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

December 10, 2001

37th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2001-Dec-10 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 10 December 2001 Lundi 10 décembre 2001

ESTIMATES

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

MUNICIPAL WASTE DISPOSAL

HEART AND SOUL:

THE STORY OF BETHESDA-REACH

SOUND BERMS

SANTA CLAUS

NORTHERN MEDICAL SCHOOL

ONTARIANS WITH

DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

NORTHERN ONTARIO

WELDING SCHOOL

HOME CARE

CHRISTMAS

VISITORS

COMMISSIONERS OF ESTATE BILLS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

SUPPLY ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE CRÉDITS DE 2001

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS DAY

MEMBER'S BIRTHDAY

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

PROTECTION OF PRIVACY

HÔPITAL MONTFORT /

MONTFORT HOSPITAL

ALGOMA STEEL CORP

PROTECTION OF PRIVACY

HIGHWAY 407 TOLLS

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

MFP FINANCIAL SERVICES

NORTHERN COMMUNITIES

CAPITAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

SCHOOL CLOSURES

PATHS TO EQUAL

OPPORTUNITY WEB SITE

COMMUNAL WATER

TREATMENT SYSTEMS

NUMBER PLATES FOR

HISTORIC VEHICLES

HÔPITAL MONTFORT /

MONTFORT HOSPITAL

PETITIONS

PROFESSIONAL LEARNING

OPTOMETRISTS

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

EDUCATION FUNDING

CHILD CARE

PARKING FEE REGULATION

LONDON HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE

OHIP SERVICES

LORD'S PRAYER

ADJOURNMENT MOTION

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TIME ALLOCATION

Monday 10 December 2001 Lundi 10 décembre 2001

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

ESTIMATES

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): I have a message from the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor signed by her

own hand.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The Lieutenant Governor transmits estimates of certain sums required for the services of the province for the year

ending 31 March 2002 and recommends them to the Legislative Assembly.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

MUNICIPAL WASTE DISPOSAL

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): In 1995, Mike Harris wrote a letter to the president of Vaughan CARES to explain

the Tory party's view on waste management in Ontario. He concluded the letter with this promise: "Please be assured that no municipality will be forced against its will by a Harris government to

accept another municipality's garbage."

I have written an open letter to the five Tory leadership candidates to reaffirm this Tory promise. In my riding, Canadian Waste Services has proposed to

increase the Richmond landfill site by six times its present size. I agree with the many residents who have written letters, phoned my office and signed petitions that this expansion is not in the

better interests of this community.

The town of greater Napanee has passed a resolution that it is against the Richmond landfill proposal. Just last week, the municipality of Tweed rejected a

proposal to create a 5,000-acre megadump within its boundaries.

The people of Ontario deserve to know if the five would-be leaders will respect the wishes of their communities when they say no to landfills. We also need to

know what commitment these would-be leaders will make to our environment or if it will be more of the same tax-cut-at-all-cost agenda that has taken its toll on the landscape of Ontario.

HEART AND SOUL:

THE STORY OF BETHESDA-REACH

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I'm pleased to rise in the House to acknowledge the publication of a volume of local history about the former village

of Bethesda. This book of 225 pages is entitled Heart and Soul: The Story of Bethesda-Reach. It will be officially launched December 15 at Utica Hall.

The Bethesda-Reach Women's Institute has worked tirelessly on this project for the past 18 months. The authors chiefly responsible for the book are Mildred

Evans, Barb Evans, Corinne Croxall and Mary Jean Till. I would like to congratulate them on their efforts and also extend congratulations to all those who helped out in any way. The compilation of

local history such as this is always a true community effort. I understand some of the research was originally conducted by the late Hilda Bailey, commemorating the centennial year, 1967. This book

includes maps, photos and fascinating stories about local residents.

Many things have changed in Durham riding over the past 100 years, but one of the things that hasn't changed is a respect for the people and places of our past.

This book shows that by remembering the past, we can better understand the present and face the future with pride and confidence.

As you are no doubt aware, the women's institute organization has helped to ensure that Ontario's rural communities continue to be vibrant and caring places to

live, work and raise our families. Through the Tweedsmuir histories, they have documented the life and times of rural communities across Ontario.

I'd like to extend my thanks and best wishes to the Bethesda-Reach Women's Institute on their latest project. I am confident that their book will be a bestseller

in Durham riding and indeed Durham region. In fact, it would be a great Christmas gift for any of the members to consider purchasing.

SOUND BERMS

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): Minister of the Environment, I rise to bring forth an issue that demands your immediate attention. The

Chief Firearms Office has been visiting gun clubs, enforcing the requirement to build sound berms by 2003. Made out of clean fill and dirt, they generally cost $80,000 to $90,000.

However, Atlantic Packaging and Ontario Disposal are offering free berms composed of pulp and paper mill sludge. The problem is, there may be other forms of

sludge in this composition. The berm in Oshawa has been tested positive for E coli. Another in Madoc has been ordered removed. A berm is to be built in my own riding at the East Elgin Sportsman's

Association any day, on a sand plain where the water table is less than 10 feet deep. This will go ahead, despite the fact that no one knows how safe these mountains of sludge are.

By mixing the sludge with sand, Ontario Disposal gets around the loophole in regulation 347 of the Environmental Protection Act; they call it a product. Your

ministry refuses to regulate products. Minister, you've been painfully silent on the issue, and you're more than aware of it. You quietly visited the Oshawa club; you know that there may be septage

in these berms. Your silence and refusal to regulate mountains of sludge are leaving these gun clubs hung out to dry. Under the EPA, they will be liable for any adverse effect, yet you and your

ministry continue to refuse to warn them.

Minister, you must speak up today and show that leadership that you aspire to and tell us how you plan to stop these mountains of sludge across this

province.

SANTA CLAUS

Mrs Julia Munro (York North): It is the season to be merry. Today I would like to speak about that merry, jolly man, Santa Claus, easily one of

the world's most popular and mysterious characters.

We know he lives in the North Pole with Mrs Claus, and we know he and his elves load the sleigh each Christmas Eve for a marathon trip around the world. But

little is known about his past.

Some historians believe the legend started in the fourth century when Nicholas, the first bishop of Myra in Asia Minor -- today modern Turkey-became known for

his kindness to children and for helping the needy. Santa has been depicted as everything from a pixie, a leprechaun, even a gnome. But credit must go in part to the Coca-Cola Co that the jolly

fellow has an image that is well-known and enduring around the world as a plump man in a red suit and white beard.

Popularly known as the Sundblom Santas after the artist, the series of Santa Claus oil paintings were used for a number of special Christmas advertisements for

Coca-Cola beginning in 1931 and carrying through the next six decades. The Sundblom Santa is remarkable for several reasons, most notably because of the way he captured the essence of St Nicholas.

Sundblom created an enduring symbol, the spirit of kindness and giving that is Christmas.

NORTHERN MEDICAL SCHOOL

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): As the northwestern Ontario campaign to seek equal status for Thunder Bay for the northern

medical school heats up, it seems to me that a few things need to be said about how unfairly this process has so far played out. This strikes me as particularly timely, as it is my understanding

that Health Minister Clement will be in Thunder Bay sometime this week and Sudbury Mayor Jim Gordon will be gracing us with his presence early next week.

As far as Mayor Gordon is concerned, there are a few questions I believe he must answer. First of all, Mayor Gordon, at what point did you decide to stab Thunder

Bay in the back? After a period of working co-operatively with Thunder Bay on the original dual-campus model, when exactly did you learn that Sudbury was to be given the full medical school? When

that happened, why did you not inform Thunder Bay Mayor Boshcoff that the original proposal was no longer being considered, or to put an even more sinister edge on this, were you working all along

in opposition to the original proposal?

If my remarks sound a tad bitter, I will freely acknowledge that they are. Many people in northwestern Ontario have worked very hard to make this project a

reality, and quite frankly they felt at the end of the day that they had been duped. Clearly the finger should be pointed at Mayor Gordon.

For those who view this medical school as only having long-term benefits, let's look at the fact that 19 physicians have agreed to come to Sudbury to work since

the April announcement. Clearly the fact that a medical school is to be located in one's community has short-term benefits as well in terms of physician recruitment.

I say to Health Minister Clement, if you are remotely sincere about your stated goal of attracting more physicians to the north, you will see how vital it is

that Thunder Bay become an equal partner in this new medical school.

ONTARIANS WITH

DISABILITIES LEGISLATION

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): I stand today to thank all those people across Ontario who participated in the hearings, however limited, that

took place in Ottawa, Windsor, Toronto, Thunder Bay and Sudbury with regard to Bill 125, the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, and the shadow hearings in London on Saturday. My apologies to all

those who couldn't attend because we didn't come to your community.

It needs to be known that we in this caucus encouraged the government to take their time, to wait until January, February or March, when they could go out and

visit more smaller and larger communities in different places across this province. It's a huge province and transportation is a huge challenge, particularly at this time of year. Many people did

not have their voices heard. Many of you have been working on this effort to remove barriers for those living with disabilities for a long time now, some since the early 1970s, working to have an

effective Ontarians with Disabilities Act enacted in Ontario. I heard you and our caucus heard you as you called for major amendments to Bill 125.

Ladies and gentlemen, today's the day. Today is a very important day in the very young life of this bill. We'll find out today if the government actually heard

those submissions so ably delivered and if the government is serious about giving this bill some effectiveness and some teeth, because today they will table their amendments, or they won't, and

we'll be watching.

NORTHERN ONTARIO

WELDING SCHOOL

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): I'm pleased to rise this afternoon to speak about the official opening of the Northern Ontario Welding School

that I had the pleasure of attending in Barrie last Friday.

The Northern Ontario Welding School's approach to training is to provide students with the skills and work ethic required in today's workforce. With the school

emulating a work environment with proper safety procedures, scheduling, reading of blueprints and instilling a good work ethic, students are prepared to meet the demands of the workforce.

Students work eight hours per day, either day or afternoon shifts, five days a week. Attendance is mandatory and progress is closely monitored. By course

completion, students have a good idea of what to expect from the industry and how their own strengths and skills will meet the demands from potential employers.

Northern Ontario Welding School's training program is based on knowing the needs of industry and developing training programs to meet these needs. The school

employs specialized instructors with many years of welding experience in industry and as teachers. Students benefit from the low student-teacher ratio, giving each student adequate individual

attention and additional training as required to pass a test and become a certified welder.

I congratulate president Bill Mandris and his staff for this important investment in Simcoe county and for the use of our province.

HOME CARE

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): I want to talk about Bill 130, the home care bill, a bill that should be withdrawn, a bill that we should

not debate in this House, a bill that should be thrown right out the big window behind the Speaker's chair.

Because of this bill, which is a hostile takeover, a gag order of home care agencies across Ontario, people like Cathy Chisholm in Niagara will not be able to

tell us, after this bill is passed, that there's a $9.2-million shortfall in home care requirements in the Niagara region. There will not be a Cathy Chisholm to tell us that the brunt of these cuts

are being faced by children; that waiting lists for speech, physiotherapy and occupational therapy have quintupled since last year; that just under 2,000 school-aged children were waiting for

therapy, compared to just 400 in previous years.

