—not sometime, not never, but now.

I want to thank Egale Canada for advancing equality and justice for LGBTTIQ people and their families and Joanne Cohen of the Bruce E. Walker Law Office for their tireless advocacy in this regard.

CANCER AWARENESS MONTH

Mr. Kim Craitor: This week marks the start of the Canadian Cancer Society's Cancer Awareness and Daffodil Month throughout our province.

Today, two in five Ontarians will develop cancer at some point in their lives. This is much more than a statistic, as some of us are acutely aware. That fact represents thousands of cancer stories. These stories motivate over 15,000 Ontario volunteers to go door to door to sell daffodils in the month of April to deliver hope to our constituents.

Since the daffodil campaign began 50 years ago, the Canadian Cancer Society has made significant progress in the fight against cancer through research, education, advocacy, and assistance to those living with cancer. Today, 60% of people diagnosed with cancer will survive the disease, compared with just 33% a few decades ago. Early detection is a plus, and the daffodil campaign certainly helps the society get that message out.

As a cancer survivor, I ask all Ontarians, when a volunteer comes to your door, to not only buy a daffodil but to thank them for their tremendous service to our community, for what they do is important.

The cancer society has sent a letter out to each member, along with a daffodil pin to wear during the month. I'm proud to ask the House to give permission to each of the members to wear the daffodil pin in the House to recognize the month of April.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member seeks unanimous support to wear the daffodil pin in recognition of cancer. Agreed? Agreed.

CANCER SCREENING

Mr. Shafiq Qaadri: As you'll be aware, prostate cancer is the most common type of cancer found in men today, affecting mostly men over the age of 50. Knowing this, I'm particularly pleased that our budget proposed to cover the cost of the prostate-specific antigen test, more commonly referred to as the PSA test, which is used to diagnose and monitor treatment of prostate cancer. It is the blood test that helps detect cancer, and it has now finally received funding.

The coverage of these tests was one part of the three-year, $154-million investment to build on the province's cancer screening program, to increase early detection and treatment of a number of conditions, including breast, cervical and colorectal cancers; as well as extending the HPV, or human papillomavirus, vaccination program.

The coverage of the PSA tests was also welcome news to my colleagues across the floor, and I'm happy to put on the record some comments. On the topic of PSA testing being covered, for example, the member from Simcoe North, in a rare moment of candour, said: "It is nice, and I want to give the government credit." The member from Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, in a welcome moment of collegiality, said, "This has proven to be a critical diagnostic tool in this day and age ... and I am happy to see this cost being covered."

I couldn't agree more, and I commend the McGuinty government and Minister Smitherman for this initiative.

PALLIATIVE CARE

Mr. Joe Dickson: I rise today to speak to one of the many highlights of last week's budget.

As part of the funding for our health and long-term-care system, this government proposed an investment of $14 million in 2007-08 for 10 residential hospices across the province. The funding will provide end-of-life care in a home-like environment for patients who cannot be cared for at home.

I know I'm not the only one who is pleased with this investment. When commenting on the $969,000 in funding towards capital costs for Sakura House in his riding, the member from Oxford said: "I'm elated with the amount.... It's a significant achievement and it will allow them to move forward and get construction under way. It's the type of thing we like to see—it's part of the end-of-the-year spending. I'm very happy they saw fit to fund Sakura House. We commend them for that."

The member from Sarnia—Lambton also voiced his satisfaction with the $1.5-million investment slated for the St. Joseph's Hospice in his riding when he said, "I can't be too negative when we receive funding we asked for."

I couldn't say it better myself. Clearly, this is important funding for a very important purpose, and I'm pleased that our government is making these investments.

MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE

Mr. Bob Delaney: Last week's budget announcement included some significant investments in our province's infrastructure.

Ontario's budget proposed a $1-billion investment for municipal infrastructure in 2007-08, with funding for our roads and bridges, public transit and social housing.

Let me quote from some of the very positive feedback about Ontario's budget. Doug Reycraft, the president of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, said that he is "extremely pleased to see the investment in infrastructure." He went on to say that "in order to be globally competitive, we need to invest in infrastructure."

