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

November 15, 2005

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2005-Nov-15 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Tuesday 15 November 2005 Mardi 15 novembre 2005

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES

SIKH COMMUNITY

COURT FACILITY

TENANT PROTECTION

LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

ONTARIO FARMERS

VIOLENT CRIME

POLICE

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR L'ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE

FAMILY STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE

DES QUESTIONS FAMILIALES

MANDATORY BLOOD

TESTING ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR LE DÉPISTAGE

OBLIGATOIRE PAR TEST SANGUIN

GARETH RODGERS ACT

FOR SPORT PARACHUTING

(FREEFALLING REGULATION), 2005 /

LOI GARETH RODGERS DE 2005

SUR LE PARACHUTISME SPORTIF

(RÉGLEMENTATION DU SAUT

SANS SOUTIEN)

RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE

(LONDON) ACT, 2005

SAFE NEEDLES SAVE LIVES ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR L'UTILISATION

D'AIGUILLES SÛRES

POUR SAUVER DES VIES

VISITORS

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

FAMILY LAW ARBITRATION /

ARBITRAGE EN DROIT DE LA FAMILLE

MANDATORY BLOOD TESTING

FAMILY LAW ARBITRATION

MANDATORY BLOOD TESTING

FAMILY LAW ARBITRATION

ORAL QUESTIONS

POLICE OFFICERS

MUNICIPAL TAXATION

TENANT PROTECTION

POLICE OFFICERS

SKILLS TRAINING

POLICE OFFICERS

PROTECTION FOR

HEALTH CARE WORKERS

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE /

VIOLENCE FAMILIALE

POLICE OFFICERS

PROPERTY TAXATION

HEALTH CARE

POLICE OFFICERS

PETITIONS

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

DISABILITY BENEFITS

MACULAR DEGENERATION

CANCER TREATMENT

PLANT CLOSURE

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

OPTOMETRY SERVICES

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

FIRE AT RECYCLING PLANT

QUEENSWAY CARLETON HOSPITAL

MANDATORY RETIREMENT

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

PROPERTY TAXATION

NOTICES OF DISSATISFACTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

OPPOSITION DAY

VIOLENT CRIME /

CRIME VIOLENT

ADJOURNMENT DEBATE

SENTENCING

HYDRO RATES

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TRANSPORTATION STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE LE TRANSPORT

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL

FISCAL POLICIES

Mr. John R. Baird (Nepean–Carleton): I rise once again today to talk about the $23-billion fiscal gap and the fiscal imbalance which has been acknowledged by all three political parties. I was shocked to see John McKay, the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance, say that there was no fiscal imbalance.

Is there anyone on Parliament Hill, any government MP who is standing up and fighting for people in Ontario? I can tell you, a Conservative government on Parliament Hill will not be the answer to all of the problems of Ontario, but at least we will acknowledge them and we will begin to do the work.

The $23-billion gap is an issue that all three political parties in this assembly have supported our Premier on. I was there on May 7 to personally support our Premier when he was negotiating with the federal government. But I read with great trepidation a story by Ian Urquhart in the Toronto Star. Let's look at where we've been since May 7: "Training for unemployed workers" -- nowhere; "Meat inspection" -- nowhere; "Kyoto commitments" -- nowhere; "Corporate tax collection" -- nowhere; "Housing" -- nowhere. And because of Joe Volpe's mismanagement and incompetence, he won't provide any information on what he would do for funding for Ontario's new immigrants.

Of the $5.75 billion promised by Paul Martin to the people of Ontario, not a single dollar has flowed. This is a travesty, and we need to change this. This simply cannot continue. We must begin to at least acknowledge the fiscal imbalance and do good things for the people of Canada and the people of Ontario.

SIKH COMMUNITY

Mr. Kuldip Kular (Bramalea—Gore—Malton—Springdale): It's an honour to rise today to acknowledge Guru Nanak Dev Ji's birthday on this day in 1469 -- indeed, many moons ago. As the founder and first guru of Sikhism, Guru Nanak Dev Ji lived an honest life. He taught others to share their earnings with those who are less fortunate and to earn their living with honest labour -- values which many hold to be true today.