This information will not be available to us because of your hostile takeover. What we know is, this is this government's attempt not to properly fund home care,

to take beds away from hospitals and force people into home care, and to give no monies to properly service these individuals.

Let me say again, Bill 130, this home care bill, should be thrown right out the window behind the Speaker's chair. This bill should die today.

CHRISTMAS

Mrs Tina R. Molinari (Thornhill): As Christmas fast approaches, many of the Thornhill residents I represent will not only celebrate the joy of a

holiday, but will celebrate the importance of a very special holy day.

While Christmas has become associated with Santa Claus, Christmas trees, the traditions of giving presents, reuniting with family and sitting down to a bountiful

meal, we must not forget that Christmas is a celebration by people of the Christian faith honouring the birth of Jesus.

Now in the second full week of Advent, Thornhill Christians are busy making preparations for the commemoration of the birth of Jesus. Each of the four weeks of

Advent symbolizes a different way in which believers perceive Christ: through the flesh, the Holy Spirit, death and Christ's judgment of the dead. Special masses will be held in many parishes

throughout Thornhill and across the province commemorating and celebrating the birth of Jesus.

I will have the pleasure of participating in the readings at St Paschal Baylon church on Christmas Day. The story of Christmas will be retold and passed on to

generations of believers so that they will understand and appreciate the significance of this very special celebration.

While most of us take comfort knowing we will be able to spend time with our family and loved ones, I ask that we remember the less fortunate and extend our

hands with friendship, love and faith during this special season.

Not only would I like to wish the residents of Thornhill a very merry Christmas, but I would like to extend my greetings to the over 1.8 billion Christians

throughout the world who celebrate this special event. I would also like to extend a merry Christmas and happy holidays to all the members of the Legislature.

VISITORS

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I am very pleased to welcome Mr Tony Gulotta, president of the

Scarborough Centre Chamber of Commerce, who is in the east gallery this afternoon.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): While we are welcoming honoured guests, I would like to inform the members that we have with us today in the

Speaker's gallery a delegation from the House of Peoples' Representatives of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Please join me in welcoming our special guests.

COMMISSIONERS OF ESTATE BILLS

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I beg to inform the House that the Clerk has received a favourable report from the Commissioners of Estate Bills

with respect to Pr2,

An Act respecting Wycliffe College. Accordingly, pursuant to standing order 86(e), the bill and the report stand referred to the standing committee on regulations and private

bills.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

SUPPLY ACT, 2001 /

LOI DE CRÉDITS DE 2001

Mr Tsubouchi, on behalf of Mr Flaherty, moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 149,

An Act to authorize the payment of certain amounts for the public service for the fiscal year ending on March 31, 2002 / Projet de loi 149, Loi

autorisant le paiement de certaines sommes destinées à la fonction publique pour l'exercice se terminant le 31 mars 2002.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

The Chair of Management Board?

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): This is commonly referred to as the Supply Act. It is the formal approval by

the Legislative Assembly of all the money that is spent by the government of Ontario over the year.

This follows the process, first, of the budget, a committee hearing estimates and, finally, the concurrence by this assembly in the estimates process that was

done by committee.

This bill gives the government the authority to spend money in accordance with those estimates.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): We have one motion today. I move that, pursuant to standing order 9(c)(ii),

the House shall meet from 6:45 pm to midnight on Monday, December 10, and Tuesday, December 11, for the purpose of considering government business.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour of the motion will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1350 to 1355.

The Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Beaubien, Marcel

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Coburn, Brian

Cunningham, Dianne

DeFaria, Carl

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Galt, Doug

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Hardeman, Ernie

Hodgson, Chris

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kells, Morley

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Munro, Julia

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Runciman, Robert W.

Sampson, Rob

Stewart, R. Gary

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tilson, David

Tsubouchi, David H.

Wilson, Jim

Young, David

The Speaker: All those opposed will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Agostino, Dominic

Bartolucci, Rick

Bisson, Gilles

Bountrogianni, Marie

Boyer, Claudette

Brown, Michael A.

Bryant, Michael

Caplan, David

Colle, Mike

Conway, Sean G.

Crozier, Bruce

Curling, Alvin

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Gravelle, Michael

Hampton, Howard

Hoy, Pat

Kormos, Peter

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Levac, David

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martin, Tony

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Prue, Michael

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramsay, David

Sergio, Mario

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Greg

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 39; the nays are 36.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS DAY

Hon Cameron Jackson (Minister of Citizenship, minister responsible for seniors): I ask for a unanimous consent to do a five-minute statement

to celebrate International Human Rights Day.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? Agreed? Agreed.

Hon Mr Jackson: It is an honour today to invite all Ontarians to join in celebrating International Human Rights Day. Today marks the 53rd

anniversary of the signing of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a landmark document recognizing the dignity and inherent rights of all people.

Ontario is significantly proud of its efforts to ensure the human rights of every individual in this province. In fact, Ontario has played a defining role in

the history of human rights in our nation. In 1962, it became the first province to establish a Human Rights Commission and the first to legislate a Human Rights Code. That code, backed up by the

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, has set standards of human rights and entitlement that are the envy of the world, rights that have strengthened and will continue to strengthen.

On May 1, 2001, as Minister of Citizenship, I announced that the Human Rights Code would be amended and improved after almost 40 years. This will be done in

the new year, following public consultations.

As a result of the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, it is especially important this year for us to adhere to our fundamental commitment

to safeguard the rights of all our citizens. Those attacks in the US were an assault on human rights, the like of which we have never suffered before in North America. The savage murder of

thousands of innocent people, using passenger aircraft as missiles of destruction, is beyond our comprehension. And yet, while those attacks have caused us all to re-examine our lives, the people

of Ontario have stood strong and united in their condemnation, no matter what their birthplace, background or faith. When a few misguided individuals directed hate toward Muslim, Hindu and Arab

communities in our province, Ontarians quickly rallied to their neighbours' and citizens' support.

The government, led by Premier Mike Harris, was equally fast to reaffirm our fundamental commitment to protecting the rights of all our citizens. Our

commitment to human rights advancement is greater today than ever before, and I believe that as a result of the events of September 11 we have become even stronger in our relentless fight against

racism, bigotry and discrimination.

Ontarians have taken up arms against attacks to eliminate human rights, using weapons Canadians are renowned for: the weapons of peace, justice and tolerance.

When action is required, rest assured that our province will take it. There will be no negotiations when it comes to maintaining human rights; they will be vigorously protected and jealously

guarded.

This provincial Parliament's record demonstrates its continuing commitment to ensuring that all our citizens are treated equally. The record is apparent in our

province's readiness to welcome immigrants from around the world, to embrace different cultures and to celebrate them. Here in Ontario, we receive 100,000 newcomers every year, more than any other

province. To assist those newcomers in becoming full citizens as soon as possible, this government spends about $45 million annually on resettlement programs. Immigrants built this nation and this

province, and they continue to bolster its economic stability and success.

A further demonstration of this government's intent to allow all Ontarians the right to the benefits of full citizenship and full participation was

demonstrated with the tabling of the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, Bill 125, the most far-reaching legislation of its kind ever introduced in Canada. It is appropriate that this week an

all-party legislative committee of this House will consider clause-by-clause amendments, after consultations with the broader disabilities community, to strengthen this important benchmark

legislation.

Ontario's record of advancing the cause of human rights and fostering a climate of improved understanding and mutual respect between people is unparalleled. It

is a record of which we are proud. It is a record on which we will continue to build.

This government has an outstanding record in supporting the rights of women, children and seniors. Across Ontario, the government will spend about $145 million

this year, in a number of ministries, on programs and services to prevent violence against women and their children. The government also has a number of initiatives to safeguard the future of our

growing and aging seniors population, including a $68-million initiative to combat Alzheimer's disease, the first such comprehensive plan in Canada.

Now more than ever, we must all be determined to take further steps to make this new century a true age of equal opportunity for all of our citizens, one in

which each individual is treated with generosity, compassion, dignity and respect. To deny the human rights of one person simply denies the rights of us all.

Mr Gregory S. Sorbara (Vaughan-King-Aurora): As my party's critic for human rights legislation, I am pleased and honoured to be able to rise

today to say a few words on this, the 53rd anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Before I do so, I might just express a little bit of shock that in the context of unanimous consent to speak about Human Rights Day around the world, my friend

from Burlington would take the opportunity to do a five-minute commercial for his government, but he'll have to live with that.

Mr Steve Gilchrist (Scarborough East): That's fine. You'll take five minutes to slag the government.

Mr Sorbara: No, I am not going to take five minutes to slag the government, I tell my friend.

The

preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights includes the following: "Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable

rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world" -- I repeat, "the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world." The foundation of

that is the inherent dignity, equality and inalienable rights of every member of the human family.

That declaration was passed by the United Nations on December 10, 1948; 53 years ago the world gathered together to make a profound commitment to the equality

of every human being in the world. This is a living document and is the first pillar of the 20th-century human rights laws and the cornerstone of the universal human rights movement.

I think it is appropriate for us on this day to reflect on where we have been and where we yet need to go. Of course, that universal declaration came after the

horrendous conflict of the Second World War, characterized in such large measure by the genocide of the Jewish people across Europe, and so fitting it is that that declaration came in the light of

those atrocities. Yet since then, over the course of the past 53 years, our challenge as legislators, whether in Ontario, Canada or around the world, becomes increasingly important.

Today, as I speak here, there is a brutal conflict going on on the other side of the globe, in Afghanistan, and the issue of human rights confronts us there.

My friend Rick Patten, just moments ago, tabled a resolution in this Legislature about the severe violation of human rights in Burma. But I think today that we need not go across the globe, that we

need to look at what we are doing right here in our own province and in our own country.

We have recently, in Ottawa, passed legislation that has the capacity to severely restrict human rights that we as a people have fought for for a long time. We

need to be very vigilant that, in the wake of September 11 and the enhanced importance of security, we do not allow ourselves in this great nation to once again trample on basic human rights.

Now to respond, just for a moment, to my friend from Burlington who celebrates the record in Ontario, I agree with him that he has made, and we have made and

successive governments have made important steps, but let me remind him, if he needs to do political battle on this subject at this time, that the human rights commission in Ontario is,

unfortunately, an embarrassment. Individuals who go before that tribunal are asked to wait literally for years and years for justice.

Let us not think that the battle to protect and enhance human rights in Ontario is over. We have much to do for communities that historically have been on the

margin and have suffered the tyranny of the majority in this province.

I invite all my friends in this Legislature to celebrate our undying commitment to human rights for all Ontarians and for all Canadians.

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I'm pleased, on behalf of the New Democratic Party caucus, to speak to this first International Day for

Human Rights of the 21st century, and I will be joined by our leader, Howard Hampton.