In my own city, Mayor Hazel McCallion said, "Investing an additional $1 billion in municipal infrastructure means more job creation, sustainable, competitive communities, and a better quality of life for Ontarians."

And perhaps a quote that truly encapsulates these sentiments was made by the mayor of the Township of East Ferris, who was also the PC candidate in the 2007 election from the riding of Nipissing. He said, "The fact that the Ontario government kept their promise; they kept their promise toward infrastructure renewal and like this morning, me getting $223,000 for my small township ... my taxes are going to be low this year because of the fact that the government has committed to reducing the impact on my taxpayers...."

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Members, we have with us today in the Speaker's gallery Mr. Xue He and a delegation from the People's Republic of China. Mr. He is a member and deputy secretary general of the standing committee of Jiangsu Provincial People's Congress. I would like to point out to the members that Jiangsu and Ontario have had a formal friendship accord since 1985. Please join me in welcoming our guests today.

ACCESS TO INFORMATION

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: On a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker: Further to

section 21(

a) to (

d) of the Legislative Assembly standing orders, I filed a point of privilege with respect to the privileges and rights—

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I want to thank the member for the notice that she did provide me. It wasn't as detailed as I would've liked to have seen, but notwithstanding that, I will allow you to make your point.

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I intend to make my point.

I filed a point of privilege with respect to the privileges—and no disrespect, Mr. Speaker—with respect to the privileges and rights I am afforded as a member of provincial Parliament, and which I feel were suppressed yesterday during the standing committee on government agencies. The circumstances where my privileges and rights as a member were compromised are outlined as follows.

In the resource binder for the standing committee on government agencies provided by the 39th Parliament committees branch, it clearly states on page 24:

"Research officers of the legislative library's research service provide every standing and select committee of the House:

"The research officer:

"—highlights and clarifies central issues before the committee;

"—prepares briefing papers for the committee members;

"—suggests expert witnesses and possible lines of questioning;

"—provides legal analyses of issues before the committee;

"—summarizes submissions made to the committee;

"—provides oral briefings to the committee;

"—drafts interim and final committee reports to the House."

After I requested a deferral to determine whether or not I would add my voice to a committee concurrence of the intended appointee, a request was made by the third party, supported by the official opposition, for more information regarding the intended appointee.

Specifically, the third party requested to have the legislative researcher to have "research to concur with the answers the candidate has provided," after there seemed to be a discrepancy between some of the background information circulated by the clerk's office and the testimony by the intended appointee.

This request was stifled when government members of the committee put forth the following motion: "That the opposition request for legislative research to investigate the truthfulness of Mr. Anand's responses be put to a vote."

As the committee resource binder clearly states: "The research officer highlights and clarifies central issues before the committee."

In this case, the government, through its motion, attempted to muzzle the opposition in our attempt to receive reasonable, open-source and public information in order to make the best possible decision. Ultimately, because we felt pressured by the government, the opposition withdrew its request.

I never want to be put in that position again. After all, it is the rules in this place that protects the minority from the tyranny of the majority.

As it clearly states on page 5, the mandate of the committee is "to review the intended appointments made by order in council of persons to ABCs of the Ontario government. The committee may select for review intended appointees, determine whether or not it concurs in the intended appointment and then report its concurrence to the House."

Under standing order 106(e)(8), it states: "At the conclusion of the meeting held to review an intended appointment, the committee shall determine whether or not it concurs in the intended appointment. Any member may request that the committee defer its determination to the next committee, but in the event no later than seven calendar days. In its report, the committee shall state whether or not it concurs with the intended appointments and may state its reasons."

The request made by the opposition was made to clarify the information circulated by the clerk's office and the statements made by the intended appointee, so that committee members could make the best possible decisions on behalf of the residents of Ontario and, as in standing order 106(e)(8), the reasons for concurrence or not.

It is my opinion that the government's actions impeded my ability, as well as other members of the committee, to effectively act as a member of provincial Parliament because they put into question the opposition's right to request the legislative researchers to "highlight and clarify a central issue before the committee" so that we can properly share our reasoning of concurrence or not.