An extraordinary human being, Guru Nanak Dev Ji was a great prophet of peace, love and truth, but above all, he was a humanitarian in every sense of the word. Perhaps most significantly, Guru Nanak Dev Ji thought of working for the betterment of humanity. Wherever he went, he would spread his divine message of universal love, humanitarian service and the uniqueness of God.

I would like to take this opportunity to wish all followers of Guru Nanak Dev Ji a most joyous day and to encourage them and everyone to continue to embrace the teachings of universal love.

Additionally, I would like to acknowledge and applaud the many members of the Sikh community who, in keeping with the teachings of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, have generously donated their time and food to many food banks within my riding of Bramalea—Gore—Malton—Springdale and the greater Toronto area every year and for the past many years.

COURT FACILITY

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The member for --

Mr. Jim Flaherty (Whitby—Ajax): Whitby—Ajax.

The Speaker: Whitby—Ajax.

Mr. Flaherty: The recently elected member for Whitby—Ajax.

Interjection.

Mr. Flaherty: No. I will have a farewell message at some point, especially for the member from St. Catharines because I know he's into farewells, especially for the honourable member for Nepean and me. He's happy to wish us farewell. That's not the statement I was going to make.

The statement is about the Durham consolidated courthouse, which we're waiting to hear about. The minister responsible for public infrastructure said at committee in September that he had been converted, as had Mr. McGuinty, to public-private partnerships. In fact, they had three consortia, one headed by EllisDon, one headed by PCL and one headed by SNC Lavalin, all set to build the new consolidated courthouse in Durham region, which is one of the most rapidly growing areas not only in Canada, but in all of North America.

We have security concerns. The police associations here today -- the PAO and the police officers from Durham region -- have security concerns, as the people of Durham region do, about using an antiquated facility. We have had an alleged murderer escape and try to enter that courthouse, and in people's backyards including my own, and families endangered by that. So we want that courthouse built.

We are waiting for the announcement. We urge the government to get moving forward on the security issue for the good of the people of Durham region and announce the courthouse as soon as possible as a Christmas present to all the people of Durham region.

TENANT PROTECTION

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches—East York): In the weeks and months leading up to the last election, you couldn't hear Liberals talk too much about the need for a new Tenant Protection Act. They promised, within 365 days of their election, that there would be a new act. Well, I have to tell you, you are now 409 days late on your commitment and your promise.

In that period of time, 35,000 tenants have been evicted from their homes because of your inaction. In that time, above-guideline increases have affected tens of thousands of people in Ontario because of your inaction. In that time, vacancy decontrol has continued unabated because of your inaction, and in that time, tens of thousands and perhaps hundreds of thousands of people have seen the total lack of maintenance in the apartments, in the places they call home. Landlords are no longer afraid not to do maintenance. There are cockroaches and mice. There are living conditions no one here would want to live in.

The parliamentary assistant said not to expect anything in this particular session of Parliament. The minister refuses to answer the question about when he will introduce this legislation. I think members opposite should be ashamed they are not carrying out the very promise that helped them get elected by the tenants of Ontario. The time for that act is now.

LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

Mr. Dave Levac (Brant): I want to offer some simple and truly sincere advice to the leader of the official opposition. The member from Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey talks and talks about doing things differently here. Unfortunately, no one seems to know exactly what he means. He talks about consultation. He wants phone calls and e-mails. He wants to feel part of the government as a legislator. Well, here's that simple advice.

Mr. Tory, stop taking advice from your caucus colleagues who were part of the Harris-Eves government. They did things differently. They fought with people. They didn't consult, and now they pretend to tell you exactly how this place should work. Maybe it's like the old days. I don't think we want that.

Here's a guideline for you. Ministers introduce bills. Bills get second reading. And here's the big surprise: They go to committees for public hearings. They get amended and come back to the House. They get debated and put to a vote. The majority wins and the bill is carried, to become law.

Now, I know your caucus has a hard time with this concept and that's why they're heckling. They were used to ramming legislation through this House. They didn't even know what standing committees were used for, and they didn't want to debate. No, they just wanted to shove that legislation down the people of Ontario's throats.