It's an important day because it presents us with an opportunity, in this instance here, as legislators, to lend our voices in support of Amnesty

International's call for a global coalition for human rights. The struggle for human rights is a global pursuit. It's been a passionate interest of many of us of my generation ever since our first

awareness and vicarious sharing of the pains and the victories of the civil rights movement of the 1950s in the United States. Certainly for many of that same generation, the war in Vietnam and the

struggle to end that war raised our consciousness of human rights and the need to engage in the struggle for international human rights.

We've continued our involvement with a wide range of human rights movements because we believe that justice and human dignity are fundamental rights that ought

to be enjoyed by every person of every nation, every colour, every creed, every ethnicity and religion. Justice and human dignity are fundamental rights that must be enjoyed by people of every

gender and every sexual orientation.

I'm proud to say that just this morning I participated in a press conference here at Queen's Park calling upon all three parties in this assembly to support a

resolution to condemn human rights violations in Burma. In 1990, Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the National League for Democracy, won 82% of the votes in Burma's national election. The

military regime running that country, the SPDC, has refused to heed the will of the people and has confined Aung San Suu Kyi to house arrest for over 10 long years. She has called upon nations

internationally to join in economic sanctions in condemnation of that military dictatorship in Burma, yet our own federal government continues to indirectly support Burma's dictatorship by

facilitating and indeed allowing Canadian companies to trade and invest in Burma.

Listening to what other people in the world have to say is the first step toward advancing a global human rights agenda. In August, Rosario Marchese and I

joined a delegation of elected leaders, labour representatives and community activists on a mission to Colombia known as the Minga campaign for peace and against violence. There, we listened to the

stories of hundreds upon hundreds of people, many of them aboriginal people, women and members of displaced communities, who have suffered at the hands of right-wing paramilitary groups and drug

cartels. Human Rights Watch reported that military thugs and drug lords in Colombia account for 85% of that country's political violence and human rights violations. In Colombia, like everywhere

else in the world, it's the voiceless who suffer the most. In Colombia this last year alone, there have been an estimated 1,655 terrorist attacks. That makes for seven each day. People live in

chaos. We met those people in Colombia. Four presidential candidates, one Minister of Justice, hundreds of police, Supreme Court judges, priests, journalists, teachers and labour leaders have been

assassinated indiscriminately. Between 1995 and the year 2000, 3,656 innocent civilians were slaughtered, 7,300 people were kidnapped, and hundreds of towns and villages have been ransacked and

burned, torched in a campaign of terror.

Given the extensive abuse of human rights in nations around the world, it is unfair to pick one nation and yet not another. That's where we, as Canadians, have

to be very conscious of the fundamental rights and freedoms that people in this country acquire, not by birth here, not even by citizenship here, but by virtue of setting foot on Canadian soil --

those fundamental rights and freedoms currently under attack by way of Bill C-36. That attack is as serious as any attack on human rights. We must stand vigilant in opposition to it.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I want to join in the recognition of the United Nations' International Human Rights Day to point out

to all members that while we are here, literally hundreds of thousands of people in Afghanistan are in danger of starving to death over the next few weeks.

I'm asking all members to join with organizations such as Oxfam Canada, Toronto's Faith Action Network, the Steelworkers Humanity Fund and UNICEF in engaging

in a day of fasting and at the same time contributing financially to organizations like UNICEF so that they may provide and distribute food to the hundreds of thousands of people in Afghanistan,

including tens of thousands of children, who are in danger of starving. If we cannot feed ourselves, we cannot observe human rights.

MEMBER'S BIRTHDAY

The Speaker: The member for Hamilton East on a point of order?

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): Actually, on a point of interest to the House, Mr Speaker, I'm sure all of us would join in extending

best wishes for a happy birthday to my colleague Marie Bountrogianni from Hamilton Mountain.

VISITORS

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I want to point out to all members that Cindy Haney, Doris

Mengellberg and Pam Constable from the OSSTF are here. They are here to point out that there is a six-week strike in place by special education assistants against the Keewatin-Patricia school

board, and they are asking for our support to find a resolution.

ORAL QUESTIONS

PROTECTION OF PRIVACY

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): My question is for the associate minister of health. Minister, the relationship between patient and

doctor is sacred. People tell their doctors things they would not tell to anyone else. Their relationship depends on trust. But your government is threatening that relationship with your

mishandling of patient files and information technology.

Today we learned that the privacy commissioner is investigating allegations that the privacy of patient files has been compromised. This comes, incredibly,

just one month after doctors in Chatham started using your brand new record-keeping technology.

Minister, how could you have failed to make absolutely sure that the privacy of patient files would be maintained in your new system?

Hon Helen Johns (Minister without Portfolio [Health and Long-Term Care]): As the member opposite knows, the government is absolutely committed

to ensuring privacy and confidentiality of patient records. The member also knows, because she's had an opportunity to talk to the Information and Privacy Commissioner today, as has the Ministry of

Health -- the Ministry of Health tells me that they have heard from the Information and Privacy Commissioner and they have been informed by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner,

that there is no investigation going forward. I know that she knows that, so I'm kind of in a quandary about the question.

This government has moved forward with smart systems for a health program. They are designed to enhance patient safety. They are enhanced to make sure that the

personal health information of the client is secure, and we have been in contact with the Information and Privacy Commissioner through all of our discussions, because we're committed to ensuring

that records are safe.

Mrs McLeod: I hope we're not going to play word games with something as serious as personal health information and its confidentiality. The

privacy commissioner is conducting what she has termed "fact-finding" into the allegations that have been made against the violation of the privacy of patients' medical records. The allegations are

serious, Minister. They are allegations that private companies have been given access to patient information, that patients were not fully informed about what happens to their health information,

that raw data are given to technicians for tracking. There is even an allegation that a technician took home tapes with thousands of medical records and that some of those tapes were lost or

misplaced.

There is nothing more sensitive than your medical record, and physicians who hold those records in trust were promised a technology that would be absolutely

secure. I suggest to you that that is not what you have given to them, and your failure has shattered confidence in the privacy of medical records. Minister, what steps will you take now to ensure

that that confidence can be restored and that patients' medical records will be kept completely confidential?

Hon Mrs Johns: The only person in this Legislature who's shattering confidence is the member opposite. As we were moving forward to bring the

Ontario Family Health Network into place, we talked to the Information and Privacy Commissioner. I have a letter from the Information and Privacy Commissioner. The ministry tells me they have

worked with the Information and Privacy Commissioner through every step of the process. They inform me that they have talked to the Information and Privacy Commissioner all the way through the

process, and again today.

Let me say that this government is committed to providing quality health care. We're committed to ensuring that patient records are kept safe and sound. We

have worked with the doctors in the Chatham-Kent area and the Ontario Medical Association to make sure that we provide the Ontario Family Health Network in that area. It's a pilot project --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. The minister's time is up.

Mrs McLeod: Yes, indeed, the Ministry of Health did work with the privacy commissioner before the system was set up. One month after the

system is in operation, it becomes apparent that a hacker on the Internet system can access a patient's personal medical information. That is not good enough; a simple denial is not going to

restore confidence in the privacy of records being maintained.

Minister, you knew how difficult it was going to be to make sure that computerized medical files would be secure. It is the single greatest issue that was

raised in the privacy hearings when your government tabled health privacy legislation. But instead of dealing with the challenges, what you did was pull the bill and forge ahead with your new

technology. We know that at the same time this is happening, you're forging ahead with new smart card technology.

Minister, I stress again the sensitivity of personal medical files. Will you assure us today that you will stop experimenting with patients' medical files and

their records until you bring in health privacy legislation that ensures that patients have true protection?

Hon Mrs Johns: Let me say that we were very careful as we moved forward with the Ontario Family Health Network. As you know, someone can break

into a doctor's office, open a file cabinet and get health records, and that can't be stopped. But when it comes to putting records on the computer, we had an organization, a recognized company,

come in and look at the records. They told us that they tried for two days to hack into the records and were unable to do that. We have a written report from the company saying so. We also fully

informed the patients. The patients have to enter into an agreement with the family health network to ensure that they understand what is happening.

So let me tell you that we have done a great deal to try and ensure that all records in the province of Ontario are safe. Personal health information is the

most important piece of information a person has, and we are acting to ensure that those records are as safe as is humanly possible.

HÔPITAL MONTFORT /

MONTFORT HOSPITAL

M. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell) : Ma question s'adresse au ministre délégué aux Affaires francophones.

Vendredi dernier, la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario a rendu sa décision au sujet de l'hôpital Montfort d'Ottawa. La cour rejette donc l'appel de votre gouvernement et confirme l'ordonnance de

la Cour divisionnaire, qui annulait les directives de la Commission de restructuration des services de santé. La balle est dans votre camp, monsieur le ministre, ainsi que celle de votre

collègue le ministre de la Santé.

La Cour d'appel reconnaît que l'hôpital Montfort est le seul hôpital en Ontario à fournir un vaste éventail de soins de santé et

de la formation médicale dans un milieu francophone.

Monsieur le ministre, n'eût été le comité SOS Montfort, présidé par M me Gisèle Lalonde, et la communauté

francophone qui s'est mobilisée, la communauté francophone de l'Ontario aurait perdu une institution essentielle.

Il faut dire que ceux et celles qui connaissent l'hôpital Montfort savent très bien que la décision de la commission ne correspond absolument

pas à la réalité. Monsieur le ministre, ma question : allez-vous enfin reconnaître l'importance fondamentale de Montfort ? Est-ce qu'on lui accordera le financement

qui lui revient ? Aussi, est-ce que le gouvernement est prêt à faire des excuses publiques pour les dépenses inutiles encourues et aussi pour le stress et l'inquiétude

causés à la communauté francophone ?

L'hon John R. Baird (ministre des Services sociaux et communautaires, ministre délégué aux Affaires francophones) : La

lequel on continuera de travailler très fort.

Vendredi matin, il y a eu la décision de la Cour suprême de la province de l'Ontario. Les juges ont pris six, sept, huit, neuf mois pour penser

à leur décision et pour en créer une. Selon nous, il est très important de prendre le temps de lire une décision de plus de 60 pages. On va prendre quelques jours, quelques

semaines pour avoir une bonne connaissance de la décision avant de prendre une décision.

M me Sandra Pupatello (Windsor Ouest) : Monsieur le ministre, vous avez dépensé des milliers de dollars pour tenter

de réduire les droits linguistiques de la minorité dans cette province. Vous avez tenté de fermer cet hôpital, qui est à la base des services médicaux en langue

Cinq années d'incertitude à Montfort ont eu des effets négatifs sur le moral du petit nombre de médecins et d'infirmières francophones

que nous avons. Certains ont été forcés de partir. Un autre appel ferait encore plus de tort aux services de santé.

Monsieur le ministre, allez-vous mettre fin à votre guerre pour fermer Montfort ? Pouvez-vous promettre ici et maintenant que vous ne ferez pas appel

de cette décision ?

