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

March 2, 2005

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2005-Mar-02 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Wednesday 2 March 2005 Mercredi 2 mars 2005

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

DEER AND ELK FARMERS

ROTARY CLUBS

ONTARIO FARMERS

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

ONTARIO FARMERS

RURAL ONTARIO

ONTARIO FARMERS

BSE

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS

ONTARIO FARMERS

POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS

IDENTITY THEFT

ONTARIO FARMERS

HEALTH RECORDS

GROWTH PLANNING

RURAL ONTARIO

HYDRO RATES

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

PETITIONS

SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION FUNDING

ADVERTISEMENT

REGIONAL CENTRES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

TTC RIGHT-OF-WAY

ONTARIO FARMERS

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

ONTARIO FARMERS

CARDIAC CARE

ONTARIO FARMERS

SENIORS' TRANSIT PASS

PIT BULLS

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

ORDERS OF THE DAY

PLACES TO GROW ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR

LES ZONES DE CROISSANCE

CITY OF OTTAWA

AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR LA VILLE D'OTTAWA

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

DEER AND ELK FARMERS

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): I'm joined by Bill Top, Todd Grignon and his son Adam, who are representing the Ontario Deer and Elk

Farmers' Association.

Farmers are creative, hard-working, willing to take risks and willing to work with people to satisfy public perception. We have always been encouraged to

diversify. Special interest groups have lobbied strongly and continue to work against us with the Ministry of Natural Resources to have our industry exterminated. We have come to the table and

openly discussed their concerns. MNR spin doctors wage war and use deceptions to the public against farmers.

This proposed regulation has no science and no substance behind it. This proposed regulation is based only on perceptions. We are an agriculture industry. Our

animals are farm-born and -raised. Farmers build their farms, their livelihoods and their businesses based on current rules and regulations, and designed with future trends in mind. Farmers built

their business in full compliance with the law, and now this McGuinty government wants to take our businesses away.

A ministry backed by special interest groups wants to change those laws. We had no

part in the process. We were not protected. The policies and rules were

changed midstream. We need to be protected and governed by the Ministry of Agriculture, not the Ministry of Natural Resources. The ministry designed to protect the farmers is doing absolutely

nothing pertaining to our issues.

We have had countless meetings with the Minister of Agriculture, and at the end of each meeting we are promised solutions and assistance; countless promises

broken, countless commitments undelivered. We have proposed many options to the government, and they all have been denied.

Minister Peters, why do you not protect us? Minister Peters, how can a non-agriculture ministry dictate to farmers with no consultation with industry? Minister

Peters, show us your commitment to deer and elk farmers, as we have not seen this yet.

Premier McGuinty, show us your commitment to agriculture. Premier McGuinty, you promised to make agriculture the strongest ministry in your cabinet. Premier

McGuinty, please keep your promise.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.

ROTARY CLUBS

Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): On February 23, I had the great pleasure of attending the Rotary Club of Canada's 100th birthday celebration in

Peterborough at Trent University's Great Hall. The event was attended by members of the Rotary Club of Peterborough, the Rotary Club of Bridgenorth-Ennismore-Lakefield and the members of the Rotary

Club of Peterborough-Kawartha. In honour of Rotary's centennial, the Honourable John Manley, who of course has held numerous federal cabinet positions, spoke to an audience of keen and dedicated

Rotarians. The event was also attended by the Honourable Peter Adams, MP for Peterborough; master of ceremonies John McNutt; the mayor of Peterborough, Her Worship Sylvia Sutherland; and Warden

Neil Cathcart.

Currently in the Peterborough area, Rotary is primarily involved in the Greenway Trail, which is a beautiful natural trail made out of the foundations of an

abandoned railroad line which stretches from Little Lake in downtown Peterborough up through Trent University and on to Lakefield. Rotary members built the trail with determination and elbow

grease. The highlight could very well be the wooden trestle bridge that links Peterborough and Omemee.

For years, the Peterborough area Rotary clubs have been involved with the Easter Seals campaign to help handicapped children. Another very popular

Peterborough-Kawartha Rotary initiative is Camp Kawartha. Now co-ed, Camp Kawartha was originally founded as a boys' camp and has been providing magical summers for children and teens since

The Peterborough area Rotary clubs have also been involved with the Polio Plus program, dedicated to the annihilation of polio in the world. Every Victoria Day,

Peterborough area Rotary helps to celebrate the occasion by providing a beautiful display of fireworks at Little Lake. This is enjoyed by adults and children alike.

The world watched in horror as a series of tsunamis swept over 11 countries, leaving 150,000 dead and thousands more homeless. The Rotary Club of

Peterborough-Kawartha reacted quickly and was proud to offer this humanitarian effort $5,000.

Rotarians of Peterborough, keep up the good work.

ONTARIO FARMERS

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): Farmers across Ontario are in an absolute crisis, and the Liberal government must take a

leadership role to save the industry. Our Minister of Agriculture, Steve Peters, was once an advocate for our farmers, but since being promoted to Dalton McGuinty's cabinet, he has turned his back

on the farmers. Steve Peters once said, "Ontario's grain and oilseed farmers have been hard hit by low commodity prices, poor weather conditions and increasing farm subsidies in both the United

States and the European Union." Steve Peters was once a strong advocate for a $300-million cash injection to save the province's cash crop industry, but I heard today that cash crop farmers are

still waiting for, and badly need, this money.

Where has Steve Peters, the agriculture minister, gone? Why hasn't Steve Peters spoken up and continued to advocate for this necessary money? Why has Steve

Peters turned his back on the cash crop farmers of Ontario? That $300 million is not an inflated number. We are six weeks away from planting season, and farmers do not have the money to put the

seeds into the ground.

Steve Peters used to support our farmers, but where is he here today? How could someone go from being a staunch supporter and advocate for this needed money to

doing absolutely nothing when it's so needed? The clock is ticking: Planting season is only six weeks away. We need the government to invest in our farmers now.

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): Dalton McGuinty's Liberals are hell-bent on taking health care in Niagara region from bad to worse. Not only

is the crisis in Niagara region not being addressed by the Liberals at Queen's Park, but it is being aggravated.

Let me give you some illustrations, especially in the area of mental health. A constituent, the mother of a 19-year-old boy suffering serious mental illness,

can't get mental health treatment for this 19-year-old boy and is told by the police to have him arrested so that he can get treatment. The kid does three weeks in the detention centre, and still

no mental health treatment; he finishes his sentence, and still no mental health treatment -- problem unsolved, aggravated by the Liberals at Queen's Park.

Another woman has an eight-year-old grandson who has ADHD and needs to see a psychiatrist. He's been sent to the sexual treatment outpatient program at St.

Catharines General -- a four-month waiting list. This is an eight-year-old boy who is at incredibly high risk, who isn't even guaranteed to be treated in four months, simply being told that if he

joins now, the time period is four months to await treatment and could be longer.

Another woman is looking for a psychiatrist in Welland without success, trying to address mental health problems. My staff went on to the College of Physicians

and Surgeons Web site that lists which doctors are accepting new patients. The nearest ones are in Hamilton.

What does this government do? This government forces Niagara into its mega-LHIN, into a supersized LHIN, which is going to bury the interests and needs of people

in Niagara, when it comes to health care, and leave them at the end of the line.

ONTARIO FARMERS

Mr. Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): I want to take this opportunity to welcome the many farmers who have gathered here

today at Queen's Park. I want to let the farmers throughout Ontario and those here today know that we are here to listen to what you have to say and that we value your input. I also want to thank

you for your hard work, your leadership and your patience in the face of trying times.

I represent a rural riding. As such, I know how important farmers are to our local economy and to the economy of our province and our country. It's no secret

that our farmers are facing many new challenges these days. I know, because I get the letters and the phone calls, attend the farm meetings and hear directly from my farm constituents, both back

home and here today right on the lawn and right on the front steps of our Legislative Assembly.

I want to reassure the farmers that we will always be here to listen to their concerns. That is why we are meeting with farm leaders from all across the

province.

Like our farmers, this government is dedicated to moving forward on critical issues to ensure that farming remains a viable and sustainable way of life here in

Ontario.

This government has moved to bring funding to the table for BSE, drainage, abattoirs, enhanced food safety and product promotion, to name just a few. Why?

Because we know that our farmers are the very backbone of our province.

We know that there are challenges ahead and there are no magic answers. That said, like our farmers, we're in this for the long run, and we intend to stand with

our farmers every single step of the way.

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): There'll be no long run for farmers if this government gets its way.

I had the opportunity today to stand with thousands of farmers out on the front lawn covered in snow, who arrived here by bus and by tractor to deliver a message

to this government: There has never been a level of frustration among our farmers like we are finding today.

This government, which promised that agriculture would be a lead ministry, has reneged on that promise. In fact, they have cut funding --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): I'll give you a chance to make your comments. I'm going to ask the members to be quiet. I'd like to hear the

member from Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke give his statement uninterrupted.

Mr. Yakabuski: In fact, this government has cut funding to agriculture.

Farming is going through the biggest crisis in memory -- low prices, unfair competition, and no support from this government -- while at the same time, this

government is burdening them with over-regulation. They have no money to get their crops in the ground, yet they want them to pay for nutrient management.

For farmers in the province of Ontario, to quote the great author John Steinbeck, this is the winter of their discontent. While this government has money for

casinos in Windsor -- $400 million -- it has not kept its promises. I heard plenty from farmers today. I heard words from farmers today about what they think of this Liberal government. Well, I can

tell you one thing, and they'd better get the message: Farmers do keep their promises.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I know that the member from Huron-Bruce would like to make a member's statement. I'd like to start so she can get her full

complement of time. That is the reason for that delay.

RURAL ONTARIO

Mrs. Carol Mitchell (Huron-Bruce): As a member representing one of the most rural ridings in Ontario, I wish to tell the Legislature about a

vital part of our province, and that's rural Ontario.

In rural Ontario, we value education. Our government has recognized the special needs of our rural schools. The new funding formula acknowledges that our rural

schools have very large catchment areas. The McGuinty government is supporting all schools by providing funding for much-needed repairs and renovations. After 10 years of neglect, this is very

welcome news in our rural communities, especially for small schools in need of repair or slated for closure.

Rural Ontario also values our health care facilities. Small hospitals, long-term-care facilities, community health centres and home support services are critical

to our small rural Ontario towns. I am pleased that this government is supporting those needs. The Ministry of Health just announced that they have received over 200 applications for family health

teams. I can tell you, in our rural ridings this is good news: a service that will be available from one spot.

The government has also helped launch the Canada-Ontario municipal rural infrastructure fund, which will help with the critical infrastructure that is required

in our rural communities.

Rural Ontario contributes to the province, and with new funding it will be able to make an even greater contribution. Not only am I proud to represent rural

Ontario; I am very proud of a government that understands rural Ontario.

ONTARIO FARMERS

Mr. John Wilkinson (Perth-Middlesex): I rise today to speak about the McGuinty government's commitment to agriculture.