Mr. Tory, do you want to do things differently? Stop listening to the band of bandits over there and start acting in the best interests of Ontarians, and get your caucus some real work to do. We're looking forward to it.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): The member for Simcoe North will withdraw that comment.

Interjection.

The Speaker: You will just withdraw.

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): I withdraw, Mr. Speaker, and make a point of order: I would ask that the member withdraw his final statement --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members' statements.

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): Today is police association day here at Queen's Park. I also stand to bring to the attention of this House and speak about progress that is being made by police responding to incidents which involve persons who are mentally ill. This is a matter that has been raised by constituents in Durham riding who want to ensure family members who need treatment and support for mental illness do not find themselves in court and indeed in prison. There is more to be done.

Furthermore, I would like to commend police and mental health providers on the partnership approach being taken in Durham region when responding to individuals in crisis. This partnership includes Durham Mental Health Services, whose executive director is Robert Adams. These interventions require very specialized training and resources. Crisis services offered in conjunction with Durham Regional Police Service include safe beds, a crisis line and follow-up.

I'd like to point out that recently in Durham region there was a Canadian critical incident conference held November 7 to 9 in Oshawa. Its purpose was to further educate front-line police officers who, in responding to victims, are involved with disturbed and troubled individuals. Inspector Tom Cameron of Durham Regional Police was one of the partners at the conference. Inspector Bruce Townley serves as supervisor of the mental health support unit with Durham Regional Police.

It is estimated that mental illness affects four out of five Ontario citizens, either directly or indirectly through family members, co-workers, friends and associates. I'm pleased the police are working with our community health professionals in responding to those who are mentally ill, and I trust this trend will continue.

ONTARIO FARMERS

Mr. Pat Hoy (Chatham—Kent Essex): I rise today in support of Ontario farmers. As a farmer myself and a rural MPP, I know first-hand the financial crisis our farmers are facing.

On October 27, our rural caucus met with a large group of agricultural partners to talk about their Farmers Feed Cities campaign, a campaign that focuses on risk management programs, stabilization of the industry and the revitalization of rural Ontario. We shared ideas about why the financial crisis is happening and what can be done to improve the situation both immediately and over the long term.

Agriculture in Ontario provides more than 650,000 jobs and is a multi-billion dollar business. We are encouraged by the support we've received from our farming community. We value our relationship with farmers -- folks who give so much to make life better for Ontarians. Caucus is encouraged by their willingness to share together with our government and work hard to find solutions, and by their openness to share with us.

As an MPP from rural Ontario, I will continue to work with our agricultural partners to work toward solutions to this crisis so that our children and our grandchildren will have a future in farming in Ontario. I'm committed to working toward a prosperous and thriving rural Ontario.

Today I would like to thank the Ontario farming community and our agricultural partners for their continued efforts to provide a brighter future for Ontario. Rural caucus thanks our farmers and agricultural partners for continuing to bring farm issues to the forefront of discussion at Queen's Park --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you.

VIOLENT CRIME

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): I rise today to congratulate our Attorney General, Michael Bryant, and our Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services, Monte Kwinter, on convincing the federal government to respond to our call for a crackdown on violent gun crimes.

As we all know, our province, and the city of Toronto especially, has seen a sharp increase in gun-related murders this year. Just under a month ago I spoke about how our government is being tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime. For example, hospitals are now required by law to report individuals with gunshot wounds. Also, we've invested in safer communities by creating the community use of schools program.

The recent commitment made by our federal partners to be tough on crime is welcome news. The federal government will be increasing mandatory minimum sentences for trafficking in guns and will introduce two new gun-related offences. As well, we should all be pleased that the federal government has committed to $50 million in new funding to support community-based prevention and intervention programs that will be tough on the causes of crime.

Our ministers made a strong call for zero tolerance on gun crimes in Ontario and the federal government has heard us. This co-operation will lead to safe, liveable communities and fewer guns on our streets.