L'hon M. Baird : C'est bien sûr quelque chose qui est très important. On a travaillé très fort comme gouvernement

On a reçu une décision de la cour vendredi. C'est une décision de plus de 60 pages. Je sais qu'il y a des gens qui voudraient avoir une

réponse cinq minutes après que la cour a rendu sa décision. Selon nous, il y a des choses qui sont près de la constitution, qui sont près d'autres choses légales, et

il est important de prendre quelques jours au moins d'avoir la chance de lire la décision de la cour et aussi d'avoir une connaissance de comment on va suivre la décision.

Mrs Pupatello: Minister, you were asked a simple question: will you be appealing this? We are telling you that, on behalf of the francophones

of Ontario, we expect that you will not. You have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting the francophone community over this hospital and you owe it to them not to appeal the decision.

We in this party celebrate the Monfort Hospital and we celebrated those bilingual services being available. You have fought them every step of the way. We are

asking you, Minister, today to stand on your feet and say, "We will not fight Montfort. We will fight to maintain these services." After five years, Montfort today was celebrating and we on this

side of the House celebrated with them. Minister responsible for francophone affairs, will you stand in the House today and say you will not appeal this decision?

L'hon M. Baird : Selon moi et selon tous les députés de mon côté de la Chambre, il est très important d'avoir

une connaissance des ramifications du jugement. On va prendre quelques jours pour entendre les résultats du jugement.

Il est aussi très important d'avoir un dialogue entre nous et les gens à l'hôpital Montfort pour être certains que les bons services de

qualité sont disponibles non seulement dans la communauté d'Ottawa-Carleton mais aussi dans l'est de l'Ontario, avec la formation et les besoins de tous les francophones de la

province.

Il est très important pour nous de prendre ces quelques jours et aussi d'avoir l'opportunité de parler avec nos partenaires dans le domaine de la

ALGOMA STEEL CORP

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is to the acting Premier and it concerns what is happening on this very day in Sault Ste

Marie.

People in Sault Ste Marie are very concerned that the core of their economy, Algoma Steel, which provides tens of thousands of full-time jobs in Ontario, may

be allowed to go under. For months the steel workers have been at the table trying to put together a reorganization package. The question is, where has your government been and where has the

federal government been? Why haven't you been at the table, demanding that the note holders and the banks come together and put together a package to reposition Algoma Steel and the tens of

thousands of full-time jobs that it represents? Why aren't you at the table? Why haven't you demanded that the Liberals in Ottawa join you at the table? Are you prepared to allow tens of thousands

of full-time jobs to fail?

Hon Chris Hodgson (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): The Minister of Economic Development and Trade wants to answer this

question.

Hon Robert W. Runciman (Minister of Economic Development and Trade): Contrary to what the leader of the third party is suggesting, the Ontario

government has been very much at the table with respect to ongoing discussions with Algoma Steel, the bondholders, and others who are participating in this decision. In fact, as I understand it,

there will be an appearance in court later today, this afternoon, with respect to some changes in the agreement that was rejected by the bondholders last week. So it's clear we are participating.

We've been playing a very active role in trying to save Algoma.

Mr Hampton: We're now at H-hour, D-Day in this process, and your government's response thus far is only to be concerned about the pension

fund. That's important, but you've got a much broader, much bigger leadership role. What we've needed from your government is to say clearly and publicly that you are not prepared to allow Algoma

Steel to go under, and to say clearly and publicly that the Liberals from Ottawa should join you at the table and should say to the noteholders and the mortgage holders that there must be a

restructuring of the debt, that there must be a repositioning of the company, because Ontario cannot afford to lose another 10,000 jobs on top of the 28,000 full-time jobs that were already lost in

November.

Are you prepared to say that clearly and forcefully today, so that the noteholders, the mortgage holders and the banks cannot back away from this, that they

must be at the table, that they must commit to a repositioning package today? Say it now, loud and clear.

Hon Mr Runciman: What I will say is what we've been saying for some time. We've had Mr Bill Farlinger, current chairman of the board at

Ontario Power Generation, representing the government in the restructuring discussions, in an effort to protect the interests of the pensioners covered by the pension benefits guarantee fund. We've

done that. We're playing that role. That's a role we feel is critical to the pensioners at Algoma. We will continue to play that role. We have no intention to go beyond that commitment. We feel

there are efforts being made, in a very strenuous way, to find accommodation with all the stakeholders, Ontario being one of them. We remain hopeful that there will be an accommodation.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Final supplementary, the member for Sault Ste Marie.

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): Minister, that's just not acceptable. The future of my community is in jeopardy. The Steelworkers have

slogged away for six months trying to save Algoma Steel. We're five minutes to midnight on this deal. You could breathe real life into Algoma's restructuring plan by coming to the table and playing

a strong role, instead of letting the noteholders dictate the future of my community. Will you at least get the Premier to co-sign an all-party letter, on behalf of your government, demanding joint

federal-provincial action that will save Algoma and the future of Sault Ste Marie?

Hon Mr Runciman: We are certainly concerned about the impact any negative decision could have on the community. We want to work with the

community to assist them. We've been doing a number of things over the past few years to help diversify the Soo economy. We will continue to work with them to try and address those broader

concerns.

With respect to Algoma, we are playing a role; we are at the table; we feel we're filling an appropriate role there. The federal government, as the member

opposite indicates, has not been to the table. I would encourage him to address his concerns in that direction.

PROTECTION OF PRIVACY

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is to the Minister of Health. People across Ontario today learned that the confidentiality

of their health records once again may be at stake under this government. This time it's your electronic patient information database. You indicated earlier that there is not a problem. But we

spoke to the Information and Privacy Commissioner, who told us this morning that she is going to demand a meeting to seek clarity as to what is happening, that the meeting will take place on

Wednesday of this week, that so far there has been no full program review of what is happening and that she wants to understand how confidential information could possibly have gone home with

someone.

Can you tell us why an investigation, a meeting with the privacy commissioner, is now required by the privacy commissioner when you're trying to tell everyone

everything is fine?

Hon Helen Johns (Minister without Portfolio [Health and Long-Term Care]): As I said earlier, we've been working with the Information and

Privacy Commissioner over the last number of months to ensure that this goes forward. We've also not entered into the Ontario Family Health Network until we had the OK from the Information and

Privacy Commissioner.

Let me say that I'm always happy to meet with the Information and Privacy Commissioner. I believe that the Information and Privacy Commissioner provides

valuable service to the Legislature. I'm always open for a meeting with the Information and Privacy Commissioner. We're happy to do that.

Up until this point, we have kept her informed, we have let her know about the things that we are doing with the Ontario Family Health Network, and she has

written a letter to explain some of her happiness with that. If she wants to meet with me, I'm sure that she will be calling, and I of course will openly welcome her to my office.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Supplementary?

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): Minister, we'd appreciate if you'd table the letter that you have been swinging around so we can see what the

date of that is.

You also don't clearly understand that Ms Cavoukian is meeting on Wednesday with the smart systems people to find out what has happened specifically with

respect to the allegations raised this morning. Not just some simple meeting to come and say hello, she is coming to meet with you to discuss the serious allegations which are now a matter of

public record.

It's very clear, Minister, that your system for storing personal medical files was not designed with privacy protection as the priority, but it's also very

clear that implementation of such a system demands that level of the highest security of people's medical information. It certainly doesn't mean that a technician can take home tapes for several

nights, tapes that include thousands of medical records.

We want to know from you specifically today, what concrete steps are you taking to deal with these very serious allegations, and what are you going to do to

reassure the public that the security of their medical records is guaranteed?

Hon Mrs Johns: Mr Speaker, I have to tell you that it's difficult to take constructive criticism from the party opposite. When their

government was in power in 1992, the provincial audit report said that the ministry at that time "had not defined access rules and ensured that existing controls ... were adequate to protect the

confidentiality and integrity of the information....We determined that over 12,000 computer users could potentially access and change registration information without authorization."

We have not gone there. What we have is a small project with 7,000 people rostered in the Chatham-Kent area. We have those patients talking to their doctors.

They understand what the system is. We have a system that was discussed with the Information and Privacy Commissioner. We have worked all the way along with companies to ensure that we could

maintain records in a safe way --

The Speaker: The minister's time is up.

HIGHWAY 407 TOLLS

Mr Gerry Phillips (Scarborough-Agincourt): My question is to the Minister of Transportation. Somebody's not telling the truth about the tolls

on the 407.

Just before the last election, your government very clearly said that you had an agreement that would protect the users. You said that this agreement would

mean that tolls could increase by about 3 cents per kilometre after 15 years -- after 15 years, up 3 cents a kilometre.

In a document that the 407 corporation has released, they've said something quite different. They've said that, provided certain traffic flows are met, tolls

may be raised "without limit."

After a two-year fight with the Privacy Commissioner, you would be aware that on January 14, the public will finally see this deal that has been kept

secret.

My question to you is this: who was accurate? Was it you, the government, that, when you sold the 407, said tolls could increase by only 3 cents a kilometre

after 15 years? Or is the 407 corporation telling the truth that tolls may be raised without limit provided certain traffic flows are met?

Hon Brad Clark (Minister of Transportation): First off, I'd like to respond to the member's question from the standpoint of his implication

that the government didn't want the contract released. The government has always stated from day one that we would release the contract to the public pending the decision of the Information and

Privacy Commissioner. The rules have always been there. The legislation is stated in such a way. The company itself took the position that under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy

Act they would apply for a third-party exemption, so the company had concerns about certain things in the contract being released. We said to the Privacy Commissioner, "It's your decision." At no

time, honourable member, has this government refused to release that document. We said it was up to Information and Privacy Commissioner.

Mr Phillips: I never even asked that question. You've got the wrong briefing note, for heaven's sake. My question is about ripping off the

users of the 407. It's not about the privacy commissioner and whatnot. Let's get with the program here.

I had a phone call today from a very large corporation that tries to use the 407, and when they decided they'd use it they took your advice about the controls.

They were paying $200,000 a year. They scheduled their work so they would be on off-peak hours. In May of last year, 18 months ago, their fee went up to $250,000. In January of this year, it went

to $300,000, and with the new announcement, it will go to almost $600,000. It will have almost tripled in the space of 27 months -- less than that actually.

My question to you is the same one that I asked just a moment ago when you answered a completely different question. Who was telling the truth? Was it you,

when you announced the sale of this and said that tolls could only go up three cents a kilometre, or the 407 corporation, when they said tolls can go up without limits? Who is right in this case,

Minister?

Interjection.

Hon Mr Clark: It's nice to see that the member for Vaughan-King-Aurora is actually in the House today.

When the --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): When you get into that, you just end up getting yelled at. I encourage the member not to refer to that. They'll

refer to the people who aren't --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Mr Clark: When the honourable member asks a number of questions within a question, I do the best to answer. According to the toll

threshold formula, the ETR cannot increase peak rates over 1.5% for 2000 and 2% for each 2001 and 2002, excluding inflation. It's as clear as that.