Today, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture has gone to extra lengths to ensure that their concerns are heard here at Queen's Park. They are here today to get

the message out that these are tough times for many of our farmers. I spent my morning today out on the front lawn speaking with those assembled and was fortunate to be able to meet farmers from my

riding of Perth-Middlesex for lunch.

Since Perth-Middlesex is the most productive agricultural riding in Ontario, I'm quite familiar with many of these issues, but I always welcome the opportunity

to speak to Ontario farmers, as I know do Minister Peters and Premier McGuinty. Speaking with and, more importantly, hearing farmers is the best way we can get a better understanding of both their

broad and individual concerns. In fact, after attending the demonstration today, Minister Peters travelled to Ottawa to attend the federal/provincial/territorial agricultural ministers' meeting and

conference. Knowing the importance of being here today, Minister Peters postponed --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Order. I'll give you time to finish your statement, if the members would stop heckling.

The member for Perth-Middlesex.

Mr. Wilkinson: As I was saying, Minister Peters is on his way to Ottawa to help close that gap in funding that we have with the federal

government. Knowing the importance of being here today, Minister Peters postponed his trip this morning so that he could be right here at Queen's Park to be with our farmers first-hand.

Today's rally, along with the minister's voice, will send a strong message to Ottawa that Ontario's farmers need their fair share. The opposition should join us

and support our Minister of Agriculture as he goes to Ottawa and gets the money that we need in this province.

BSE

Ms. Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): Since May 20, 2003, the US border has been closed to Canadian beef. It is hoped that in just five days

it will once again reopen to live cattle.

The consequences of BSE have hit Ontario farmers hard. There were times when farmers didn't know when the border would reopen. They were worried, and they had

hundreds of head of cattle but no one to sell to.

We responded to the BSE crisis with a comprehensive federal aid package worth $410 million. This was part of a long-term strategy developed in consultation with

the provinces, territories and industry groups, and was designed to ensure the long-term viability of Canada's beef industry. On top of that, it included continuing efforts to reopen the US border.

Those efforts have paid off, and now we look forward to the resumption of trade in live cattle with the US, scheduled for March 7, 2005.

But more must be done. That's why Minister Peters recently led a delegation of Canadian and Ontario agricultural leaders to the US to meet with the US government

and travelled with Minister Mitchell on a second trip to Washington.

I want to reassure the farmers here today and those back home that this government will continue to work toward full resumption of trade.

Mr. John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I rise on a very serious point, fundamental to the accountability and the

checks and balances in our parliamentary system. The opposition is particularly concerned that we have been notified of the absence of almost half of the cabinet. The Minister of Agriculture was

seen a few moments ago in the tunnel between this place --

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): Scurrying.

Mr. Baird: "Scurrying," one member says. I was hoping you could seek some guidance --

The Speaker: That's not a point of order --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I'm sure all members are busy doing the work of the people who elected them.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE ON

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

Mrs. Linda Jeffrey (Brampton Centre): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on general government and move its

adoption.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Mr. Todd Decker): Your committee begs to report the following bill without amendment:

Bill 163,

An Act to amend the City of Ottawa Act, 1999 / Projet de loi 163, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1999 sur la ville d'Ottawa.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed.

The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.

VISITORS

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'm very proud today to introduce to you Jackie Vandenberg, who is an

outreach worker with the Ontario Early Years Centre in Simcoe North. She is in the Speaker's gallery.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): We welcome all visitors to the assembly, but the chief whip knows the process by which people are

introduced.

Ms. Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: We have question period coming up and I understand the agriculture

minister is not going to be here, so I'm sending this chicken to the desk.

The Speaker: The member from Toronto-Danforth almost went out with that chicken.

I want to take a moment to recognize, in the members' gallery, Paul Klopp, the former member of the provincial Parliament who represented the riding of Huron

in the 35th Parliament. Join me in welcoming him.

I also would like to welcome John Parker, in the gallery, the member for York East in the 36th Parliament.

ORAL QUESTIONS

POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Acting Premier. It's truly regrettable that the Minister of Finance

didn't see fit to attend today, because we've been made --

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order --

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order --

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): There are too many speakers here. The government House Leader on a point of order.

Hon. Mr. Duncan: Too late.

The Speaker: Shall we start now? Can I ask for the clock to start again. Now it is time for oral questions. The leader of the official

opposition.

Mr. Runciman: My question is to the Acting Premier. We have been made aware of some additional disturbing information that may be directly

connected to the secret $10,000-per-person fundraiser held last May at the Sorbara home. We're now advised that the development on the 150,000 acres, the so-called peach fuzz, south of the

greenbelt boundary, much of it prime farmland owned by developers, is wide open for development today, despite your government's assurances that this would not happen. On one hand, your greenbelt

plan attacks the interests of real, legitimate farmers, and on the other, developers who can afford to fork out $10,000 to have the Premier's ear are rewarded.

Acting Premier, do you not see how important it is that you now reveal the names of the individuals who attended the secret soirée and may have benefited

from doing so?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of the Environment): I'm going to refer the question to the minister responsible for public infrastructure

renewal.

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal): The information that the leader of the official opposition has presented is not

correct. In fact, the land that the member mentions is currently undesignated in municipal official plans, and it would be up to official plan amendments of the normal planning process of the

various municipalities to then designate.

Now, I should tell you, of course, that our Places to Grow plan identifies that, within the current urban envelope, there are some 20 years of land supplied

for both residential and commercial-industrial development. We will be having a future conversation with municipal officials about what the future of those lands will be, but it will happen within

the normal planning process.

Mr. Runciman: One of my colleagues said, "Places to grow the Liberal bank account." That's a cop-out response. This smells to high heaven.

We see, in the media today, Rob MacIsaac, who's the chair of the Greenbelt Task Force, saying that the boundaries for the greenbelt were set in the Premier's

office. We know that the minister, responding to this question in October, said that there would be a requirement for 40% intensification in the municipalities before any growth was allowed to

occur in this area. What's happened here is that this government has shafted farmers in the greenbelt area: no compensation for confiscation. They have a secret fundraiser -- $10,000 a head at the

Sorbara household -- and, surprise, surprise, developers now get the green light for 30 years of urban sprawl in this area that the government said was going to be protected. Will you now do the

right thing and release the names of the people who attended this secret soirée at the Sorbara home?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: Well, it's certainly a lot of sound and fury by the member opposite. I want you to know that a million additional protected

acres by our government is a tremendous legacy that your government would never -- you guys want to pave it all. Come on, give us a break.

We're working with municipal officials, we're working with environmentalists and, yes, we are working with the industry to be able to grow in a much different

way because of the lack of vision by your government previously. If we had left it up to the previous government, we would pave over this entire province. Well, that's not going to happen under our

government. We're going to grow in a better and more effective way.

The Speaker: Final supplementary.

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): Back to the minister: One person who will not be on the $10,000-a-person list for the Sorbara mansion fundraiser

is Lidia Kuleshnyk. Lidia has been representing a group of farmers in the Ajax area where the greenbelt cut their farms in half. She came to Queen's Park. She made her point. She did not have a

single meeting, as far as we know. She didn't see the science behind that decision. She didn't have her chance for appeal. She wakes up Monday morning and now finds out her entire farm and that

entire row of farms in north Ajax are in the greenbelt, the opposite of what they were asking for.

Lidia Kuleshnyk and those farmers cannot afford to pay $10,000 each to go to a fundraiser at the Sorbara mansion. I say to the minister, if they can't pay the

$10,000, how do they get their appeal? What can you say to farmers who want to have their fair day in court as well?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: The Minister of Municipal Affairs.

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, minister responsible for seniors): I repeat once again that the lands that are

included in the greenbelt plan can all be justified on the basis of science that was established either by the Ministry of Natural Resources or the LEAR system under the Ministry of

Agriculture.

Besides, in the particular area you're talking about around Ajax, we acted upon the official plan for the town of Ajax, plus we acted upon a resolution from

the town of Ajax by the duly elected council to include those lands within the greenbelt, and we did that because it's based on good science and good planning.

ONTARIO FARMERS

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leader of the Opposition): A question to the Acting Premier: As you are aware, and hopefully your Minister of

Agriculture is aware, there are thousands of people on the front lawn of Queen's Park today, protesting this government's inaction with respect to the challenges that the farming community and

rural Ontario are facing today. We've heard the sounds of honest working people who don't have $10,000 each to donate to the Liberal Party. They have to get your attention the old-fashioned way,

and I hope they've been loud enough to get your attention. I hope their shouts have penetrated the blankets that your Minister of Agriculture is holding over his head in some bed in the

basement.

Acting Premier, your party broke your promise to make agriculture a lead ministry in the Liberal government by slashing spending on agriculture by 20% in your

first year. Your Premier says his top priority is a swanky new $400-million casino hotel in a Liberal riding, while your agriculture minister holds $300-per-person fundraisers with anti-farming

activists. Farmers in Ontario this year will lose $229 million compared to a $1-billion net income for farmers in the rest of Canada. Farmers have come here for answers. Acting Premier, why have

you clearly turned your back on Ontario farmers?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of the Environment): I'm very happy to have the opportunity to stand in the House and say how very much this

government welcomes the visitors who have come to Queen's Park today. They have made their points in a very effective and peaceful way. I myself had the opportunity over the lunch hour to go out

there and walk with them. I know that the Minister of Agriculture was out there with them from 10:30 this morning, I believe, until he left the city, on his way to Ottawa to take their message to

the government in Ottawa.

We understand that agriculture and farmers in this province are in crisis. Our government is acting, we're listening, and this Minister of Agriculture is very

effective. He has gone to take their message to Ottawa to get them what they deserve so we can continue to have a strong, viable agriculture industry in the province of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Supplementary? The member from Oxford.

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): Acting Premier, you will know, as was mentioned in the first question, that there were thousands of farmers on

the lawn. They were hoping to be able to come to Queen's Park and speak to the politicians and then hopefully be given the opportunity to have the minister answer questions in the House. Obviously,

the minister did not feel that was important, so he chose not to be here. I also didn't see the Premier there, so I guess the Premier has turned his back on agriculture too.

Acting Premier, why is your government saddling farmers with increased costs of doing business at this point in history? In six weeks, our farmers will be

planting, and many cannot afford to put seed in the ground. Ontario farmers lost over $229 million this year alone. When will we have an agriculture minister who will stand up and fight for

Ontario's farmers? When will we have a minister who will take charge of this disaster? When will we have a minister whose voice will not only be heard but listened to? It's clear to our farmers

that Mr. Peters would rather hobnob at $300-a-plate --

The Speaker: Thank you. Acting Premier?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: I'm delighted to have this opportunity to say to the people of Ontario and the people in this House that we have one of

the strongest agriculture ministers that this province has ever seen. And what is the evidence of that? Let me tell you. I can say, because I know, that at the cabinet table, whether we talk about

health care, whether we talk about education, whether we talk about energy, this Minister of Agriculture is making the views of that community known and heard. We have implemented -- we have active

policies in this province in all those areas to support rural Ontario.