POLICE

Mr. Bill Mauro (Thunder Bay—Atikokan): I'm delighted to rise in the House today to recognize the members of the Police Association of Ontario, represented here today by their president, Bob Baltin. It also includes the Thunder Bay contingent of Jim Mauro, Keith Hobbs, Bill Shopoff and Greg Stephenson, who are visiting Queen's Park as part of their annual legislative day.

Reps of the PAO have come from across the province to meet with their MPPs to discuss mutual community safety concerns. Such exchanges are vitally important if we, as legislators, are to understand and appreciate the tremendous challenges Ontario's police officers face every day on the job.

This government realizes that our police deserve every possible support and reinforcement in their struggle to keep our province safe, and that is why we are moving fast to put 1,000 new officers on the road. We have heard the opposition criticize this plan countless times, but this government has taken great pains to ensure we are sending our resources where they are most needed: to address the province's most pressing safety concerns such as guns and gangs, organized crime, young offenders and domestic violence. When the ranks of police begin to increase with additional officers in the coming months, I'm certain this carefully executed allocation process will pay off.

I, for one, am particularly pleased that a significant number of the new personnel will be devoted to northern policing, that there will be a special funding allocation formula for the northern component and that we will take over funding those officers hired under the previous government program that was to sunset after five years.

On behalf of all my caucus colleagues and constituents, I would like to say to the police association members who are with us today, thank you for everything you do. You are the anchors of our community and Ontario simply could not prosper if it were not for your courage.

Mr. Dave Levac (Brant): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: In our standing orders, which is how we behave in this place, I want to refer us to page 18,

section VI, "Rules of Debate,"

section 23: "In debate, a member shall be called to order by the Speaker if he or she … (

k) Uses abusive or insulting language of a nature likely to create disorder."

I've done that today. I withdraw the word "bandit" and I apologize to this House and especially to the member who was very offended by it, and substitute it with "bully."

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order. I think I need you to withdraw.

Mr. Levac: I withdraw.

The Speaker: Thank you.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

LEGISLATIVE PAGES

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): I ask all members to join me in welcoming this group of legislative pages serving in the second session of the 38th Parliament, and to allow us a few seconds to get organized here.

From Brampton Centre, we have Kumail Abidi; from Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, Brenna Carroll; from Kitchener—Waterloo, Nadia Eckardt; from Northumberland, Laura Greenwood; from Leeds—Grenville, Zoë Griggs; from Davenport, Jessica James; from Scarborough—Agincourt, Margaret Jiang; from Brampton West—Mississauga, David Kong; from Eglinton—Lawrence, Adam Kwinter; from Niagara Centre, Alexandre Lafontaine; from York North, Helen Lenz; from Don Valley West, Cara Lew; from Cambridge, Andrew Martin; from Oakville, Jeremy McGibbon; from Waterloo—Wellington, Cameron McLean; from Simcoe—Grey, Alex Nyikos; from Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Stephen Pynenburg; from Thornhill, Richard Sukhdeo; from Durham, Janine Sziklasi; from Stoney Creek, Nathan Terbrack; and from Burlington, Katherine Wilson.

Please join me in welcoming the pages.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT LA LOI

SUR L'ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE

Mr. O'Toole moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 26,

An Act to amend the Legislative Assembly Act / Projet de loi 26, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'Assemblée législative.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

The member may have a brief statement.

Mr. John O'Toole (Durham): The intention of this bill is quite simple: It's to strengthen your role, Mr. Speaker, as our new Speaker, and to compliment our leader, John Tory, for his leadership in improving members' behaviour in this Legislature.

FAMILY STATUTE LAW

AMENDMENT ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 MODIFIANT DES LOIS

EN CE QUI CONCERNE

DES QUESTIONS FAMILIALES

Mr. Bryant moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 27,

An Act to amend the Arbitration Act, 1991, the Child and Family Services Act and the Family Law Act in connection with family arbitration and related matters, and to amend the Children's Law Reform Act in connection with the matters to be considered by the court in dealing with applications for custody and access / Projet de loi 27, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1991 sur l'arbitrage, la

Loi sur les services à l'enfance et à la famille et la

Loi sur le droit de la famille en ce qui concerne l'arbitrage familial et des questions connexes et modifiant la Loi portant réforme du droit de l'enfance en ce qui concerne les questions que doit prendre en considération le tribunal qui traite des requêtes en vue d'obtenir la garde et le droit de visite.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Does the minister have a short statement?