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

Mr Bert Johnson (Perth-Middlesex): My question is for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Over the last couple of weeks I've

heard Liberal members across the floor criticize you and our government for the perceived lack of action we've taken on the made-in-Ontario safety net program. Minister, could you please set the

record straight? What has actually taken place with this very important program? Constituents in my riding are well aware of the program, and they would like to hear the details of what our

government is doing to help them in the long term. I ask you, Minister, to stand in your place and clear up the foggy minds from across the floor.

Hon Brian Coburn (Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs): When I was at the Ontario Federation of Agriculture annual convention last

week, I announced the support that I had from our government -- my caucus and cabinet members -- on the made-in-Ontario strategy that had resulted from the input I had from all the commodity

groups. I had received their support to move forward into negotiations with the federal government, and as part of those negotiations, I was asked to highlight five key elements: crop insurance is

available in 53 commodities; income support program for producers of grain and oil seeds; self-directed risk management which is offered to fruit, vegetable and maple syrup producers; both

governments work toward enhancing the net income stabilization program; a disaster assistance program to be used as required when faced with circumstances well beyond our control.

These five elements are part of the negotiations, and we're waiting on the federal government to respond to our request.

Mr Johnson: Minister, thank you for that response. I appreciate your informing this House and my constituents that our government has worked

hard in helping farmers across the province.

There is still one thing I don't understand. If we've already developed a package that all commodity groups can work with, what is the holdup in implementing

it?

Hon Mr Coburn: As you know, to make this agreement work you need agreement from the three parties: certainly the producers, our government and

the federal government. Right now, our proposed safety net program is with the federal government, and we're waiting on their response. Hopefully today Finance Minister Martin will make reference

to the needs that we have in the agricultural community here in Ontario.

When we announced the $90-million one-time payment, we went $20 million beyond what we needed to do in order to meet the federal-provincial agreement. Our

commitment is very much in favour of the needs of the agricultural community, and I hope, after the budget speech in Ottawa today, that they will be as well.

MFP FINANCIAL SERVICES

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): My question is to the Chair of Management Board. Minister, MFP Financial Services Ltd and MFP Technologies Ltd have

extensive contracts for financing equipment and for providing services with your government. In fact, you paid approximately $88 million to them in this past fiscal year.

I first raised this issue with you in a letter on September 4. Further, in reply to my question on October 3, you said, "certainly all the contracts we have

are on contract and certainly appear to be aboveboard." Now the city of Toronto is the latest municipality to line up and sue MFP.

Can you assure this Legislature and, more importantly, can you assure the taxpayers of Ontario, that all of your contracts with MFP Financial Services Ltd and

MFP Technologies Ltd are above reproach?

Hon David H. Tsubouchi (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): I do reference the response back on October 3 as well, at which time the

member asked me this particular question. At that time, I said, "As a result of seeing your letter, I've asked our ministry, Management Board, to investigate all the contracts dealing with this

particular company. They have advised me already that in fact we have no legal disputes between them and any of our government ministries at this point in time." Also, they have assured me there is

compliance with their contractual liabilities, their obligations with the government of Ontario.

I believe that the civil servants at Management Board, who act basically as auditors for this government internally, are doing a good job. They have

investigated this, as I have asked them to do, and they're satisfied at this point in time that there is contractual compliance with this particular company.

Mr Crozier: Minister, considering that Brock University had its contracts with MFP revised, and considering that the region of Waterloo is

suing MFP over contract discrepancies, and considering that the city of Windsor yanked a $2-million leasing agreement from MFP and is conducting a forensic audit of all its contracts, and

considering that the Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Authority is conducting a forensic audit of its contracts, and considering that the Union Water System is conducting a forensic audit of its contract

with MFP, I would suggest to you, as I did in September and again in October, that you call for the Provincial Auditor to conduct a special forensic audit on all past and present contracts with MFP

Financial Ltd and MFP Technologies. Would you agree?

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: The member has absolutely no information whatsoever to ask for this type of an action. When this was brought up to me

through the letter from the particular member, and also in the House again, I asked the civil service, the Management Board -- by the way, I don't understand why you haven't got confidence in the

employees who work for the Management Board of this government.

Interjections.

Hon Mr Tsubouchi: I hear some chirping back there. I have indicated in the past that we have good civil servants who work for us in this

government, certainly in Management Board of Cabinet. I have all the confidence in them and their abilities when we've asked them to review the contracts. When they say back to us that they find

compliance with those contracts, I have to believe them. I believe and have confidence in them.

This member has absolutely no information on which to say that this government does not have total compliance with our contracts.

NORTHERN COMMUNITIES

CAPITAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): My question is for the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. The new capital assistance program

that you unveiled last week in the Legislature in response to consultations with northerners means that constituents from Parry Sound-Muskoka and right across the north will benefit from

investments in priority projects in the region.

Minister, could you clarify for all members of this House what the rationale and restrictions are on this new program?

Hon Dan Newman (Minister of Northern Development and Mines): The northern communities capital assistance program provides funding for the

construction, acquisition or renovation of facilities and essential services that create, renew or enhance the infrastructure of northern communities. Northern Ontario lower-tier municipalities,

First Nations, local services boards, and not-for-profit corporations providing community services in areas without municipal structure are eligible to apply.

The northern communities capital assistance program application form is available on the northern Ontario heritage fund Web site or may be obtained from

government information centres. Applications must be received by the heritage fund by December 31, 2002. I would encourage northerners to work with the Mike Harris government by submitting their

proposals to the heritage fund so that together we can continue to build strong northern communities.

Mr Miller: Thank you very much, Minister. You're certainly doing a great job representing the constituents of the north.

This new capital assistance program sounds great. I know my constituents and northerners will be preparing their proposals for review. In fact, I just got a

letter from the reeve of South River looking for funding and wondering if there's any funding for an underground water distribution system for the village of South River. Perhaps he'll be able to

participate in this program and get that new water distribution system.

Eighty-two million dollars is indeed a significant amount, and the north is very happy about it. What does the announcement actually mean for the individual

communities? For the benefit of all members of this House, can you translate that into some real dollars for the individual communities of the north?

Hon Mr Newman: In communities like Magnetawan, with a population of 184, and south Algonquin, with a population of 1,237, they would each be

eligible for funding of up to $200,000. For communities like Hilton Beach, with a population of 196, and Gogama, with a population of 625, they each would be eligible for up to $100,000 in

funding.

Some other examples of funding levels for various communities across the north would include Dryden, which has a population of 7,587 people. Dryden is eligible

for up to $1.13 million. Neebing, with a population of 2,044, would be eligible for up to $300,000 in funding. I would encourage communities across the north to bring forward their applications to

the heritage fund so that together we can build even stronger northern communities.

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Energy. The wheels keep falling off your dirty deal to privatize

and deregulate Ontario's electricity. Today it's John Mayberry, president of Dofasco, employer of over 7,000 people, who says very clearly that because of what you're doing, privatization and

deregulation -- electricity prices will increase by between 20% and 40% -- there will be more risk and more unpredictability and volatility. Then he says it will cost jobs in Ontario.

Are you listening to the John Mayberrys? If you are, it seems to me you either have to guarantee Dofasco and the other companies that rates are not going to go

up or you have to cancel your stupid idea of privatizing and deregulating Ontario's electricity system. Which is it?

Hon Jim Wilson (Minister of Energy, Science and Technology): I just remind the honourable member that the only two countries in the

industrialized world that haven't undertaken to introduce competition in the electricity sector are Canada and France. I guess there's a lot of stupidity in the world.

The honourable member will know that we cannot continue, as Mr Mayberry suggests in his op-ed piece in the Globe and Mail, to have average consumers subsidize

the large companies in this province. Some companies in this province receive a portion of their electricity that is below cost. It contributed to the debt over the years. We are opening up a

competitive market. Those companies will buy electricity on the competitive market, but to ensure that we transition these companies in a sensible way, the honourable member will know we've already

filed a regulation for a four-year transition for companies that need help in adjusting to the competitive market.

Mr Hampton: This is a friend of your government. This is Dofasco, a company that contributes thousands of dollars to the Conservative Party

every year. This is what Mr Mayberry says: "Dofasco has gone to all potential suppliers for electricity pricing and crunched the real numbers. Our data show prices will go up and consumers will

have little ability to protect themselves." Whether they're big companies or little companies, what he points out, over and over again, is that your strategy to privatize electricity will simply

mean that those who buy up Ontario Power Generation will want to sell their power in the United States, where they can get double the price. He, at Dofasco, now recognizes that.

Why are you so intent on killing more jobs, doing more damage to Ontario's economy, when it's already very fragile? Why won't you listen to one of your friends

who's simply saying, "This is a bad idea. You don't have it right. Don't do it."

Hon Mr Wilson: The Minister of Economic Development and Trade and I met with Mr Mayberry last Wednesday. He made the same points as he did in

the Globe article, but he also makes one point in the Globe

article where he is in error. He says that competition will be bad for the average household. The average household is today subsidizing

large companies in this province. That was the policy of the two parties across the way. We are transitioning those companies over four years. Over four years Mrs Jones will continue to subsidize

those companies, as I will on my monthly bill. I'm willing to do that over four years until there is some competition so they can buy at competitive market prices. Nobody else in the province is

getting that deal.

SCHOOL CLOSURES

Mr Gerard Kennedy (Parkdale-High Park): My question is for the Minister of Education. Right now there are school boards around the province

talking to parents, to local schools, about school closings that you want to arrange. You're trying to close Epsom school in Durham region. You're trying to close St Bernadette school in Toronto,

and St Veronica. You're also trying to close schools in Hamilton and Windsor -- St Bernard's in Hamilton. Minister, all around the province, it's your school closing policy forcing boards into

conflict with parents and so on. You've been closing schools at triple the rate of other governments.

We've learned that in Durham region you've given them an extension. You said that their forced policy to close schools will get special treatment. It doesn't

have to report until the middle of February. It'll still be eligible for next year. Minister, I have a question for you: with your incredibly senseless school closing policy, will you at least give

all the other boards in Ontario the save privilege you gave your home board?

Hon Janet Ecker (Minister of Education, Government House Leader): The honourable member doesn't know what he's talking about. First of all,

the responsibility for deciding school allocation is as it always has been. I understand the honourable member keeps not understanding this, obviously deliberately. The allocation decisions are

part of what a school board and school board trustees are responsible for. That is always the way it has been.

Secondly, the policy is also very clear that school boards must consult with the community. I have yet to see a school board allocation proposal that has not

benefited from consultation with the community. Many times the school board might well adjust it, but at the end of the day, it is up to the school boards to decide how best to allocate their

resources. That policy has been very clear. There has been no change.