Do you want to know where the Minister of Agriculture is today? He's in Ottawa fighting for Ontario farmers, fighting for our fair share. That's the kind of

Minister of Agriculture we have here in Ontario, and I'm proud to serve with him.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Member from Niagara Centre, come to order, please. Final supplementary.

Mr. Hardeman: Madam Minister, you can't blow that one by the farmers. On the biggest farming awareness day of the year, where's our Premier?

Where's our Minister of Agriculture? Why does Steve Peters see the need to be on the lawn shaking hands but then not returning here for question period? Farming is in crisis, and it's a sad time

when the Minister of Agriculture doesn't even bother to show up to fight for farmers.

Acting Premier, in the 2004 budget, your government slashed safety net support for crop stabilization by $50 million, a 33% cut.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Member from Guelph-Wellington.

Interjections.

The Speaker: The Minister of Community and Social Services, if you would come to order.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I'll be starting to warn members, because we're going to have a good question period today. I think we were at the final

supplementary of the member from Oxford.

Mr. Hardeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I'll continue. Acting Premier, in the 2004 budget, your government slashed safety net support

for crop stabilization by $50 million, a 33% cut; This at a time when the Ministry of Agriculture saw its administrative budget skyrocket by $11 million, or a 68% increase. Once again, Minister

Peters -- oh, I'm sorry, he's not here. Acting Premier, the numbers don't lie. You cut monies previously spent to help farmers in favour of rewarding Queen's Park bureaucrats --

The Speaker: Thank you. The question's been asked.

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: I think it's important to remind the members of this House that when people came to this place to make their views

known, members from this government and this cabinet went out to the front lawn. We spoke with those people. We talked to them, unlike when you were in government. You brought in the police and you

brought in the barricades and you built a wall around the members of the government. We went out there; we're talking to them. They're the people that we represent.

You asked what this Minister of Agriculture has done for the farming community in Ontario. One of the first things he did was sign the agricultural policy

framework, which your government wouldn't do. That enabled our farmers to access $1.7 billion that you prevented them from accessing. That's what this Minister of Agriculture has done.

The Speaker: New question, the leader of the third party.

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Acting Premier. Thousands of Ontario farmers came to Queen's Park today to

deliver a clear message to the McGuinty government. There is a serious farm viability crisis in Ontario, and they have a beef with your lack of a plan and your inaction. It's never been tougher to

be a farmer in Ontario, never tougher than it is now. Farm incomes are in free fall. For the first time ever in the history of Ontario, farmers have a negative income. I heard a lot of

heart-wrenching stories from people who are afraid of losing everything. Acting Premier, what's your plan for Ontario agriculture? What's your plan for the farmers who produce Ontario's food?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: I'm very happy to speak about the good work that the Premier of Ontario and the Minister of Agriculture have done to

support the agriculture industry in Ontario. I think it's also important to report to the members of this House that because we are very aware of the crisis there is an agriculture in Ontario, the

Premier and the Minister of Agriculture met with eight leaders of the agriculture community just last week. I believe it's a responsible approach to work with the representatives from the

agriculture community, to understand from them exactly where and exactly how this government can best respond to the crisis they are now facing.

You were outside; you heard the farmers. I heard the farmers. They recognize that many of the issues that they're made to face right now are not of their

making and not of our making. But together we've got to work with them to get them through it.

Mr. Hampton: Minister, I asked for a plan, and as usual from the McGuinty government, we hear a lot of wordage and no plan. Let me tell you,

the farmers out there think so much of what you're doing that 7,000 came here today not to congratulate you but to tell you that you're missing the boat and you're risking their very incomes.

They don't need any more Dalton McGuinty "I feel your pain" speeches. They need a plan. They need to see that you have something to work in the short term and

something to work in the longer term. They are risking everything, and so far they see nothing from the McGuinty government; nothing at all except more press releases that don't add up to a plan.

Deputy Premier, Acting Premier -- whatever you want to call yourself today -- what's the McGuinty government plan so that people who produce our food can afford to stay on the land and can afford

to produce the food for Ontario consumers?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: Our government has recognized the importance of the second-largest industry in Ontario, the industry that feeds us. That

is why the Minister of Agriculture signed the agriculture policy framework. That is why this Minister of Agriculture has provided $138 million to support farmers and assist them through the BSE

crisis. That is why we have recently announced a $6-million drainage program. That why we are moving forward with our ethanol strategy, which is going to support agriculture in the province of

Ontario as well. That is why, unlike the previous government, we have directed dollars toward supporting the largest farms in Ontario to meet the nutrient management commitments; we've put $20

million aside.

Maybe for the NDP those millions of dollars don't mean anything. That's not what I heard from the farmers out there. The reality is, we have more to do, our

Premier and our Minister of Agriculture are prepared to do it, and they're working with the farm community to find the solutions that will work for them.

The Speaker: Final supplementary.

Mr. Hampton: Minister, I asked for a plan. You mentioned ethanol. I met with a list of corn farmers from the Chatham area earlier this

morning. Let me tell you something. Your Premier goes down to Chatham and talks about ethanol. Those corn farmers who live within five and 10 kilometres of that ethanol plant are going broke. Do

you know why? Because your ethanol plant doesn't use Ontario corn. Your ethanol plant uses corn that comes from Michigan and Ohio and is subsidized. Farmers in the Chatham area aren't going to

plant corn this year because the McGuinty government is subsidizing the operation of ethanol plants that use American corn. Is that what you call a plan?

Insurance rates are going through the roof, hydro rates are escalating, the cost of doing almost everything on the farm is going through the roof, and all

you've got to offer is importing American corn? Where's the McGuinty government plan for our farmers?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: Obviously the honourable member is not paying attention to the good work that has been done so far by the government. He

doesn't understand that we continue to work with representatives from the agriculture community. They brought their message here; they're very eager to work with the Premier and with the minister

so that, going forward, we can provide resources in areas that will meet their needs.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Member from Renfrew-Nipissing, come to order.

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: Our Minister of Agriculture has also recognized --

Interjection.

The Speaker: Order. Member from Renfrew-Nipissing, I'm going to give you a warning. The next time I'll be naming you.

Minister?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: Our minister has also recognized that while we are dealing with a very serious crisis in the agriculture industry, and

we do have a role and we can help farmers, the federal government also has a very key role to play in ensuring that our industry is sustained and remains strong in the province of Ontario. He has

gone to make his case with the other ministers of agriculture from across Canada. This is a national issue, and I'm very confident that our Minister of Agriculture is going to make the points that

need to be made so that he can --

The Speaker: New question.

Mr. Hampton: To the Acting Premier: some of the farmers I met with today wonder, how can Quebec provide their farmers with floor prices? You

say this is a national problem. They're wondering, how can Quebec provide their farmers with floor prices so they can afford to produce? Your Premier went down to Chatham and used the Chatham

ethanol plant as a place to deliver one of his "promise" speeches, and do you know what? The farmers who live within 10 or 15 kilometres of that plant and produce corn can't sell corn to that

plant. That tells us just how out of touch your government is, how out of touch the McGuinty government is, with the plight of farmers. You say it's a national problem. Tell me, why can Quebec

afford to support their farmers when the McGuinty government is importing subsidized corn from the United States?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: First of all, I think it's important to remind the honourable member that the ethanol initiative that we have underway

is going to be good for our environment; it's going to provide 3,000 new jobs in Ontario. The Minister of Agriculture is working on a strategy that will enable the ethanol producers to access more

domestic corn.

I want to say, with respect to his issue around the way the Quebec government supports their farmers, that they're using our money to do it, my friend. That's

why Minister Peters has gone to Ottawa to get our fair share. Is it fair that other provincial governments in Canada are in a position to provide that support and we are actually funding those

subsidy programs?

Mr. Hampton: Maybe then you can tell us, did the Minister of Agriculture go to meet with the federal Minister of Agriculture today? Did he go

to whine, or did he go to blame? You're trying to do one and the same thing. One minute you're whining, and the next minute you're blaming.

The question is this, Minister: You say that Ontario farmers should be proud of your government's ethanol strategy. Your government's ethanol strategy is

bringing in subsidized corn from Ohio and Michigan while Ontario corn farmers go broke, while they lose everything. Is it the McGuinty government position that those farmers should be happy about

that?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: It is the position of this Minister of Agriculture that we will work to ensure that more domestic corn will be able to

be used in our ethanol strategy. He has recognized that there are issues, and we're working to ensure that ethanol that is produced in Ontario is made from Ontario corn.

With respect to the issue around the Minister of Agriculture in Ottawa, he is there to represent the issues of Ontario farmers at the federal table with all

the other ministers of agriculture, where he should be. That's exactly where we want our provincial voice: speaking out for farmers about the issues that Ontario farmers have to deal with. We want

the federal government to provide the kind of support that they should be providing, to help our farmers deal with the crises they are dealing with, some of them because of a national impact.

Mr. Hampton: We're still listening to hear the plan. Last week, I met with farmers in the Orangeville area with our candidate, Lynda

McDougall. This is what some of those farmers told us: Ontario's 21,000 beef farmers have lost over $200 million, Ontario sheep farmers have lost money and Ontario dairy farmers are also losing

money.

What they're wondering is this: They see your government has $500 million for auto investment, they see that you have $125 million for investment in film and

television production in Toronto and they see that you have $400 million for investment in the casino in Windsor -- again, your argument is that this will sustain jobs -- but what they want to know

is, if you've got a $1 billion for investments in these sectors to sustain jobs, where's the investment strategy for Ontario farmers who are rapidly going out of business?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: I've shared this information with the member. I'm very happy to do it again, to talk about all the good work the

Minister of Agriculture has done and will continue to do to support farmers in Ontario. We have provided resources to help farmers with the BSE crisis: $138 million. We have provided resources to

assist with the ruminant situation, to assist with dead stock. We have provided additional resources for nutrient management.

I think it's important for all of us to remember that we are in a very unusual time, that there are many reasons why the agriculture industry is in crisis in

Ontario today. Our Premier and our Minister of Agriculture are prepared to work with the agricultural representatives to help them identify what more we can do. I'm sharing with you what our

efforts have been so far. I believe there is more we can do, and I know that our --

The Speaker: Thank you. New question.