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General): I will defer my remarks to ministerial statements.

MANDATORY BLOOD

TESTING ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR LE DÉPISTAGE

OBLIGATOIRE PAR TEST SANGUIN

Mr. Kwinter moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 28,

An Act to require the taking and analysing of blood samples to protect victims of crime, emergency service workers, good Samaritans and other persons and to make consequential amendments to the Health Care Consent Act, 1996 and the Health Protection and Promotion Act / Projet de loi 28, Loi exigeant le prélèvement et l'analyse d'échantillons de sang afin de protéger les victimes d'actes criminels, le personnel des services d'urgence, les bons samaritains et d'autres personnes et apportant des modifications corrélatives à la Loi de 1996 sur le consentement aux soins de santé et à la

Loi sur la protection et la promotion de la santé.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Does the minister have a brief statement?

Hon. Monte Kwinter (Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services): I will make a statement during ministers' statements.

GARETH RODGERS ACT

FOR SPORT PARACHUTING

(FREEFALLING REGULATION), 2005 /

LOI GARETH RODGERS DE 2005

SUR LE PARACHUTISME SPORTIF

(RÉGLEMENTATION DU SAUT

SANS SOUTIEN)

Mr. Tascona moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 29,

An Act in memory of Gareth Rodgers to regulate freefalling / Projet de loi 29, Loi à la mémoire de Gareth Rodgers pour réglementer le saut sans soutien.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Does the member have a brief statement?

Mr. Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie—Simcoe—Bradford): The bill enacts

an act to regulate persons who participate in freefalling. The act establishes a system of offences for persons who fail to comply with the act and the terms of the permit or who manufacture parachutes that do not meet the requirements specified by the regulations.

RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE

(LONDON) ACT, 2005

Ms. Matthews moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr17,

An Act respecting Ronald McDonald House (London).

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

Pursuant to standing order 84, this bill stands referred to the standing committee on regulations and private bills.

SAFE NEEDLES SAVE LIVES ACT, 2005 /

LOI DE 2005 SUR L'UTILISATION

D'AIGUILLES SÛRES

POUR SAUVER DES VIES

Ms. Martel moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 30,

An Act to reduce the incidence of needlestick injuries / Projet de loi 30, Loi visant à réduire les incidences de blessures causées par des piqûres d'aiguille.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

The member may have a brief statement.

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): Each year in Ontario, 33,000 health care workers suffer from a needle-stick injury. A worker punctured by a needle or blade might then be exposed to 33 blood-borne diseases, including hepatitis C or HIV/AIDS. The overwhelming majority of these accidents are entirely preventable with the use of safety-engineered medical devices.

The bill would make it mandatory for employers in prescribed workplaces to provide workers with safety-engineered devices. The choice of devices would be made by the joint health and safety committee, and appropriate training would be provided by the employer. The US, Saskatchewan and Manitoba have moved to protect workers and the general public from these injuries, and it's time for Ontario to do the same.

This bill is exactly the same as my Bill 179, which was passed unanimously by this House on second reading on March 31, 2005. I urge the government to adopt this private member's bill and prevent needle-stick injuries, which cause so much pain and suffering to tens of thousands of Ontarians every year.

Hon. Christopher Bentley (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker --

Hon. Steve Peters (Minister of Labour): Happy 50th birthday.

Hon. Mr. Bentley: I was just wondering: After the member for London North Centre introduced the bill about Ronald McDonald House, I was very interested in finding out what it was about, but I don't remember if she was --

The Speaker: She introduced a private bill, Minister.

VISITORS

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: I want to welcome in the gallery here Pamela Cross of the Metropolitan Action Committee on Violence Against Women and Children, and Amanda Dale from the YWCA. Welcome back to this Legislature.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Government House leader.

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): No.