Mr Kennedy: The chair of the Durham board and Ismail Patel, the planner there, tell us they've got an exemption to that, that they don't have

a December 30 deadline, they've got a different deadline. They know where to go when they want something changed to do with a school closing. They come to you, because it's your provincial school

closing policy, and they're going to close Epsom school in your riding because they have to build new schools someplace else. It's senseless. It's closing schools in St Catharines, in Windsor, in

Essex county; it's closing them in Toronto and Ottawa. Minister, what those people want to know is, do they at least get fair treatment from you? Will you extend the deadline for every other school

board, the way you did it for your home board in Durham?

Hon Mrs Ecker: The allegations of the honourable member I find quite offensive. No board in this province is getting special treatment. Every

board in this province frequently sits down and works out with the ministry flexibility arrangements on a whole range of rules. We've done it for the Toronto school board -- obviously the

honourable member didn't think that was special treatment -- and we've done it for other school boards on a whole range of things, because at the end of the day we continue to work with school

boards to make sure they are making the best decisions on behalf of their students and their parents.

PATHS TO EQUAL

OPPORTUNITY WEB SITE

Mr Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): My question is to the Minister for Citizenship. This year has been a truly significant one for persons with

disabilities in this province, culminating with the tabling on November 5 of the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, Bill 125. This bill, which builds on the nearly $6 billion spent annually by this

government on programs and services to assist people with disabilities, was subject to public hearings that took place across the province, ending last Friday.

Last week, this government also unveiled Paths to Equal Opportunity, a new Web site designed to help business and service providers make their buildings,

products and services accessible to customers and employees with disabilities. I am sure persons with disabilities in my riding and those throughout the province will be able to take advantage of

this innovative Web site. Could you provide us with more details on what this site provides?

Hon Cameron Jackson (Minister of Citizenship, minister responsible for seniors): First of all, I'd like to state that employers across Ontario

are learning that persons with disabilities are a very valuable source of new employment in our province, and as such, they're also learning that these people have incredibly good records for

loyalty and ability in the services they perform for their employer. The Paths to Equal Opportunity Web site is a practical information tool for those employers and the disabilities community on

how to remove barriers and to open doors for employment for persons with disabilities. This is a unique Web site in Canada, given that it has special features that change the font size and the

colour formatting for persons with visual impairments and has keyboard shortcuts for persons who can't manipulate a mouse. It's the most technically advanced Web site of its kind in all of

Canada.

Its call letters are www.equalopportunity.on.ca, and I encourage all employers in Ontario to look into this innovative site.

Mr Hardeman: Bill Wilkerson, co-founder and CEO of the Global Business and Economic Roundtable on Addiction and Mental Health and the author

Wilkerson, I understand, was with you when the Web site was launched at the fully accessible Granite Brewery restaurant in Toronto, where he spoke of the economic opportunities that will open up

when business removes barriers for customers and employees with disabilities.

Minister, will you tell us more about the advantages to be gained by opening doors for customers in the business sector and by the employers creating job

opportunities that nurture the skills of persons with disabilities?

Hon Mr Jackson: This government has made a significant commitment in its funding programs with respect to enabling change, which involves

opening opportunities on a wide range of opportunities, whether it's volunteerism or access to employment. We're very pleased that this Paths to Equal Opportunity Web site demonstrates about 17

examples of specific businesses like Loblaws, Laidlaw Transport, Coca-Cola, the Granite Brewery and others that have done innovative ways in which they've worked with the disabilities community to

modify their workplace -- the guidelines that employers have been looking for as to how they can improve access.

The Greater Toronto Hotel Association, in partnership with our ministry on a $63,000 enabling-change program, developed one of Canada's leading programs to

train the hospitality industry in the city of Toronto. I'm pleased to report the successes that we're enjoying in this city. The Marriott Hotel, for example, has TTY machines available to their

guests; visual fire alarms are available for the deaf; the modified --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I'm afraid the minister's time is up. New question.

COMMUNAL WATER

TREATMENT SYSTEMS

Mr Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): I have a question for the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. I want to bring to your

attention and the attention of all members the plight of many of my constituents connected to private communal water systems. These residents are facing an impossible situation. Their water systems

clearly do not meet provincial standards. The cost of testing the water has also already placed a huge financial burden on the owner and/or residents. These systems need significant capital outlays

to ensure safe, clean drinking water.

In Algoma-Manitoulin, there are hundreds of people in this situation. For example, the Peace Tree subdivision in Heyden will be in need of significant capital

improvements to meet the standards.

Minister, what steps have you taken to provide the necessary assistance to ensure that the residents relying on communal private water systems will have safe,

clean drinking water?

Hon Dan Newman (Minister of Northern Development and Mines): That question is best answered by the Minister of the Environment. Chris?

Interjection: The acting minister.

Hon Chris Hodgson (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): Thanks to my colleague the Minister of Northern Development for referring this

question to me.

I think I understand the question. You're concerned about some of the communal water systems in northern Ontario that have to come into compliance with the new

Ministry of the Environment regulation on small waterworks, and they are having a hard time figuring out how they are going to be able to afford to bring that up to the new standard.

It's something the Minister of the Environment has been working on, consulting with small communities. It's something that our caucus is very concerned about,

and I'm sure all members in the House are concerned that small systems should be safe. We should make sure that they are funded to be safe. It's getting those two things to work together, to make

sure it's practical, because you don't want to be paying too much money when it could be cheaper to drill a well, yet we have these systems in place and we want to make sure they are brought up to

the right standard.

Mr Brown: Minister, the subdivision I cited was in an unorganized township, so there is no municipal government to deal with this.

I want to bring to your attention also that the OSTAR program is to fund one third of the capital funding of municipal water systems. One third is not enough

to make it work. I recently was at the opening of one water system that was just opened in the township of Sable-Spanish Rivers, and they tell me that they received 90% provincial support to open

that water system. How in the world do you believe that the town of Bruce Mines, for example, which has been sentenced to 18 months of boiling water already and has no way of funding a new communal

water treatment plant -- how do you expect that on one third funding they can possibly provide water for the residents of Bruce Mines in the near future?

Hon Mr Hodgson: This isn't a new problem. This has been a problem we have faced in small communities for a long time.

The northern heritage fund has a category, if the member wants to hear this, where the governments, under the Canada-Ontario infrastructure, fund one third,

one third and one third. That was asked for, and it's something that's easily understood. The municipalities know how to deal with that.

Unorganized areas would fit into the same criteria, except that their one third is very difficult to raise on the users of the system, so we have a category

where in emergency situations, when it goes above the one third ratio, the northern Ontario heritage fund kicks in, like it has for a long time in the past, and we will take a look at that.

Those are some of the considerations that the Minister of the Environment and this government are seized with right now. We've been consulting with people

across Ontario. The minister has held 28 consultation sessions. Almost 1,000 people have attended. I think the public want to make sure that the systems are safe, but they also want to make sure

that we're practical and that these solutions are affordable. If there is extra assistance needed in some of the small communities in rural and northern Ontario, we will be looking at that as well,

and how we address that.

NUMBER PLATES FOR

HISTORIC VEHICLES

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Although he's sitting right in front of me, I prefer to put it on

the record here.

The minister will no doubt recall that my private member's Bill 99 was passed in the House last year, and I thank you for that. This legislation allows owners

of antique vehicles to display the year-of-manufacture licence plate.

This summer the ministry introduced the regulations that allow owners of these vehicles to apply for approval to use year-of-manufacture plates. Ontario has a

very large community of men and women who restore and maintain classic and antique vehicles. The option of displaying year-of-manufacture plates is appreciated because it ensures that the vehicle

is restored in absolutely every detail, from bumper to bumper.

I understand, however that there a few finer points in the legislative process that may want your follow-up. For example, I understand that some historic

licence plates have the same number as trailers or snowmobile plates, and since these plates match those of licence plates already in the system, they may not be registered for use on historic

vehicles.

Minister, I'm asking you to review this situation in order to fine-tune it to accommodate the many historic vehicles in Ontario.

Hon Brad Clark (Minister of Transportation): Perhaps I should just look backwards here. My colleague is correct; some year-of-manufacture

licence plates have been assigned to other vehicles or trailers. This is because prior to 1971, every car in Ontario got a new plate every year. Since then, Ontario has moved to a system whereby

there's a plate with a sticker attached to it, so as a result there are some expired plate numbers before 1971 that would have been issued to other vehicles. The vehicle registration system is

designed to never have duplicate numbers so that plates could not be issued to two separate vehicles. Licence plates assist enforcement officers in determining both the proper vehicle class and

verification of registered ownership. Both my ministry and the law enforcement authorities have expressed reservations about altering registration data that potentially could duplicate plate

numbers. So at the present time, we are looking at the system to see how we can help those with the year-of-manufacture plates.

Mr O'Toole: Thank you, Minister. It's clear that you're the person to clear this up.

My supplementary question revolves around fees for the year-of-manufacture plates. My understanding is that donors of historic vehicles can pay, as they have

always, $18 for a generic historic vehicle plate. However, if you want to register your year-of-manufacture plate, the cost of processing the registration is $74, the same as a regular plate. Could

you please explain why the fee is set at $74 a year? Is it because there is added cost? Minister, what's the excuse for the $74 instead of $36?

Hon Mr Clark: Vehicle owners will continue to have the option of registering their historic vehicles using the existing historic vehicle plate

provided by the ministry or with a year-of-manufacture plate. If the owner chooses to use a historical plate on the vehicle, there are some restrictions. Vehicles with these plates can only be used

for parades, exhibitions, demonstrations, for sale and for travelling to repair depots.

However, during the preparation of the legislation, we heard from historic vehicle owners who wanted to drive their vehicles with year-of-manufacture plates

without these restrictions. This was agreed to by the ministry and included in the legislation. Therefore, vehicles with year-of-manufacture plates are allowed to operate on the highways without

restriction, the same as other vehicles. If they choose to do that, the annual validation fee is $74, the same as for other vehicles.

HÔPITAL MONTFORT /

MONTFORT HOSPITAL

M. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-Baie James) : Ma question s'adresse au procureur général. Monsieur, comme vous le savez, la Cour

d'appel de l'Ontario vient juste vendredi de renforcer encore, sur la bataille de Montfort, la question, est-ce que votre gouvernement a l'autorité de fermer cette institution ?

La cour a été claire. La Cour d'appel de l'Ontario a dit carrément que vous n'avez pas le droit. Nous voulons vous poser une question qui est

très simple : est-ce que vous êtes préparé à ce point-ci aujourd'hui de dire que vous n'allez pas à la Cour suprême avec un appel pour essayer de renverser

cette décision ?

Hon David Young (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs): It is true that we did seek some further direction from the court

of appeal and we received that direction Friday morning. We are in the process of reviewing the decision and the reasons provided by the court of appeal, as I am sure the member opposite would have

expected us to do out of respect for the court and out of respect for the issue. Indeed, it is a very important issue. In due course, we will be announcing our decision as to what further steps, if

any, are to be taken.

M. Bisson : Très carrément au procureur général, la décision est de 60 pages. Il n'est pas très

compliqué de vous figurer ce que vous allez avoir. Ce que nous demandons, c'est que vous respectiez la population franco-ontarienne et que vous fassiez ce que vous êtes supposé de

l'habilité de votre gouvernement de fermer cette institution, l'hôpital Montfort.