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): My question was for the ag minister, who is undoubtedly feeling some pressure today, so to the

Acting Premier: Your ag minister yesterday questioned where my loyalties lie. I've been outside talking to farmers since eight this morning. My loyalties are to farmers, to rural people. I don't

discriminate. I don't judge what they farm or what organization they belong to. Acting Premier, farmers outside say your ag minister is a puppet. They say he has abandoned them. Your government has

to stop blaming others for your shortcomings. Your government has to stop trying to divide and conquer. While your ag minister was mudslinging yesterday, he neglected to answer questions from

myself and the member from Haliburton-Victoria-Brock. Will you stand in your place today -- we've had thousands of farmers here -- and commit the $300 million for cash crop farmers --

The Speaker: Thank you. Acting Premier?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: I want to remind the honourable member that the Minister of Agriculture was out speaking with the farmers who came here

to Queen's Park today. He was out there for hours to listen to them and to hear their concerns. I also want to remind the honourable member that the Premier and the Minister of Agriculture last

week met with the elected representatives of farming communities from across Ontario, because we are aware of the crisis they're in. The Premier and the minister want to understand directly from

these representative groups what we can do, exactly the very best way we can move forward the kind of support they need. Some of that can be regulatory changes. Some of that is additional funding

for programs.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Order. The member from Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant doesn't seem to want the answer. You're shouting down the minister. Is there a

supplementary? The member from Lanark-Carleton.

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark-Carleton): Farmers from eastern Ontario are not going to have enough money to plant crops this spring.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Order. Member from Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant, I'm going to give you a warning. I would like to hear the member from

Lanark-Carleton's supplementary.

Mr. Sterling: Farmers in eastern Ontario are not going to have enough money to plant crops in the spring. Your minister, shortly after being

elected in 2003, went up to Ottawa and signed an agreement, the Canadian agricultural income stabilization program, which has proved to be a disaster in terms of what it provides our farmers. It's

also a mess. When can our farmers expect not their 2004 cheques but their 2003 cheques so they can plant their crops in the spring?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: The Minister of Agriculture has recognized that there are serious problems with the CAIS program, that it's not meeting

the goals it was intended to meet. However, the minister has indicated he is looking forward to ensuring that those cheques are delivered to the farmers before the spring planting.

POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS

Ms. Marilyn Churley (Toronto-Danforth): I have a question for the Acting Premier. Prime agricultural lands were excluded from the greenbelt;

it was pointed out to you time and time again. I made an amendment to have them included, but all the Liberal members on the committee voted against it. We wondered why. Lo and behold, there are

now allegations that developers who attended your secret $10,000-per-plate fundraiser own some of these lands.

Minister, you have been dithering time and time again on your election promise of real-time disclosure for over a year. Now is the time to clear the air. Will

you tell us today who was at that fundraiser, or do you have something to hide?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of the Environment): The minister responsible for democratic renewal will answer that.

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): Yes, we are

going to be bringing in laws that will require real-time disclosure. In the interim, Premier McGuinty said to the Progressive Conservative Party and the New Democratic Party, "Why don't we all play

by the same rules, and why don't we all have real-time disclosure?" He did this on October 28, 2004. What's your answer?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Government House leader, please come to order. I would like to hear the member from Toronto-Danforth's

supplementary.

Ms. Churley: Minister, that answer is getting very tired. But right now, you have a major scandal brewing here. It's in your interest to keep

your promise and disclose who was at that dinner. You're stalling, it looks like you're stalling and the people of Ontario can smell that you're stalling. They know you're trying to hide something

here.

Let me repeat: During the election campaign, you said that people had a right to know who funded your party and that you'd ensure they knew right away. Last

October, the Premier stood in this House and said, "If you are prepared to go there, then we're prepared to go there right away." Instead, you've stalled. And now we learn that while you were

setting the final boundaries for your greenbelt, developers who wanted their lands excluded were paying $10,000 to spend quality time with your Premier and the finance minister. Will you disclose

the names of those who attended that dinner?

Hon. Mr. Bryant: The member knows that the name of every donor is disclosed to the public through Elections Ontario. You know that. The

question is the timing. Why won't the New Democratic Party, why won't the Progressive Conservative Party, accept the challenge that Premier McGuinty made in October, November and month after month

after month? The silence is deafening.

I think I've got an answer. I think I know why they won't accept the challenge. We just heard last weekend that Mr. Tory has raised $2.5 million since he's

been leader. That's $15,000 a day. Why won't the Conservatives accept Dalton McGuinty's challenge and agree to real-time disclosure now?

IDENTITY THEFT

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a question for the Minister of Consumer and Business Services.

Interjections.

Mr. Ruprecht: Why don't you listen? You might learn something.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Why don't you direct your question to the Chair.

Mr. Ruprecht: I will, as soon as I get a chance.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, member from Nepean-Carleton.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): Show some respect for the Chair, Tony.

The Speaker: Order. I'm now going to warn the member from Simcoe North to come to order. That's your first warning.

Mr. Ruprecht: Identity theft is the fastest-growing crime in North America according to numerous consumer awareness associations and law

enforcement agencies. In order to combat this growing crime, our government has taken action in recent months with the launching of our identity theft statement and partnership with industry at

large. I want to congratulate this minister and commend him for producing these brochures in languages of the ethnic community, because it is so important for them to understand that identity theft

is a growing problem. So thank you, Minister.

However, most of these initiatives have consumer focus, and the minister should know that our government is doing everything it can to ensure --

The Speaker: Thank you. The question has been asked.

Hon. Jim Watson (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): Mr. Speaker, I can listen to this member all afternoon.

It's rare that I get a question. I can't even remember who my critic is on the --

Interjection.

The Speaker: Member for Niagara Centre --

Interjection.

The Speaker: Order. When I sit and I hear shouting across, I'll give you a warning.

Minister.

Hon. Mr. Watson: I think that was the junior member from Nepean, Mr. Speaker. He obviously wasn't given permission for a question today.

I want to thank the member for Davenport for his consistent interest in the issue of identity theft. As he rightly pointed out, identity theft is the

fastest-growing crime in North America.

On Monday this week I was pleased to be in my hometown of Ottawa, where we launched a new information kit aimed at giving businesses useful tips and

information on how to avoid the theft of information. I was there with the president of the Retail Council of Canada, Diane Brisebois, the chief of the Ottawa Police Service, Vince Bevan, as well

as the federal privacy commissioner and other interested parties.

The information kit provides the kind of information that both employers and employees need to avoid identity theft in their places of business. It is going to

provide valuable information for these individuals, not only to save money for themselves and their businesses but also, quite frankly --

The Speaker: Thank you.

Mr. Ruprecht: These crimes are growing because more personal information is collected and retained than ever before, and the risk of identity

theft multiplies every time it is transmitted or retained in an unsafe manner.

I have heard from my constituents -- I know you have too -- of the government's need to educate businesses on how to reduce their risk of identity theft and

how to take action should they become victims. I understand that we have launched an information campaign geared toward businesses.

Can you explain how the identity theft kit for business can be obtained so that the right people have the right information; and are you prepared to enact

legislation to protect consumers if this information campaign is not effective?

Hon. Mr. Watson: That's one of the tougher questions I've had since being a minister, and I thank the member very much.

First of all I want to thank Visa Canada. Visa Canada was at the forefront of a partnership that we developed with the federal and provincial consumer

ministers across the country. Secondly, the information is available free of charge to businesses. It's available on our Web site, serviceontario.ca, which is very easily accessible to businesses.

Finally, as the member pointed out -- and he represents a riding that has many different cultures and languages -- the identity theft brochure is available and has been sent to all members and

government information centres in seven different languages, because new Canadians are often some of the most vulnerable targets of these scam artists. We're very pleased to provide the information

in their languages.

ONTARIO FARMERS

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): A question to the Acting Premier: As you saw today, corn producers, grape growers, tender fruit producers are

becoming increasingly concerned about the McGuinty government's assault on farmers and their way of life. The latest example is your "greenbotch" legislation, which, I remind you, in

section 6

gives extraordinary powers to the minister to limit any kind of building on a farmer's lot. The proposals that you have on the table would effectively limit any value-added operations to the extent

that any winery that currently exists in the province could never be built in the greenbelt area. Cherry-pitting operations that contribute to agriculture could not be built under that set of

rules.

Sadly, the government always characterizes farmers who object as speculators instead of as having legitimate concerns about the regulations that you're

bringing forward with your greenbelt legislation. In fact, Paul Mistele from OFA says it's the most draconian piece of legislation ever faced by farmers. Acting Premier, are they speculators, or do

they have legitimate concerns?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of the Environment): The Minister of Municipal Affairs.

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, minister responsible for seniors): Let me make it abundantly clear that this

government does not regard farmers as speculators. That is your

interpretation, sir. We regard farmers as being in an honourable profession. It is a very important profession. What we are doing in

the greenbelt is to ensure that farming and the --

Mr. Hudak: Then why are they objecting?

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Member from Erie-Lincoln, come to order. I give you a warning. You asked a question, and the minister is

trying to respond.

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: What we want to make sure of with the greenbelt legislation is that farming will continue. We made extra provisions in our

greenbelt plan to make sure that not only the current farming that's being carried out on the good agricultural land within the greenbelt can continue but also that modern and more modern new

processes that may come along within the agricultural industry can be accommodated there. We think it's extremely important, not only for this generation but for generations to come, that the good

agricultural lands that are within the greenbelt area be preserved for farming, the way it should be.

The Speaker: The member from York North has a supplementary.

Mrs. Julia Munro (York North): To the Acting Premier: I have yet another example of your and your government's assault on rural Ontario. Your

election platform identified a commitment to 5% ethanol content in gasoline by 2007. A few moments ago, you said that your government was working on an Ontario solution. Yet the Ontario Corn

Producers' Association developed a business plan with broad stakeholder support; you didn't listen.

Minister, will you explain to this House why you are so committed to an arbitrary date of 2007 that will, according to the Ontario Corn Producers' Association,

shut out Ontario's corn producers and processors? Why are you not listening to them?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: Speaker, I'm not sure if it's in order, since the first question was on the greenbelt, but I'm very happy to talk about

our ethanol initiative and our ethanol commitment. The reason 2007 is our first target date and 2010 is our second target date is that we are committed to improving air quality in the province.

This is cleaner gas. We made that commitment during the campaign. This is going to be good for farmers in Ontario. Certainly, the farmers in Cornwall who produce corn, the farmers in Brantford who

produce corn, think this is a good strategy. We know that it's going to be better for the environment, because we're going to have cleaner gas, and it's keeping a commitment that we made during the

campaign.

HEALTH RECORDS

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): My question is to the Minister of Health. Last week, as you recall, private medical tests went missing in

my community. They were stolen from a van that was contracted to deliver personal and private health information to clinics and hospitals in the area. We know that one individual was disciplined.

We know that couriers won't be leaving people's medical tests out in the open any more. But we still don't know how many test results were lost, how many patients had their privacy violated.

Minister, what do you have to say to those in Niagara region who are now wide open to the very identity theft that your member from Davenport just asked your

Minister of Consumer and Business Services about? Can you please respond?

Hon. George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I can. I'll respond along the same lines as I did last week, which is that

this is a matter that we take extremely seriously. We work very, very hard to make sure that the personal information of individuals is protected. This is job one.

The member, in her very question, indicated that -- in examination of the circumstances that went down, we're always seeking to improve those, and as a result,

measures have been taken to make sure that this is the case in the future. We continue to work, through the appropriate bodies, to make sure that any information we have is properly conveyed to the

individuals who are affected. This is what we'll continue to do.