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): You don't say, "No," now. You don't know which one I'm going to choose.

Interjections.

Hon. Mr. Bradley: The one on the left.

I move that, pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Tuesday, November 15, 2005, for the purpose of considering government business.

The Speaker: Mr. Bradley has moved government notice of motion number 23. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All in favour will say "aye."

All opposed will 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 1403 to 1408.

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

Ayes

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

Nays

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 73; the nays are 6.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY

AND RESPONSES

FAMILY LAW ARBITRATION /

ARBITRAGE EN DROIT DE LA FAMILLE

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General): I rise in the House today to introduce legislation that would, if passed, make changes to the Arbitration Act, 1991.

A bit of background to let you know why we are here in this position now: The Arbitration Act was introduced on March 27, 1991, by the Attorney General of the day, Howard Hampton, presently the leader of the third party. Attorney General Hampton at that time articulated the purpose of the Arbitration Act, 1991. He said, "Arbitration is a good and accessible method of seeking resolution for many kinds of disputes. It can be more expedient and less costly than going to court. The parties can design their own procedures and select appropriate arbitrators."

During second reading debate in November, Charles Harnick, then Attorney General critic, a future Attorney General himself, also spoke in favour of the bill. In fact, the NDP Arbitration Act won the support of all three parties and was passed unanimously on November 20, 1991.

The time is now to make needed improvements to the Arbitration Act. The bill I am introducing today would, if passed, amend the Arbitration Act, 1991, and improve it to ensure all family law arbitrations are conducted exclusively under Ontario and Canadian law. That means when it comes to family law arbitrations in this province, there is only one law in Ontario, and that is Canadian law.

Under the proposed legislation, no family law arbitration can be conducted under any other law or principle. Resolutions based on any other laws or principles would have no legal effect and would not constitute family arbitration. They would amount to advice only. Ontarians of course, as the Premier said, would continue to have the right to seek advice from any source, including religious advice in matters of the family. However, under the proposed legislation, such advice would not be enforceable by the courts.

But there is more to be done. We also want to change the way Ontario family arbitrations have been conducted to date. We are proposing a number of legislative and regulatory changes, all designed to reform Ontario family law arbitrations and better protect the people who choose to arbitrate their family disputes.

This legislation, if passed, would require that a family arbitration agreement based on Ontario and Canadian law must be in writing, and that each party must receive independent legal advice before making an arbitration agreement.

Under the current system, participants of a family arbitration can waive their right to appeal an arbitrator's decision in court. Under our new bill, under our new proposal, the right to appeal could not be waived, so that anyone who is not satisfied with the result could take it before an Ontario court for review.

Also under the current system, the 1991 system, people can agree in advance of an actual dispute arising -- for example, as part of a marriage contract -- to use arbitration to resolve all family matters. This locks them into a position of little or no choice if and when family disputes arise. Under our new proposal, we would prohibit advance agreements to arbitrate family law matters, ensuring that everyone has the right to resolve their disputes when their dispute arises, using their method of choice.

Very importantly, with this proposed legislation, all family arbitration decisions must be made in the best interests of the children involved.

It also authorizes the regulation of Ontario family law arbitrators for the first time. If this legislation is passed, we will have the authority to, and will, require Ontario family law arbitrators to be members of a recognized professional dispute resolution organization, and to undergo training, including training in screening parties separately for power imbalances and domestic violence. We will require, in addition to the training, that they inquire into such matters of power imbalances and domestic violence. Lastly, we're requiring that family law arbitrators keep proper records and submit reports, to be tracked by the Ministry of the Attorney General.

Our government has been examining the issue of family law arbitrations for some time now. We have been considering the views of Ontarians, consulting with the public and consulting with experts. Part of that consultation was conducted by Marion Boyd, a former Attorney General and minister responsible for women's issues who, in her pre-elected life, served as executive director of the London Battered Women's Advocacy Centre. Ms. Boyd conducted public hearings that heard from close to 50 groups and dozens of individuals and received an additional 40 written submissions.