On vous demande une autre fois : dites aujourd'hui que vous n'allez pas aller à la Cour suprême du Canada pour être capable d'aller en

appel de cette décision. Allez-vous carrément vous mettre avec la communauté francophone, ou allez-vous retourner encore une fois pour essayer de nous taper sur la tête à

la Cour suprême elle-même ?

Hon Mr Young: As the member is aware, the decision is a complex one, dealing with a very important matter. I know that he feels comfortable

summarizing it in a few words or less and then trying to score some political points in the process. I, for one, think that a 60-page decision is worthy of more than an hour or two or a day or two

of consideration. We are in the process of reviewing it. We are respectful of the importance of the issue, we are respectful of the court from which this decision emanates, and in due course we

will have more to say about this very important issue.

PETITIONS

PROFESSIONAL LEARNING

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It says:

"Because we, the undersigned, believe in our responsibility as teachers to maintain a high degree of professsionalism; and

"Because such professionalism is best served when professional learning is self-directed and based on teacher need, improves professional skills, improves

student learning, is based on best-practice accountability and is funded by the appropriate educational authority; and

"Because we oppose the government's teacher testing program and the College of Teachers' professional learning program because they do not meet the objectives

of effective professional learning,

"We, the undersigned -- " from St Charles College, St Benedict Catholic Secondary school, Marymount academy, St Theresa's school, St Albert learning centre and

St Mark school -- "respectfully request that you repeal all clauses and references to professional learning from the Stability and Excellence in Education Act, 2001."

I affix my signature and give it to Andrew to bring to the table.

OPTOMETRISTS

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): I have a petition addressed to the Ontario Legislature.

"Whereas the Legislative Assembly of the province of Ontario will be considering a private member's bill that aims to amend the Optometry Act to give

optometrists the authority to prescribe therapeutic pharmaceutical agents for the treatment of certain eye diseases; and

"Whereas optometrists are highly trained and equipped with the knowledge and specialized instrumentation needed to effectively diagnose and treat certain eye

problems; and

"Whereas extending the authority to prescribe TPAs to optometrists will help relieve the demands on ophthalmologists and physicians who currently have the

exclusive domain for prescribing TPAs to optometry patients; and

"Whereas the bill introduced by New Democrat Peter Kormos (MPP -- Niagara Centre) will ensure that patients receive prompt, timely, one-stop care where

appropriate;

"Therefore I do support the bill proposing an amendment to the Optometry Act to give optometrists the authority to prescribe therapeutic pharmaceutical agents

for the treatment of certain eye diseases and I urge the government of Ontario to ensure speedy passage of the bill."

I have signed that as well.

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): It's my pleasure to introduce a petition here on behalf of the member from Scarborough Southwest who, as you would

know as members of the crown, is the Minister of Northern Development and Mines. It's my pleasure to read the petition on behalf of the minister and on behalf of his constituents of Scarborough

Southwest.

To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Criminal Code of Canada considers animal cruelty to be a property offence; and

"Whereas those who commit crimes against animals currently face light sentences upon conviction; and

"Whereas those who operate puppy mills should, upon conviction, face sentences that are appropriate for the torture and inhumane treatment they have inflicted

on puppies under their so-called care;

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

"That the Ontario provincial government petition the federal government to move forward with amendments to the cruelty of animal provisions in the Criminal

Code as soon as possible."

I know the minister would sign this. I'm going to sign this on behalf of my constituents in Durham.

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mr James J. Bradley (St Catharines): This is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Harris government's rigid education funding formula is forcing neighbourhood school closures and has centralized control for education spending

and decision-making at Queen's Park, and will not allow communities the flexibility to respond to local needs;

"Whereas chronic underfunding and an inflexible funding formula are strangling the system and students are suffering the consequences;

"Whereas there is evidence that large schools do not automatically translate into cost-effectiveness;

"Whereas smaller, neighbourhood schools have lower incidences of negative social behaviour, much greater and more varied student participation in

extracurricular activities, higher attendance rates and lower dropout rates, and foster strong interpersonal relationships; and

"Whereas small neighbourhood schools in local communities, both rural and urban, serve as important meeting areas for neighbourhood organizations which help

bring individuals together and strengthen neighbourhood ties and the current funding formula does not recognize community use of these schools,

"Be it resolved that the Harris government immediately reconfigure their unyielding funding formula to restore flexibility to local school boards and their

communities which will allow neighbourhood schools in our province to remain open."

I affix my signature as I am in complete agreement.

CHILD CARE

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have petitions that have been signed and sent to me by E. Rosewell of Caledonia, the Ryerson School of

Early Childhood Education, the Church of St Thomas, and the children's daycare centre in St Catharines. These petitions read as follows:

"Whereas an internal government document states the Conservative government is considering cutting the regulated child care budget by at least 40%;

"Whereas the same internal document states the government is also considering completely cutting all funding for regulated child care and family resource

programs in Ontario;

"Whereas the Conservative government has already cut funding for regulated child care by 15% between 1995 and 1998 and downloaded 20% of the child care and

family resource program budget on to municipalities;

"Whereas Fraser Mustard and Margaret McCain identified regulated child care and family resource programs as integral to early childhood development;

"Whereas the Conservative government will receive $844 million from the federal government over five years for early childhood development;

"Whereas Ontario is the only province which didn't spend a cent of this year's federal money on regulated child care;

"Whereas other provinces are implementing innovative, affordable, and accessible child care programs such as Quebec's $5-a-day child care program;

"Whereas the need for affordable, accessible, regulated child care and family resources continues to grow;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"We demand the Conservative government protect the current regulated child care and family resource program budgets and invest significant federal Early Years

funding in regulated child care and family resource programs. We demand future federal Early Years funding be invested in an expansion of affordable, regulated child care and in continued funding

for family resource programs."

I agree with the petitioners, and I have signed my name to this petition.

PARKING FEE REGULATION

Mr Carl DeFaria (Mississauga East): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario which reads as follows:

"Whereas many senior citizens are living on fixed incomes and being forced to pay an additional $400 per annum for parking alone; and

"Whereas many senior citizens will be forced to sell their vehicles as a direct result of high parking fees, thereby affecting their standard of living;

and

"Whereas most of the parking spots are located outside and unprotected from inclement weather and vandalism; and

"Whereas in a subsidized building, tenants are forced to pay the market rate for parking;

"We, the undersigned, hereby respectfully petition the Legislature of Ontario as follows:

"That the government of Ontario regulate the cost of parking, ensuring that subsidized buildings maintain affordable fees."

This petition is signed by over 550 people in my riding, and I am pleased to affix my signature to it.

LONDON HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE

Mr Steve Peters (Elgin-Middlesex-London): A petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the London Health Sciences Centre is a world-class academic health sciences centre serving people throughout southwestern Ontario; and

"Whereas the Ministry of Health has forced the London Health Sciences Centre to find $17 million in annual savings by 2005; and

"Whereas the London Health Sciences Centre has agreed to cut 18 programs in order to satisfy directions from the provincial Ministry of Health; and

"Whereas these cuts will put the health of the people of southwestern Ontario, and particularly the children of southwestern Ontario, at risk; and

"Whereas these cuts will diminish the London Health Sciences Centre's standing as a regional health care resource; and

"Whereas these cuts will worsen the continuing physician shortages in the region;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned" -- the citizens of such places as Kippen, Clinton, Grand Bend, Exeter, Bayfield, Goderich -- "petition the

Ontario Legislature to demand the Mike Harris government take immediate action to ensure these important health services are maintained so that the health and safety of people throughout

southwestern Ontario are not put at risk."

We, the undersigned 1,900 individuals, ask the government to put this decision on hold.

I'm in full agreement and have affixed my signature.

OHIP SERVICES

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): "Whereas the Harris government's decision to delist hearing aid evaluation and re-evaluation from OHIP

coverage will lead to untreated hearing loss; and

"Whereas these restrictions will cut off access to diagnostic hearing tests, especially in geographic regions of the province already experiencing difficulties

due to shortages of specialty physicians; and

"Whereas OHIP will no longer cover the cost of miscellaneous therapeutic procedures, including physical therapy and therapeutic exercise; and

"Whereas services no longer covered by OHIP may include thermal therapy, ultrasound therapy, hydrotherapy, massage therapy, electrotherapy, magnetotherapy,

transcutaneous nerve therapy stimulation and biofeedback; and

"Whereas one of the few publicly covered alternatives includes hospital outpatient clinics where waiting lists for such services are up to six months long;

and

"Whereas delisting these services will have a detrimental effect on the health of all Ontarians, especially seniors, children, hearing-impaired people and

industrial workers; and

"Whereas the government has already delisted $100 million worth of OHIP services,

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately restore OHIP coverage for these delisted services."

I add my name to these as well.

LORD'S PRAYER

Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, which reads as follows:

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer, also called Our Father, has been used to open the proceedings of municipal chambers and the Ontario Legislative Assembly since the

beginning of Upper Canada in the 18th century;

"Whereas such use of the Lord's Prayer is part of Ontario's long-standing heritage and tradition that continues to play a significant role in contemporary

Ontario life;

"Whereas the Lord's Prayer is the most meaningful expression of the religious convictions of many Ontario citizens;

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

"That the Legislature of Ontario maintain the use of the Lord's Prayer in its proceedings, in accordance with its long-standing established custom, and do all

in its power to maintain use of this prayer in municipal chambers in Ontario."

I affix my signature.

ADJOURNMENT MOTION

Mr Dwight Duncan (Windsor-St Clair): Mr Speaker, I move adjournment of the House.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour of the motion will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the nays have it.

Call in the members; this will be a 30-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1528 to 1602.

The Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will please rise and remain standing until they've been counted by the Clerk. You may take your

seats.

All those opposed will please rise and remain standing.

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 41; the nays are 45.

The Speaker: I declare the motion lost.

Pursuant to standing order 30(b), I am now required to call orders of the day.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TIME ALLOCATION

Hon Helen Johns (Minister without Portfolio [Health and Long-Term Care]): I move that, pursuant to standing order 46 and notwithstanding any

other standing order or special order of the House relating to Bill 130,

An Act respecting community care access corporations, when Bill 130 is next called as a government order, the Speaker shall

put every question necessary to dispose of the second reading stage of the bill without further debate or amendment, and at such time, the bill shall be ordered referred for third reading; and

That, notwithstanding standing order 28(h), no deferral of the second reading vote shall be permitted; and

That the order for third reading may be called on the same day.

That, when the order for third reading is called, 60 minutes shall be allotted to the third reading stage of the bill, to be divided equally among all

recognized parties, and at the end of that time, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings and shall put every question necessary to dispose of this stage of the bill without further debate or

amendment; and

That, notwithstanding standing order 28(h), no deferral of the third reading vote shall be permitted; and

That, in the case of any division relating to any proceedings on the bill, the division bell shall be limited to five minutes.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Mrs Johns has moved government notice of motion 109.