Ms. Horwath: Mr. Minister, obviously you haven't even seen the package that was produced and delivered to Queen's Park offices this week by

your own minister. Quite frankly, I've studied the package, and your ministry is in breach of at least three of the standard safeguards in this package against identity theft. Did you prepare a

strategy to manage the breach? No. Did you use locks, alarms and video cameras? No. Did you limit access to sensitive data? No, you did not, Minister. Why, then, are you breaching the identity

theft protection measures advocated by your own minister and in fact questioned by your own member today in this Legislature?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: This honourable member, in her desire to create hysteria and fear, is creating a circumstance where she has removed any

of the reality of the situation, which was that somebody broke into a vehicle in the first place -- she talks about alarms and security systems and cameras.

Obviously, there are important protocols in place, and we're always working hard to improve those. We brought in the strongest personal protection law in the

country, which is a standard that other people are chasing, and we'll continue to work to improve those.

GROWTH PLANNING

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): My question is for the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal. You recently released our

government's draft growth plan for the greater Golden Horseshoe. In the next 25 years, about 75% of our growth is expected to occur in the GTA and Hamilton. Minister, how will this growth plan be

implemented and managed so that sprawl and gridlock is reduced and communities get the infrastructure support they need to grow?

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal): I thank the member very much for the question. We have a situation where we've

had a lack of leadership from previous governments that has resulted in gridlock, sprawl, poor air quality and inappropriate land use. In fact, that's exactly why we brought the greenbelt, Places

to Grow, source water protection, transportation strategies and a whole host of other measures.

The member asks, what are the necessary infrastructure projects which are going to be put in place to reverse some of the decline we've seen under the previous

governments? Quite clearly, our government has taken action where there was none previously: $1 billion to support the TTC, $1 billion for GO train enhancement and expansion, $300 million for the

Kitchener LRT, over $200 million to support the Ottawa train. I want all members to know that there is much more to come. My colleague the Minister of Transportation will be unveiling a strong

Greater Toronto Transportation Authority, a GTA-wide transit strategy, and much, much more that I'd be happy --

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): And I'm sure that in the supplementary, you'll get there.

Mr. Berardinetti: My supplementary to the minister: You may know that areas in my riding of Scarborough Southwest are earmarked for growth

under the city of Toronto's new official plan. In fact, a few weeks ago I had the opportunity to tour the riding with the mayor of Toronto, David Miller, the city councillor for the area, Gerry

Altobello, and my wife, Michelle. We actually spent a good morning together going through the area.

The Warden Woods community is going to see intensified residential development and growth in the coming years. Minister, I'd like to ask you how that

intensification will be phased in over a period of years and how my residents will be given greater choices in choosing the type of housing they want in their community.

Hon. Mr. Caplan: In fact, that goes right to the heart of the very plan. People across Ontario are telling us that they want greater choices.

They want neighbourhoods. They want easy access to community services, schools, work and recreational opportunities. They want to be connected between communities as well.

There's sometimes a misperception that it's either a choice between a 50-foot lot or a 50-storey condominium. We reject that model entirely. There is an entire

range of housing choices and affordabilities that we think Ontario consumers ought to have access to. We think there's an entire range of transportation choices, whether it's cars, transit,

walking, cycling, skateboarding or whatever. We think that Ontarians deserve those choices, and that is what our plan will deliver for the people of Ontario, through infill and through brownfield

redevelopment.

The city of Toronto is already near their target, and they have an outstanding official plan for this.

RURAL ONTARIO

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): My question is for the Acting Premier. Today I heard from John Buchler from my riding of Parry

Sound-Muskoka. In fact, his wife, Antonia, was here today at the rally, along with Klaus Wand and a whole busload of farmers from my region. John is the first one to say that farmers aren't just

interested in handouts, and that's a good thing, because by the time they get through the paperwork for CAIS and for BSE funding, it's really not worth their while. What has him really bugged is

the way your government is treating rural Ontario. He would be the first one to tell you that the drinking water regulations and the nutrient management rules are going to shut down small farmers

all across the province.

Minister, tell me, tell the small farmers in my riding and Ontario, the ones who were here today on the lawn at Queen's Park: When are you finally going to

come up with a regulation that is reasonable, affordable and sustainable?

Hon. Leona Dombrowsky (Minister of the Environment): I'm very happy to be able to stand in the House today and say to the honourable member

that we did inherit a lot of problems, and we're here to fix them.

I'm really happy that you talk about the water regulation, particularly regulation 170. I have heard from many of your constituents who were absolutely aghast

with the burden that regulation 170 was placing on them, a regulation that was signed by the now leader of the official opposition. Mr. Runciman was the one who signed that regulation.

We have been working very hard to improve that, I'm happy to report. I was happy to report at the Rural Ontario Municipal Association that we've completed a

good deal of consultation. We've gone to 12 communities in Ontario, and we're going to be repairing that very flawed regulation very soon.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Supplementary, the member for Waterloo-Wellington.

Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): My question is to the same minister. Of the many thousands of farmers on the lawn of the Legislature

today, hundreds were from Waterloo-Wellington, and I want to thank them for helping us to send a message to the government that rural Ontario will not be ignored and we will stand up for our vital

interests.

For three years now, I have been calling upon the provincial government to protect double-hatter firefighters so that our rural communities will be safer as a

result of their training, skills and knowledge. Recently, I was pleased to learn that the Ontario Federation of Agriculture has added its strong voice in support of the double-hatters' right to

volunteer in their home communities. I would ask the Acting Premier, who represents a rural riding in eastern Ontario where this is a huge issue, what is she doing to stand up for the right of

double-hatters to volunteer in their home communities and in their own free time?

Hon. Mrs. Dombrowsky: I guess I'm surprised. Yes, I am a rural member and I am aware of the double-hatter issue in rural Ontario. It was an

issue that was raised on the floor of the Rural Ontario Municipal Association convention last week, and I think the minister responsible gave quite an appropriate answer. I'm sure the agriculture

community appreciates that the minister responsible, Minister Kwinter, is doing all he can, working in conjunction with the fire marshal's office to ensure that communities across Ontario,

including rural communities, continue to be safe.

I just want to remind the honourable member: Maybe he could explain to the OFA and all the folks in rural Ontario why a former minister, himself a rural

representative, did not support your private member's bill when he was the minister and you were the government.

HYDRO RATES

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Natural Resources. Yesterday the McGuinty government

rubber-stamped an outrageous 35% pay increase for the chief executive officer of Hydro One: a $750,000 base salary, a $600,000 bonus, $125,923 in other compensation, a $2-million severance package

should he decide to leave, and you're going to subsidize the mortgage on his home to the tune of $125,000. Meanwhile, the news wasn't so good for the people of Terrace Bay. Neenah Paper is closing

a pulp mill on May 1, and 130 workers will lose their jobs in Terrace Bay. Why is the mill closing? High production costs -- that's code for Dalton McGuinty's 12% increase in the hydro rate for

pulp and paper mills. Minister, can you tell the people of Terrace Bay how you justify a 35% pay hike for the chief executive officer at Hydro One at the same time as the McGuinty government kills

130 jobs in that town?

Hon. David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources): What I'd like to do with the member is address the situation in Terrace Bay, because it's

alarming to me. Obviously I'm saddened when I see announcements such as that, where 130 workers are being displaced. It looks to be about 70 of those workers will be eligible for early retirement.

We have talked to the company about ensuring that they receive their maximum benefits and early retirement benefits in order that they can stay in the community.

I've also pledged to work with the company to resolve many of the challenges they have. Fibre supply is obviously a big challenge, and we're working with the

company. I gave the company some suggestions in a meeting I had on Monday, when they came up from Atlanta, where I think we could streamline our forestry operations. So I've pledged to work with

them so that the viability of machine number 2 will sustain the community.

Mr. Hampton: Minister, it's another 130 jobs that are being killed by your government's policy of increasing hydro rates for industries in

northern Ontario. That's on top of the 6,000 jobs that were lost across northern Ontario in the last 12 months under your government, and more mills are threatened with closure because you've got a

policy of constantly increasing hydro rates for those mills.

Here's what the people in Terrace Bay see. Your hydro policy is closing their mill. They know that investments need to be made in companies like that. They see

that the McGuinty government has a $500-million investment strategy for the auto sector to sustain jobs. They see that you've got a $125-million-a-year investment strategy to sustain jobs in the

movie and television production in Toronto. They see that you've got an investment strategy of $400 million for the casino in Windsor to sustain jobs. What they're wondering is, where is the

McGuinty government investment strategy for the forest industry, a sector that needs to make investments? Where's the strategy --

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Thank you. Minister?

Hon. Mr. Ramsay: As the member well knows, I brought together the leaders of the industry, the unions, the communities, the First Nations and

the environmental community in northern Ontario. They are completing a report, which I will have on my desk by the end of next month. That is where I'm going to get an action plan from the experts.

We have also asked experts to be part of that council, to start to give us some direction for increasing the value-added capacity of the industry. This will create jobs in the north.

I would say to the member, he may have missed the announcement of the Minister of Energy of the co-generation facilitator that the government is appointing so

that we can work with the industry to start to facilitate co-generation opportunities for industry, to get them basically off the grid and maybe even be a net contributor to the grid. We think

there's a lot of potential in northern industry to produce power.

NORTHERN ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT

Mr. David Orazietti (Sault Ste. Marie): My question is for the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. After more than a decade of

neglect, our government has introduced initiatives to ensure that residents in northern Ontario will begin to share in the economic prosperity of our province. Minister, you've played a key role in

leading on these initiatives, and certainly the residents of Sault Ste. Marie have seen first-hand your commitment to our city, as well as to other northern communities. Our government has reopened

the northern office of the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines, signalling that the north is once again open for business. Can you tell us about the strategies contained in the northern

prosperity plan that will help facilitate growth in northern Ontario?

Hon. Rick Bartolucci (Minister of Northern Development and Mines): I would like to thank the member and congratulate him for all the hard work

that he's doing for his constituents in Sault Ste. Marie.

There's no question but that after years of neglect on the part of the previous government, northern Ontarians really are optimistic about their future.

They're optimistic because the McGuinty government is keeping its commitments to northern Ontario. We have kept our commitment to refocus the northern Ontario heritage fund to target job creation

in the north. We have kept our commitment to create a northern Ontario grow bonds program. We have kept our commitment to re-establish the northern development councils so that northerners can

provide their input -- a direct voice to the government -- ensuring that the solutions to northern Ontarians' concerns are found and executed by northerners.