I want to thank her for her typically thoughtful and exhaustive consideration of this issue. I want to thank Ms. Boyd for acting in the name of public service to try and assist the government in improving family law arbitration in Ontario.

We heard loud and clear from those seeking greater protections, especially protections for women. So, in addition to these legislative amendments designed to better protect the vulnerable, my colleague the minister responsible for women's issues, the Honourable Sandra Pupatello, is developing new community outreach and education programs so that all Ontarians will better understand their rights under Canadian and Ontario family law and family law arbitrations.

Notre gouvernement ne cherche pas seulement à mieux protéger les droits des personnes vulnérables. Il veut aussi s'assurer que ces personnes comprennent bien leurs choix et leurs droits.

Our government not only wants to better protect the rights of the vulnerable; we also want to ensure that they understand their rights and their choices. These education and community outreach programs will ensure that vulnerable people in communities across this province understand that only decisions that are conducted exclusively in accordance with Canadian law are family arbitrations, and only such decisions are enforceable.

Also, as part of our government's commitment to the domestic violence action plan, we are proposing a change to the Children's Law Reform Act which, if passed, would ensure that violence and abuse are considered when determining the best interests of a child in the context of custody and access. This amendment, we were told -- and we acted upon that -- will make a real difference to the safety of the women and children of Ontario.

It is trite to say that we live in a province of tremendous diversity. Ontarians understand that diversity enriches us beyond description. At the same time, we are all standing on and building on common ground. I think it's fair to say that sometimes Canadians are shy, if not at least careful, about defining our common ground and entrenching it so. We are not a nation of the melting pot. Canada is a mosaic that is constantly changing, and so our laws change too. It's not surprising that this debate over our common ground of our family law system was not a simple one. It is my hope and our hope that we are the stronger for the debate and the changes to come.

For family law matters, we are all equal before the law -- one law for all Ontarians. Not only do we need to ensure that all Ontarians are protected when it comes to matters of family law, be it Ontario family arbitrations or custody and access agreements; we also need to ensure that family law matters in this province are governed exclusively by Ontario and Canadian law.

MANDATORY BLOOD TESTING

Hon. Monte Kwinter (Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services): The McGuinty government is committed to safeguarding community safety personnel to ensure that they are protected while they protect the citizens of Ontario. Every effort must be made to support those who protect us as they go about their challenging tasks in communities all across Ontario. Every day across Ontario, thousands of men and women in a variety of occupations -- police, paramedics, firefighters, for example -- work to keep our communities safe. In the process, they face the risk of infection with specific diseases -- HIV/AIDS, or hepatitis B or C -- through contact with members of the public.

It is my privilege to introduce today a bill that, if passed, would help make Ontarians safer and provide greater peace of mind for those who may be exposed to the risk of infection through their work in protecting their fellow Ontarians. The proposed Mandatory Blood Testing Act, 2005, would, if passed, replace

section 22.1 of the Health Protection and Promotion Act with new community safety legislation for mandatory blood sampling.

The government views this proposed legislation as an important community safety issue. The mental stress and lifestyle changes experienced by a person who may have been exposed to infection while protecting us, or as a victim of crime, should not be underestimated. That person is often placed in a cruel limbo caused by the uncertainty of not knowing whether they have, or may, become infected.

You may recall that the current provisions for mandatory blood sampling date from 2003, when a private member's bill, Bill 105, amended the Health Protection and Promotion Act to help victims of crime and first aid responders who may have been exposed to HIV/AIDS, or hepatitis B or C. Essentially, the legislative provisions prescribe that if a person who is the source of a possible infection does not voluntarily provide a blood sample, a medical officer of health can order the required sampling and testing.

After two years of experience with that legislation, we have heard from stakeholders about the challenges faced by those involved in the process. We've heard the concerns of the medical community, the policing community and the public safety community about the need to move responsibility for obtaining an order to have a blood sample test done from the health system to an independent board.

We have responded. Decisions on whether to grant an application for mandatory blood sampling would be entrusted to the Consent and Capacity Board. Medical officers of health would continue to be responsible for screening applications, seeking voluntary samples and supervising the process after an order is issued, but they would be removed from the responsibility to act as adjudicators for the applications.