Mr Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I seek unanimous consent to allow the standing committee on finance and

economic affairs to sit tomorrow from 9 am to 12 pm and from 4 pm, and that the committee be authorized to sit beyond the hour of adjournment to debate and vote upon all clauses and all amendments

to Bill 125, the Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent? I'm afraid I heard some noes.

Hon Mrs Johns: It's my pleasure today to speak to Bill 130, the bill respecting community care access centres in the province of Ontario. As

everyone will recognize, the government, through consultation with many people on the outside, is moving to change the governance of CCACs within this bill and bring accountability to community

care access centres.

The third thing we're doing, which is important, is we are legislating that we have a community advisory council which will bring together the community care

access centre, the hospital and long-term-care facilities. Each of those organizations will be there to ensure that when a person comes through the system, there is an ability to make sure they get

the care they need and, in one way or another, get the services they need.

Before I go any further, I should say I'm sharing my time with Mr Klees and Mr Wettlaufer; I wanted to just say that.

Also, it's very important, as you would know, that the government moved to create community care access centres in 1997. At that time, we put forward proposals

to ensure that we provided strong services to the community. Since that time, there have been a number of concerns raised by the public within each of the areas and we have done a number of reports

and looked at different community care access centres. We had a global report done by PricewaterhouseCoopers. We also had an operational review done of the Hamilton Community Care Access Centre,

for which the Speaker is one of the members.

At that time, we recognized there was work that needed to be done on community care access centres so that we could continue to provide strong services within

the community. We found a number of things. We found, although the services within the community care access centre and in the community were strong and had grown at a very fast rate, that there

needed to be changes to be able to meet the ever-changing needs.

The community sector in the health care budget has grown at the fastest rate of any sector in health care over the last five years. We have quoted in the House

for the last number of weeks that, on average, the budgets in community care access centres have grown by 72%. For maybe a layperson watching the TV today, it's hard to recognize how much money

that really is, but let me say that in 1995 the budget in community care access centres was about $600 million. Now, in 2001, the budget in community care access centres is some $1.2 billion, so it

has grown substantially. Some community care access centres are growing faster than others as a result of changing demographics and those kinds of things, but on average it is 72% across the

province.

We need to make sure that community services stay in the community. We have taken an active role in looking at community care access centres over the last six

to eight months by doing the two reports. Putting a government appointee into Hamilton was to try to ascertain how we might best ensure the community services stay sustainable within our health

care network. From that standpoint, that's what we're doing today.

In the bill we have moved toward ensuring that we change the governance. We want to ensure that community care access centres across the province will be

providing many of the same services in one area as in other areas. We also want to ensure that we do proper training across the whole province so that the boards understand the role of people on

the board, but more importantly, that they understand how the request for proposals system that was implemented some four years ago by this government works.

If this legislation is passed, we are going to ensure that the CEOs are appointed by the board. What we're doing there is trying to ensure that there is

consistency across the province. We are trying to ensure that we have the qualifications that make all the boards strong and sustainable in the future. We're also trying to ensure that we do the

proper training and that we're able to do the training that will allow these CEOs to ensure that they can provide the services. We're working toward that.

Also in the bill we talk about the community advisory council. We're trying to ensure that all the health providers work together. We need to have health

providers working together so that when someone comes out of the hospital, they get the services they need in the community. When they get the services in the community and they feel they need to

go to a long-term-care facility, they are able to do that.

One of the things I've heard recently is that this government's goal is to try to push people into long-term-care facilities. Although this government has made

a substantial investment in long-term-care facilities, that is not the goal. The goal is to ensure that people get the right services at the time that they need them. For example, I have aging

parents, as many know, who watch this program on a daily basis. In that particular case, when they need small-community services, they should get those in the community. When at some time one of

them is alone and isn't getting an interaction with the community, I may well say to them that they should look at a long-term-care facility so that they can have an interaction with other people,

they don't have to drive to places, and they can get the proper health care they need.

So there's a continuum. There's a place for every aspect of health care in the health care system. Our goal with this legislation is to ensure that we have

sustainable hospitals, we have sustainable community services, we have sustainable long-term-care facilities and we have supports in the community that can be sustainable too.

There's been a lot of talk over the last while about why the need for this legislation. We needed to do those changes, but there are many other changes that

the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and myself will be working on over the next few months.

We're going to ensure that we have strong case managers who are evaluating patients and making sure they get the services they need.

We have a number of community care access centres in the province right now which have a very strong case management tool which should be used in all community

care access centres, so we're going to implement that before the new year comes around for community care access centres. We're looking to ensure that we have the right numbers of people in the

community care access centre and that they are providing services to the people of the community.

So we're working on those things. We're also working on education and training programs, which of course I didn't need to put in the legislation. So from that

perspective, we have a plan to make sure that community care access centres are stronger in our communities when we're finished.

I've also heard some comment that the boards will no longer have community representatives on them. Let me say that that is just fundamentally not true. It's

my intention to take a number of people from the community who are involved in many different aspects of the community so that we have the best boards we can have in the province. In fact, it's my

intention in a number of areas to reappoint boards that are already in existence because of the wonderful job they're doing in providing services to the community.

Mr Speaker, there have been a few concerns raised by different organizations over the period of time, and as you would be cognizant, we wanted to go to

committee to be able to make a few amendments, but that didn't prove possible with negotiations in the last week. So from that perspective, I have done a fair amount of work to ensure that we can

deal with the concerns that people have raised.

The first concern we heard was that Bill 130 doesn't tie in to the freedom-of-information and privacy concerns. I want to say quite clearly that that is not

the case today. There are no services provided under Bill 130, this act. The services that a community care access centre would provide are all outlined in the Long-Term Care Act of 1994. The

Long-Term Care Act of 1994 provides for the collection, but only in certain limited cases, of people's information. It is bound by the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, which

allows the minister to collect personal information only in specific circumstances, and they are all reflected in the Long-Term Care Act. So we know that we are covered with respect to that. If I

could have got to committee, I certainly would have put an amendment in to ensure that people knew that was the case. I have had quite a bit of discussion with lawyers across the government, and I

have been guaranteed that that is the case. I have written to the Ontario Association of Community Care Access Centres and let them know.

The second issue was that Bill 130 does not ensure access centres will be able to conduct their day-to-day business during the transition period. The

transition period is the time from when the bill is approved by this House -- if it is approved by this House -- and it receives royal assent until such time as we get the boards and the CEOs set

up within the organizations.

Let me tell you that if this bill passes, I will be moving very quickly to try and move forward to address this issue. I want to ensure that we get these

boards up and running as quickly as we can after the legislation is passed. Obviously, this only relates to the issues in Bill 130. The question is clearly addressed in

section 4 of Bill 130.

It states that the corporation continues and there is no interruption in the functioning of the corporation's affairs during the transition. This obviously includes service providers' contracts. If

an agency needs to enter into a service provider contract because the old one has expired, they are able to do that to carry on day-to-day business. We also will be able to put some policy out to

ensure that they can enter into small-dollar contracts for that time frame, so that the normal day-to-day business of the community care access centre does not stop. It's our goal to ensure that

people continue to be served with high-quality care during this period.

The third issue was that Bill 130 has no liability clause to protect board members and employees of the statutory corporation. This is simply untrue. Concerns

about good faith protection can, and will, be addressed through the normal process that CCACs currently employ. These include an indemnity from the corporation, and the purchase of director and

officer liability insurance for board members and the executive directors. As an example of how this is done now, I refer you to the public hospitals, of course, because that's how they provide

their insurance and freedom from liability.

The fourth issue that was raised is that Bill 130 doesn't make clear the accountability of the executive director to the board. Actually, it does. To quote

from the legislation, "The executive director ... is responsible for the management and administration of its" CCAC "affairs, subject to the supervision and direction of its board of directors." To

put it another way, the government sets the terms of employment; the board provides direction. The point is that the executive director must be responsive to ministry programs and ministry

direction, as well as to board priorities.

The fifth issue we've heard is that Bill 130 lacks clarity as to the status of CCACs as local community operations, as opposed to government agencies. The

phrase "local community operations" is usually applied to organizations created locally, and financially supported locally to pursue local objectives. In fact, community care access centres, as I

said earlier, were created by the Mike Harris government to implement provincial policies that would support rationalized and enhanced home care for the people in the province of Ontario. That's

why we've increased spending in home care by some 72% over the last five years. That's why more than $1 billion flows every year to community care access centres alone. That's why we're changing

the governance of the community care access centres. To put it in another way, CCACs were created by the province, which funds them 100% with provincial taxpayer dollars, to pursue provincial

objectives aimed at bringing better home care to Ontarians. Local input comes from the appointments of local people. So we are assuring the people of Ontario that we will be involved with the local

boards. We will be getting local input. But we also want to assure the people who are using the services that we have every intention of making sure that services are provided across the province,

in their communities.

The last concern we have heard is that the OIC board will no longer have local ties. I think I've addressed this a couple of times. I am on record as saying

that we're going to have local people on the boards. It's my intention, if this bill is passed, to advertise to fill board vacancies that may exist. In fact, the ministry is on record as saying

that we want to look at the majority of board members who are around right now and see if we can reappoint them. In addition, the advisory councils will be chaired by the community care access

centre board members, and there will be input coming from the whole community when we look at these advisory councils. So I feel comfortable that the community support agencies will have more of a

say in how community services are provided. They will work hand in hand with the community care access centres, the hospitals and the long-term-care facilities in the area.

Because this is legislated, it will no longer be an ad hoc committee that exists in some places. They will now exist in all communities across the province,

and they will bring to community services a stronger and a better system of community care in the province.

I have written a letter to the Ontario Association of Community Care Access Centres. I know they will be passing that around to the access centres. But let me

say, because I have two colleagues who want to speak here, that it's very important for us to have a sustainable community system. The people of Ontario rely on that system. We have to have every

aspect of our communities strong when it comes to health care. Hence the bill is happening today. I believe that in the long run, if and when we get approval of this bill, after we implement the

changes that we need, after we work with the communities, that the people of Ontario will be happier with the health services they're receiving in the community.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr David Christopherson): Further debate is in rotation, so the floor will go to the member for Toronto

Centre-Rosedale.

Mr George Smitherman (Toronto Centre-Rosedale): I will be sharing my time with the members from St Catharines, Sudbury, Prince Edward-Hastings

and Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington.

In response to that awful speech from the minister opposite, I say but one word: yikes. For anyone who was at home and listening and subjected to that, here,

in less than seven minutes, is the straight goods on a bad bill, one more bill from a command-and-control government that seeks to gag the voice of the local communities. This is a shameful attempt

by that minister to attempt, in her 20-minute ramble, to create an impression other than what this bill really is.

Let's be clear. The word "respecting" may be in the title of the bill, but respect, as it relates to local communities and as it relates to the patients in

this province, ends right there. The meaningful decision-making capacity at the community l