PETITIONS

SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION FUNDING

Mr. John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Ontario Ministry of Education has proposed a new funding model for the transportation of students to school, which will cut the annual

transportation grant to the Ottawa-Carleton Catholic school board by 45%;

"Whereas these cuts will force the Ottawa-Carleton Catholic District School Board to reduce the existing level of daily bus services for its schools;

"Whereas these cuts will result in increased walking distances for young children and other possible service reductions affecting Catholic schools in Ontario,

which could compromise the safety and welfare of these children;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"The Ministry of Education should re-evaluate the proposed new transportation funding model to ensure that the current level of funding for the Ottawa-Carleton

Catholic District School Board is maintained, so that children attending Catholic schools in the provincial riding of Nepean-Carleton will be able to safely travel back and forth from school."

It will be signed by this member and the member for Timmins-James Bay.

ADVERTISEMENT

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads as

follows:

"Whereas Bell Canada Sympatico issued a paper advertisement to households in Toronto and specifically in the riding of Scarborough Southwest; and

"Whereas the advertisement depicts an anatomy drawing of a female body with some sections cut out; and

"Whereas the text by Bell Canada Sympatico beside this drawing reads, `You'll do anything to protect your kids from inappropriate content. So will we.';

and

"Whereas this is offensive to females and to the general public, as it is degrading and misleading;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to forward a copy of this advertisement to the Ministry of Consumer and Business Services

and the Ministry of the Attorney General for review and possible legal action against Bell Canada Sympatico and its agents."

I agree with the petition, and I put my signature to it.

REGIONAL CENTRES FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas Dalton McGuinty and his Liberal government were elected based on their promise to rebuild public services in Ontario;

"Whereas the Minister of Community and Social Services has announced plans to close Huronia Regional Centre, home to people with developmental disabilities,

many of whom have multiple diagnoses and severe problems that cannot be met in the community;

"Whereas closing Huronia Regional Centre will have a devastating impact on residents with developmental disabilities, their families, the developmental

services sector and the economies of the local communities;

"Whereas Ontario could use the professional staff and facilities of HRC to extend specialized services, support and professional training to many more clients

who live in the community, in partnership with families and community agencies;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the government to keep Huronia Regional Centre, home to people with developmental

disabilities, open, and to transform them into `centres of excellence' to provide specialized services and support to Ontarians with developmental needs, no matter where they live."

I'm pleased to sign my name to that.

CHIROPRACTIC SERVICES

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): My petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads:

"Whereas elimination of OHIP coverage will mean that many of the 1.2 million patients who use chiropractic will no longer be able to access the health care

they need;

"Those with reduced ability to pay -- including seniors, low-income families and the working poor -- will be forced to seek care in already overburdened family

physician's offices and emergency departments;

"Elimination of OHIP coverage is expected to save $93 million in expenditures on chiropractic treatment, at a cost to government of over $200 million in other

health care costs; and

"There was no consultation with the public on the decision to delist chiropractic services;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to reverse the decision announced in the May 18, 2004, provincial budget and maintain OHIP

coverage for chiropractic services, in the best interests of the public, patients, the health care system, government and the province."

I'm pleased to present this petition, and I affix my signature thereon because I agree with it.

TTC RIGHT-OF-WAY

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I keep getting petitions addressed to the Parliament of Ontario and the Minister of the Environment against the

dedicated TTC right-of-way on St. Clair Avenue West. The petition reads as follows:

"Whereas the city filed the ESR (the environmental assessment report) and issued the notice of completion on November 22, 2004 ... ;

"Whereas environmental impacts of the dedicated right-of-way significantly affect the quality of life of nearby residents dramatically and detrimentally;

"Whereas the availability of other alternatives to the project have not received careful consideration;

"Whereas the public consultation program and the opportunities for public participation have not been adequate;

"Whereas specific concerns remain unresolved ... ;

"Whereas the city/TTC have not made their case within the parameters set out by the Environmental Assessment Act. The act defines `environment' to include `the

social, economic and cultural condition that influences the life of humans or a community.' The city has not established the need for the project, nor has it adequately assessed the potential

socio-economic impacts that would result from" constructing such a streetcar laneway;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, demand that the Minister of the Environment issue a

part II order which would subject the St. Clair project ... to an

individual environmental assessment."

Since I agree, I'm delighted to put my name to it.

ONTARIO FARMERS

Mr. Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas thousands of Ontario farmers have been forced to take their concerns directly to Queen's Park because of a lack of response from the Dalton McGuinty

government to farm issues; and

"Whereas farming in Ontario is in crisis because of the impacts of BSE, unfair subsidies from other jurisdictions, rising costs for energy and a crushing

regulatory burden on farmers; and

"Whereas current prices for farm products do not allow for sustainable agriculture in Canada, with a 10.7% decline in the number of Canadian farms reported

between 1996 and 2001;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, ask the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to consult with Ontario's farmers to develop a long-term strategy to ensure the

viability of agriculture in our province that protects our rural way of life, and to work in the short term to alleviate the farm income crisis and listen to the concerns of farmers about the

greenbelt."

These have been signed today, and I affix my signature.

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

Mr. Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): I'm pleased to present this petition on behalf of my riding of Niagara Falls. It is addressed to the

Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It says:

"Whereas there is no established province-wide standard to deal with anaphylactic shock in Ontario schools; and

"Whereas there is no specific comment regarding anaphylactic shock in the Education Act; and

"Whereas anaphylactic shock is a serious concern that can result in life-or-death situations; and

"Whereas all students in Ontario have the right to be safe and feel safe in their school community; and

"Whereas all parents of anaphylactic students need to know that safety standards exist in all schools in Ontario;

"Therefore

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, demand that the McGuinty government support the passing of Bill 3,

An Act to protect anaphylactic students,

which requires that every school principal in Ontario establish a school anaphylactic plan."

I'm pleased to affix my signature to this petition.

ONTARIO FARMERS

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I have a petition here signed by many, many farmers.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas thousands of Ontario farmers have been forced to take their concerns directly to Queen's Park because of a lack of response from the Dalton McGuinty

government to farm issues; and

"Whereas farming in Ontario is in crisis because of the impacts of BSE, unfair subsidies from other jurisdictions, rising costs of energy and a crushing

regulatory burden on farmers; and

"Whereas current prices for farm products do not allow for sustainable agriculture in Canada, with a 10.7% decline in the number of Canadian farms reported

between 1996 and 2001;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, ask the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to consult with Ontario's farmers to develop a long-term strategy to ensure the

viability of agriculture in our province that protects our rural way of life, and to work in the short term to alleviate the farm income crisis and listen to the concerns of farmers about the

greenbelt."

I affix my signature to this petition, as I totally agree with it.

CARDIAC CARE

Mr. Bob Delaney (Mississauga West): I'm pleased to speak on behalf of a number of people in the Niagara region today. I have a petition to the

Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads as follows:

"Whereas Niagara region has a population of over 430,000 people and has the highest 30-day death rate in Ontario for heart failure, has the second-highest

one-year death rate in Ontario for heart failure, has the second-highest heart failure readmission rates in Ontario, has the third-highest post-heart-attack one-year death rate, and is 25% higher

than the Ontario average for ischemic heart disease deaths; and

"Whereas in fiscal year 2002-03, Niagara region residents had 1,230 admissions to hospital for heart failure, 1,150 patients admitted to hospital for acute

heart attack, 862 admissions to hospital for ischemic heart disease, 93 admissions to hospital for cardiomyopathy, a repatriation population of 458 post-angioplasty patients, 341 admissions to

out-of-region hospitals for coronary artery disease, 328 post-coronary artery bypass patients, 92 heart valve replacement patients and three heart transplant patients; and

"Whereas all of the above-mentioned 4,503 heart patients are eligible for cardiac rehab in Niagara, which translates to 1,500 new patients who would access

Niagara cardiac rehab services every year; and

"Whereas the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care funds cardiac rehabilitation in 24 communities but does not fund cardiac rehabilitation services anywhere in

Niagara. Heart Niagara, a registered non-profit corporation, provides services in one of the largest cardiac rehab programs in Ontario at no charge to the patient but relies on funding through

donations and special events;

"Therefore we, the undersigned concerned citizens of Niagara, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"That cardiac rehabilitation services in Niagara be funded by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, as they are in 24 other Ontario communities, and made

comprehensive and accessible."

I'm pleased to affix my signature to this petition as a supporter, and ask Clemence to carry it down for me.

ONTARIO FARMERS

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas thousands of Ontario farmers have been forced to take their concerns directly to Queen's Park because of a lack of response from the Dalton McGuinty

government to farm issues; and

"Whereas farming in Ontario is in crisis because of the impacts of BSE, unfair subsidies from other jurisdictions, rising costs of energy and a crushing

regulatory burden on farmers; and

"Whereas current prices for farm products do not allow for sustainable agriculture in Canada, with a 10.7% decline in the number of Canadian farms reported

between 1996 and 2001;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, ask the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to consult with Ontario's farmers to develop a long-term strategy to ensure the

viability of agriculture in our province that protects our rural way of life, and to work in the short term to alleviate the farm income crisis and listen to the concerns of farmers about the

greenbelt."

I affix my signature to this and present thousands of signatures.

SENIORS' TRANSIT PASS

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): This is to the Parliament of Ontario and the minister responsible for seniors:

"Whereas most seniors live on fixed incomes which are eroding every year due to inflation costs and other necessary expenses;

"Whereas most seniors have their freedom severely restricted when unable to go about their daily business, which includes public transit;

"Whereas most seniors should be encouraged to live active, healthy lives -- visiting friends, relatives, going shopping etc.;

"Whereas other jurisdictions already provide free local transit passes to seniors, namely, many cities in the USA;

"Therefore we, the undersigned, strongly urge the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and responsible for seniors, to ensure that seniors be granted a

free TTC pass and/or introduce legislation that will force the local Toronto Transit Commission to issue free TTC passes."

Since I agree, I'm delighted to sign my name to it.

PIT BULLS

Mr. John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): These are more petitions in addition to the ones I've already received from the National Capital

Coalition for People and Dogs, and it reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas aggressive dogs are found among any breed or crossbreed;

"Whereas the problem of dog attacks is best dealt with through education, training and legislation encouraging responsible ownership of all breeds of dogs;

"Whereas Premier Dalton McGuinty and Attorney General Michael Bryant have failed to allow public consultation on this bill;

"Whereas this legislation is a knee-jerk reaction to a legitimate public concern about all aggressive dogs;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"That the Legislative Assembly of Ontario refrain from enacting provincial breed-specific legislation."

I agree with it and will be passing it to my good friend to table in this House.

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK

Mr. Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas there is no established province-wide standard to deal with anaphylactic shock in Ontario schools; and

"Whereas there is no specific comment regarding anaphylactic shock in the Education Act; and

"Whereas anaphylactic shock is a serious concern that can result in life-or-death situations; and

"Whereas all students in Ontario have the right to be safe and feel safe in their school community;

"Whereas all parents of anaphylactic students need to know that safety standards exist in all schools in Ontario;

"Therefore

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, demand that the McGuinty government support the passing of Bill 3,

An Act to protect anaphylactic students,

which requires that every school principal in Ontario establish a school anaphylactic plan."