As members of the standing committee on government agencies, it is our responsibility to receive accurate and truthful information pertaining to all intended appointees, review and evaluate this information to make sure the intended appointees are capable and qualified for the positions they seek, and vote accordingly. The actions of the government yesterday are clearly not in the spirit of the standing orders, the committee resource binder or of our democracy.

I do urge you to rule in favour of the "right to know" for all members of this Legislature, which will help us all do our jobs. The very foundation of our democracy is the right for the governing party to set out an agenda, the right of the opposing parties to ask questions, and the right of legislative staff to provide unfiltered, unbiased and independent advice.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): I want to thank the member again for providing me with the proper written notice under

section 21(

c) of the standing orders. I want to take the opportunity to review the Hansard of the member's comments today. With that, I will reserve my decision until next week, and I thank you for that.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

PROVINCIAL ANIMAL

WELFARE ACT, 2008 /

LOI ONTARIENNE DE 2008

SUR LE BIEN-ÊTRE DES ANIMAUX

Mr. Bartolucci moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 50,

An Act to amend the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act / Projet de loi 50, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la Société de protection des animaux de l'Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Is it the pleasure of the House the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member for a short statement?

Hon. Rick Bartolucci: Mr. Speaker, I'll make a statement during ministerial statements.

PEACE OFFICERS' MEMORIAL DAY

AND MEMORIAL ACT, 2008 /

LOI DE 2008

SUR LE JOUR DE COMMÉMORATION

DES AGENTS DE LA PAIX

ET LE MONUMENT COMMÉMORATIF

À LEUR MÉMOIRE

Mr. Levac moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 51,

An Act to proclaim Peace Officers' Memorial Day and to honour peace officers who have died in the line of duty / Projet de loi 51, Loi proclamant le Jour de commémoration des agents de la paix et rendant hommage aux agents de la paix décédés dans l'exercice de leurs fonctions.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Is it the pleasure of the House the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member for a short statement?

Mr. Dave Levac: The bill provides for the declaration of a Peace Officers' Memorial Day on the third Sunday in September of each year in the province of Ontario. The bill will also require that a memorial be established in or adjacent to the legislative precincts of the Legislative Assembly to honour the memory of peace officers who have died in the line of duty.

It's important to memorialize, maintain the peace officers in the name of peace for peace. The introduction of this bill will record the lives of those who have died on duty for future generations to remember. For over 100 years, peace officers have been committed to keeping our citizens safe. Quite frankly, with the introduction of this bill, our peace officers will no longer be forgotten. I appreciate it, Mr. Speaker, and I know that you're going to introduce very important guests in the gallery today.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

ANIMAL PROTECTION

Hon. Rick Bartolucci: I rise today to introduce legislation to better protect animals against mistreatment and abuse. This legislation represents the first significant revisions to the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act since 1919.

As I look up into the gallery today, I am pleased to welcome a number of representatives from various partner groups, who have been instrumental in the crafting of this legislation. From the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, we have Kate MacDonald and Hugh Coghill. They are joined today by inspectors Alison McAllister, Ruth Marks, Mindy Hall, Scott Sylvia, Richard Mugridge, Connie Mallory, Darren Grandel, Kevin Strooband and Todd Menard.

From the World Society for the Protection of Animals is Melissa Tkachyk. Also in the gallery this afternoon are Angela Cerovic and Doug Raven of the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association, and Susan Carlyle and Karen Smythe for the College of Veterinarians of Ontario.

This is an important day for animals and animal lovers, and I am proud that these individuals could join us.

If passed, the proposed Provincial Animal Welfare Act would provide better protection for animals throughout Ontario, including those in zoos.

Sadly, this protection is necessary. While most people enjoy and respect all animals and treat their pets as part of the family, it is not uncommon to hear of acts of uncaring individuals who exploit or harm defenceless animals: the puppy AK, found whimpering on a balcony with his ears cut off; the kangaroo Tyson, held in deplorable conditions in a roadside zoo; animals trained to fight as a sport.

In Ontario, these a