I am pleased to sign this petition, being in full support of it.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

PLACES TO GROW ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR

LES ZONES DE CROISSANCE

Mr Caplan moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 136,

An Act respecting the establishment of growth plan areas and growth plans / Projet de loi 136,

Loi sur l'établissement de zones de croissance

planifiée et de plans de croissance.

The Speaker (Hon. Alvin Curling): Mr. Caplan.

Hon. David Caplan (Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal): I will be sharing my time today with my very able and capable parliamentary

assistant, Mr. Rinaldi, the member from Northumberland. I rise today to begin second reading debate of Bill 136, the Places to Grow Act, legislation that will allow us, for the first time in the

history of our province, to make decisions about future growth in ways that strengthen our economy, support strong communities and promote a healthy environment.

As members will recall, the Places to Grow Act is enabling legislation. If passed, it will allow the government to designate specific geographic regions of

this province as growth planning areas and to develop growth plans that would guide future developments in those areas. This legislation would encourage land use planning that looks beyond the

restrictions of simple municipal boundaries. It would integrate planning across natural and local boundaries and help ensure that growth policies are coordinated amongst all levels of government.

By showing where growth should occur, it will help us to develop the public infrastructure needed to support that growth, while at the same time protecting for future generations the green spaces

so much a part of the kind of quality of life that we want; and support the agricultural lands that we're going to need to support our population and the natural systems that we desperately need to

preserve. Those are the places where growth should not occur. Above all, our growth planning will ensure that there are choices about the future that are guided by a long-term vision about the

kinds of communities we want to see.

I can't overstate it: This is truly groundbreaking legislation. Nothing like this has ever been attempted in Ontario before. This represents a radical

departure from past practice. Because it is such a sharp change from the way we've done business in the past, I want to discuss the challenges that have led us to take this step and describe the

vision for the future that guides us now.

Since about 1980, successive governments at all levels -- federal, provincial and municipal -- have allowed investments in public infrastructure to fall behind

our economic growth and the growth of our population. Governments simply did not put enough money into public infrastructure to keep it in good condition. Now, many of our public facilities are in

need of major repair: Roads and bridges are wearing out; water and waste water systems have broken down; many of our hospitals and schools are overcrowded and out of date; major highways are

clogged much of the time; and rush hour in the greater Toronto area alone now lasts some 13 hours of the day. In the greater Golden Horseshoe, our public transportation systems are inadequate and

are in desperate need of repair.

There are equally pressing needs in rural Ontario. For example, Renfrew county, the largest county in Ontario, has more than 260 bridges and culverts. A study

prepared to help the municipality anticipate future costs estimates that more than a quarter need urgent repairs. More than half will require major work that must be done within the next 10

years.

At the same time, we have not managed the rapid growth of our economy and our population in ways that will enhance our quality of life. Too often, we

emphasized short-term benefits and piecemeal planning and ignored the consequences that followed that type of uncoordinated decision-making.

In the most heavily populated parts of the province, we have developed widely dispersed car-dependent communities, a pattern of settlement that damages the

environment, threatens the economy and impairs our health and well-being. Numerous studies by the Ontario Medical Association, the Heart and Stroke Foundation, the Ontario College of Family

Physicians, the medical officer of health for Toronto, amongst others, have established important links between the way we design and build our communities and the health of our population. Air

pollution generated by daily commutes from these far-flung communities makes many of us sick and injures our health care system. In fact, the Ontario Medical Association estimates some 1,800

premature deaths per year simply because of poor air quality.

In addition, economic damage from congestion caused by this pattern of sprawl amounts to billions of dollars every year -- over $5 billion a year lost to the

provincial economy, according to the Ontario Chamber of Commerce. And if we do nothing, if we continue with business as usual, it's certain that things will get worse.

In the part of Ontario that is growing most quickly, studies by my ministry, verified by outside experts, show that over the next 30 years, greater traffic

congestion will increase commuting times some 45% and increase vehicle emissions by 42%. We will build on or pave over almost 250,000 acres of prime farmland, an area twice the size of the present

city of Toronto, simply to accommodate the new residents coming into our communities.

Other parts of the province, of course, face different challenges. For them, the issue is perhaps not runaway growth but the absence of growth. We need to

attract new people, new development and new investments in every corner of the province of Ontario: in the southwest, in the east, but most especially in northern Ontario. If the legislation we're

bringing forward today is passed, it will enable the government to develop growth plans to assist those regions and help them attract the people and job opportunities that our province so

desperately needs. But in both cases, boom or bust, continuing the patterns of the past offers no hope for the future. Business as usual is simply not an option for the McGuinty government.

I've spoken about the need to repair our existing infrastructure and build new facilities to accommodate the growth that we know is coming, that we want to

come to the province of Ontario. By our best estimates, we need to invest, at a minimum, some $100 billion in the public infrastructure over the course of the next 30 years to meet those needs. But

there is a further requirement: We cannot be content to merely replicate the past. We must use that investment in infrastructure to help us build the future and create the kind of communities and

the kind of society we want for ourselves, for our children and for our grandchildren.

It is not sufficient to simply throw money at these challenges. Certainly, we have to invest a considerable amount of money, but we also have to be much

smarter in the way we go about it. We have to get the best value for our investments by making infrastructure that exists currently work much harder, where we know it can, and by making sure that

we build the right things in the right places. We can't afford to re-create some of the boondoggles of the past. But we also need to use our investments in infrastructure to help us achieve the

kind of society that Ontarians have said they want. We need to see those investments as instruments of social change that will help us achieve the social goals that Ontarians support and hope for,

be it in health, be it in education, be it in social services, be it in the necessary vital services that we all depend upon.

In the next few years, communities across the province will make thousands of decisions about land use planning and development. Those decisions are permanent.

Once the land is paved and the houses are built, there is no going back. Our children and many, many future generations will have to live with the consequences. So if this legislation is passed,

the growth plans we'll authorize will help and coordinate those decisions in a much more effective manner so that they contribute to a larger vision of the kind of communities that we as a society

want, need and can support.

This is a dramatic change. In the past, I would say that there was no coherent vision for the future that we want and simply no plan about how to get there. So

in some parts of Ontario, we got sprawl, gridlock, air pollution, inefficient use of infrastructure and lost green space. In others, we got economic stagnation and out-migration of young people to

areas that offered greater opportunity. That is not a pattern we are willing to repeat.

This legislation, Bill 136, the Places to Grow Act, and the growth plans it would enable will help us to break that vicious cycle. If Bill 136 is passed, it

will help us develop more compact, sustainable communities -- communities that are less dependent on the car, more respectful of the natural environment and certainly much more enjoyable to live

in. It will help us to ensure that we have the right public infrastructure in the right places to accommodate the larger population that we want to come to Ontario, because, overall, it's about

promoting the economic prosperity and competitiveness of our province that this growth will inevitably bring. It would encourage economic development in those parts of the province where growth is

desperately needed. We plan to get the right kind of growth in those areas where urban sprawl puts our quality of life at risk.

I want to tell you that I have a real sense of urgency about this legislation. I am increasingly convinced that we now have what may be our last chance to plan

for growth, to secure the future that we desperately want and need. We have an opportunity now to reverse some of the negative effects of unplanned growth and sprawling urban expansion and to

encourage more balanced development across all parts of the province. If we fail to act now, as previous governments have failed in the past, we will be overtaken by the course of events.

Development will move ahead in patterns that preclude effective planning and that are impossible to change after the fact. If we get it right, however, if we make wise decisions about what we build

and where and when we build it, many of the other things that we hope to accomplish -- source water protection, green spaces, economic development and transit strategies -- will fall into

place.

More than four million people are coming to Ontario over the next 30 years, whether through natural birth rates or natural migration patterns, and we will

create over two million jobs for that population. That's great news. That means vitality and economic prosperity to support a quality of life that will be second to none. These new residents will

enhance the quality of life in our communities and contribute to prosperity and our diversity. But we need to plan how we can best accommodate this growth to make sure that people have places to

live, places to work, places to play, instead of this constant catching up to it after the fact. We need to plan carefully to ensure that the infrastructure we need is in place while we protect our

environmental assets. We can't do that without the kind of planning that this legislation will make possible in law.

Our government was chosen by the people of Ontario to bring about real, positive change to this province. Our plans are visionary in the sense that they

envision a better society and a more effective government, but they are also pragmatic, because we have to live in the real world. We expect to have substantial results in real time at the ground

level in the communities where we live. If this legislation is passed, the first growth area we will designate will cover the area we call the greater Golden Horseshoe, the fastest-growing region

in Ontario; in fact, the fastest-growing in Canada and one of the fastest-growing regions in North America.

We have developed a draft growth plan for the greater Golden Horseshoe. It is now being circulated to stakeholders and other partners for comment. The draft

plan is based upon the discussion document that I had the honour to release this past summer for public comment by Ontarians right across this great region.

I want to acknowledge the contribution of more than 1,600 individuals who attended public information sessions to discuss growth issues and over 500

organizations that made written submissions. I want to say to all of them, to the public, thank you. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and your expertise with us. You have met the first test of

citizenship: You are helping to make things better. You are participating in something which is going to create a better future for us all.

We will continue to consult with the people of Ontario, with municipal leaders in the region, with business and industry, with environmental leaders wherever

they are, here in Queen's Park and right across this province. If this legislation is passed, we will incorporate the results of this further consultation into our proposals, which will embody our

vision for future development here in the greater Golden Horseshoe.

This is a significant departure for Ontario. We have never planned for growth in such comprehensive detail or over so wide an area. In fact, the prevailing

theme that we heard in town halls right across this region was that it is long overdue, it is long past the time that the provincial government showed some leadership and worked to get it right.

Our planning has never been so firmly based on such sound research and such broad public consultation with the public at large and with expert stakeholders.

For example, we have prepared four technical papers in connection with the draft growth plan. They are all available on the ministry Web site, and we invite

public comment. They provide population, economic and household forecasts for growth in the greater Golden Horseshoe, an assessment of the land supply in the area, the ways land use intensification

targets could be applied and details about the 25 urban growth centres that we have proposed in the greater Golden Horseshoe.

I urge all members of this House, and the public, to read those studies. They answer many questions about what we propose for the region and why. The growth

plan we are developing is based upon the best knowledge we can assemble and the best practices we can observe in other jurisdictions.

I would add that we have received inquiries and interest from urban planners, from the smart growth movement in the United States, from folks literally in

jurisdictions worldwide. This is groundbreaking work. It will also be based on expressed wishes and desires, because we believe that there is a lot of wisdom in the communities that make up the

region -- the local knowledge and expertise of municipal governments and other public agencies.

I'm very proud of this legislation. I'm very proud of the growth plan we will introduce if Bill 136 is passed. But it would never have been possible without

the active co-operation and assistance of many people. I would like to particularly acknowledge my colleagues who worked very closely on this piece of legislation. I understand that it was not the

normal course of events for governments previously to have ministries work together in an integrated and comprehensive fashion. So I especially want to thank my colleagues David Ramsay, the

Minister of Natural Resources; Steve Peters, the Minister of Agriculture and Food; Leona Dombrowsky, the Minister of the Environment; Harinder Takhar, the Minister of Transportation, as I've

already mentioned; and especially John Gerretsen, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. This plan would not have been possible without their strong support, without the support of their

ministries and without a commitment to getting ministry partners to work together, which has not previously existed.

I want to thank municipal leaders who have worked with us and who have contributed to this legislation and the growth plan. The list is exhaustive, but there

are quite a few that I would like to mention, especially Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion; the mayor of Burlington, Rob MacIsaac; the chair of Waterloo region, Ken Seiling; the mayor of Hamilton,

Larry Di Ianni; and the mayor of Toronto, David Miller. The list could go on and on. These are some of the leaders who have stepped forward to help the provincial government, the McGuinty

government, develop these kinds of plans. I have never seen this kind of co-operation, vigour and synergy of having municipal leaders work with the province, business leaders and environmental

leaders to develop a shared vision in the way that we have. The suggestions and recommendations that we received from municipalities have helped this proposed legislation become even better, and I

thank them for their contributions. They were invaluable.

We are moving forward with a common purpose, because we know we have a unique opportunity before us. If we act now, if we act together, we can literally change

the way we live. For the first time in Ontario's history, we have an opportunity to develop a coherent, comprehensive program to shape the kind of future we want, so that the future is something we

build in a conscious, rational way, rather than something that simply happens to us.

I think all members of this assembly would want to see strong, sustainable communities. We all want a healthy environment. We all want a prosperous economy. We

all want a high quality of life. Those are the goals that I think each and every member of this assembly can agree upon, and this proposed legislation is the vehicle to help us achieve them.

I thank you very much and look forward to the comments of all members of this assembly.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Michael Prue): I have just assumed the chair. Were you splitting the speech?

Hon. Mr. Caplan: With the member for Northumberland.

Mr. Lou Rinaldi (Northumberland): I rise today to support second reading of Bill 136, the Places to Grow Act. The proposed Places to Grow Act

is the first effort by an Ontario government to seize the opportunities presented by future growth and shape them according to objectives on which we can all agree. Those objectives include safe,

healthy and vibrant communities; more compact and sustainable development, with less dependence on the automobile; first-class public services and infrastructure that support and strengthen new

development patterns, instead of merely trying to keep pace with them; and the protection and preservation of the vital heritage resources, green spaces and natural environment that contribute so

much to our quality of life.

Our government is working on a number of important fronts, and we're working together in a coordinated way to do it. As you know, we have just passed historic

greenbelt legislation in this House to protect valuable farmland and other environmental assets in a broad band that stretches from the Niagara Peninsula to Rice Lake.

We are developing a comprehensive transportation strategy for the GTA, to ensure that our transit systems, roads and highways can accommodate future growth and

to make the most efficient use of our existing facilities.

We are also making great strides to strengthen an agri-food sector that contributes $30 billion to the Ontario economy, employs over 650,000 people and ships

$8.4 billion in exports annually.

Besides providing much-needed financial assistance to farmers dealing with the fallout of BSE and market fluctuations, the government moved forward on

innovative projects like encouraging renewable fuel production and establishing a new rural plan.

In my ministry, the Ministry of PIR, we're developing a 30-year public infrastructure strategy to ensure that people have access to vital public services when

and where they're needed. Bill 136 demonstrates the kind of provincial leadership that municipalities and other stakeholders have been seeking for many years and that the previous provincial

government failed to provide. At this point in Ontario's history, as we begin to plan how we want our province to grow in the 21st century, this leadership is vital.

But with that kind of growth, development is appropriate. It's not appropriate to pave over field after field to put up more houses and shopping malls. This is

not necessarily everyone's idea of progress, nor do I believe that it's an efficient or sustainable approach to growth. The basic question before us is whether we want to sit back and watch change

and new development simply unfold or whether we want to develop specific plans that will allow us to shape a better and brighter future for our community and province.

I don't think there's any doubt that rational, systematic planning is the way to go. As the members know, development in the past has too often taken place in

the absence of coordinated planning on a provincial scale. As a result, our most populous region, the greater Golden Horseshoe, contains many communities that are highly dependent on the

automobile. Millions of Ontario commuters pay a price for this kind of urban sprawl. They spend hours and hours on the road. They are overcrowded. They are stuck in traffic when they could be

working at their jobs or playing with their kids. Indeed, everyone who lives in Ontario pays a daily price for sprawling development. Today, the hundreds of thousands of automobiles stuck in

gridlock are all producing harmful emissions that are extremely damaging to our air and to our health.

Gridlock and congestion also come with a huge economic cost, one that's been estimated at more than $2 billion a year in lost time and productivity. The

proposed Places to Grow Act is our last, best chance to put an end to this kind of unsustainable growth.

Many people and major changes are coming. This is made clear when you see projections stating that more than four million people are coming to Ontario by the

year 2031. That's good news. That kind of rapid growth, with all those new people and new jobs, certainly has the potential to strengthen our province, to make it even more successful, prosperous

and vibrant. Yet, if we fail now, as other governments have failed in the past, to plan a clear and rational path to the future we want, rapid growth will almost certainly prove harmful to our

society and to our quality of life.

In our view, this is a critical time for Ontario. That's why we have introduced legislation that would help us plan the province's future growth in a balanced

and rational way. The Places to Grow Act is designed to provide provincial leadership in planning for growth, to help us make better choices for a brighter future. The proposed legislation will

allow us to plan effectively to accommodate and expand population and economy.

At the same time, it would ensure that we continue to protect our vital heritage, agriculture and environmental assets.

Under this legislation, the province will have the ability to develop growth plans for different geographic regions of the province. Every plan will be

tailor-made for the area that it covers. Growth plans will help us to promote economic prosperity by working out where and how different regions should grow, by looking at the infrastructure they

need to support that growth and by assuring that growth does not trample on viable green space, natural systems and farmlands. That is so important to our quality of life.

This is an important point in Ontario's history. We're poised for a sustained period of growth that will change the shape of much of our province in the 21st

century. To ensure that those changes are beneficial to our people, we need to be clear about our goals and objectives -- about what we want growth to provide and the kind of legacy we want to

leave our children. The answer, of course, will be different from one community to another, across the many regions of this province. The key is to come up with the answers that work for each

region and community and to plan the outcomes that would ensure strong and prosperous communities.

Under the provisions of Bill 136, growth plans can include a broad range of information, such as population projections and allocations, which means how many

people a region can accommodate and where they can best be accommodated; identification of urban growth centres, which means where and how we can best accommodate growth now, in the near term and

in the longer term; and infrastructure development and location to get the most out of our existing infrastructure investments.

If we get these plans right, Ontario's future growth can provide almost limitless possibilities for our people and communities and businesses, and for our

children and for their children.

My hope is that within 30 years, people across Ontario will enjoy the benefits of rational, planned growth. I hope they'll live in strong, vibrant communities

that are efficient, well serviced and well thought out. I hope they'll have access to good schools, first-class health care facilities, libraries, parks and recreation facilities. I hope they'll

enjoy a high degree of mobility, with roads and transit services that serve the population well by allowing them to travel easily and safely. I hope they'll have employment opportunities close to

where they live, so they'll have more time to spend with their families and friends and to participate in the life of their community.

The Places to Grow Act, if passed, can help transform these hopes into reality. By enabling us to plan effectively for the remarkable period of growth that we

know is coming, this legislation would help ensure that Ontario builds strong, healthy, livable communities and a new era of economic strength and prosperity in the years to come.

As the minister and I travelled across the province just last year and talked to community stakeholders, that's exactly what they asked for over and over

again: They needed leadership from this government to help them shape their communities. So I'm delighted to support this piece of legislation, and I encourage everyone in this House to do

likewise.

The Acting Speaker: Questions and comments?

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): I'm pleased to be able to take

part in this debate on the leadoff by the government.

In his very early comments, the minister referred to the bridges of Renfrew county. I don't know how many times we've stood in this House and talked about the

need for infrastructure investment in our rural communities. The fact of the matter is that your government has decided to take some of the people's gas tax money -- and that means people from all

over this province, including Renfrew county -- and they're going to use it to pay toward transit systems in the urban areas. I question why you would even use the example of Renfrew county when

they're not getting a penny of their gas tax back for their municipal road system, which of course includes the bridges. I'd like to hear a proper explanation of that, because the fact of the

matter is that the people in Renfrew county pay a lot of gas tax over the course of a year.

You're clearly stating that you'd like to be a strong partner with the municipal councils; we heard it over and over again at the latest ROMA convention.

Municipal councils in my area are saying, "Where's our share of the gas tax money?" If you're taking tax dollars out of people's pockets here in the province of Ontario, we think it should be

evenly distributed, based on a per capita system, throughout the rest of the province, not just in the urban areas. I think the government should explain, in some of the comments today, why a

county like Renfrew or Simcoe wouldn't receive funding or assistance toward their bridge projects if the people in all those different communities across the province are paying their gas tax into

the provincial coffers for those projects.

That's just one of the concerns I have with this legislation, and I'll have many more opportunities over the next little while to make further comments.

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I have to say that notwithstanding the effusive, self-congratulatory comments of the Minister of Public

Infrastructure Renewal, as well as the hopes and dreams of the member from Northumberland, the broad consultation referred to was in fact an embarrassment in my own community.

I was there while people were outraged to see that not only were the maps totally wrong, but that they inappropriately outlined urban boundaries that didn't

exist, and designated land as urban that in reality was not urban at all. I would say that people at first were insulted, but then it turned to outrage after a little while. People I talked to,

certainly in the aftermath of the initial presentation, were concerned that this was an opportunity for the government to really look at things like sustainable development, social equity and

sustainability in this province, and in the Golden Horseshoe in particular, but that instead they called it a growth plan when it could have been called something that more reflected the desires of

the people in my community who came out to the consultations.

Nonetheless, as you are very famous for saying and are very happy to hear these phrases, it is, "Build it and they will come." That is certainly what's going

to happen in the Golden Horseshoe area. What's happening is that, with the plans for highways to cut through all of these areas, we know very well that all this really amounts to is a way to

encourage leapfrog development and more urban boundary expansion, something that is not what we would like to see in regard to a positive and sustainable way of growing this province.

Unfortunately, what we have is a bunch of developers that belly up to fundraisers put on by the finance minister and attended by the Premier, where people can get the ear of the government members

that they're going to bend. Then, lo and behold, we have this legislation that's going to go nowhere.

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): It's a pleasure to stand today in support of the proposed legislation. I come from a community that is at

the height of its growth. It's facing all the growth pressures we've talked about over the past few years. The people of my community understand the need for that growth, but what they have never

understood is why a provincial government in the past had never allowed a plan to be put in place that sensibly allowed for infrastructure, transit, highway infrastructure and for things like

libraries and arenas and green space preservation.

Municipal officials I talked to, both staff and elected, are very