We've heard the concerns of the policing community that the process be simplified, that timelines be shortened and that police be specifically designated in the eligibility criteria. The legislation I'm proposing would, through regulation, give authority to the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services to specify eligible occupations.

We've also heard from community safety workers that they want, among other things, faster resolution of applications. If passed, the Mandatory Blood Testing Act would streamline the process and achieve faster decisions. The period for voluntary compliance would be reduced from seven days to two days.

The current process has taken up to 70 days to complete. Should the proposed legislation be passed, this process would be reduced to 19 days. This means significant reductions in the time for processing these applications and significant reduction in the time our public safety workers will be in this limbo. By streamlining the process for applications, as proposed in the bill, we would ensure applications are dealt with in an efficient, effective and timely manner for all concerned.

The changes we are proposing represent a delicate balance of the interests of the applicant, the respondent, community safety workers, health care workers and others. The proposed Mandatory Blood Testing Act captures the intent and the spirit of the original legislation and seeks to respond to the concerns raised by our partners in community safety.

I would like to take this opportunity to commend the leadership of the Police Association of Ontario for their valuable input in the crafting of this bill. As we observe PAO lobby day today, I'm pleased to recognize these efforts and also to recognize, in the east gallery, Bob Baltin and Bruce Miller of the Police Association of Ontario, Karl Walsh, the recently elected president of the Ontario Provincial Police Association, and Dave Wilson, the president of the Toronto Police Association.

This bill that I'm introducing today is a fine outcome of the productive working relationship between the McGuinty government and the Police Association of Ontario. This bill reflects our government's plan to strengthen our province by strengthening our most competitive advantage -- our people. If passed, the Mandatory Blood Testing Act, 2005, would resolve many of the issues that concern our community safety workers and give them the peace of mind to go about their work with greater confidence. It means greater safety and security for all Ontarians.

FAMILY LAW ARBITRATION

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds—Grenville): I'm responding to the Attorney General's statement. It's curious that the Attorney General is making this announcement today in the absence of the Premier, given the Premier's earlier decision to exclude the Attorney General from the public announcement.

At the outset, I want to indicate that we support the general --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Stop the clock.

The member for Leeds—Grenville.

Mr. Runciman: At the outset, I want to indicate that we support the general intent of this initiative. The government, for unknown reasons, doesn't wish to share draft legislation with the opposition, so we will have to reserve final judgment. With this Liberal crew, we can't assume anything is going to be done properly.

This issue, the question of allowing Sharia law to be utilized in domestic disputes through private arbitration, is a casebook example of the incompetence of this McGuinty Liberal government. Sadly, the Attorney General allowed this issue to fester for month after month, turning it into a them-against-us controversy. He botched this, and he botched it badly.

But the Attorney General is not the only one at fault. Premier McGuinty has to share responsibility for this fiasco. He is the leader of the government. The question should have been resolved in a timely manner, not letting people twist in the wind and deepen societal divisions. It should have involved extensive consultation. Instead, we get a back door, clandestine Sunday afternoon announcement by the Premier, with the Attorney General, in a very rare occurrence indeed, hidden from public view.

I would suggest a huge vote of non-confidence in the Attorney General's carriage of this issue -- no consultation with any community, Christian, Jewish or Muslim, a covert and shameful way to act for any government that purports to be responsible. Our party, the official opposition, will be calling for public hearings on this legislation. Ontarians shut out from this process have a right to be heard.

MANDATORY BLOOD TESTING

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): I'm pleased to make a few comments on the bill introduced by Minister Kwinter. I want to thank him for bringing the bill forward, and also to congratulate him on having his grandson here in the House as a page.

I am pleased it has been brought forward today, on the PAO lobby day here at Queen's Park. I want to thank all the different police associations from across the province that have come forward today. I want to thank Bob Baltin for his kind comments to myself and Mr. Tory yesterday at their conference at the Marriott Hotel.

This follows up on Bill 105, a bill that was passed in this House, I think by 78 to 2. The problem with the bill is that it ran into the roadblock of regulations, and we've pointed that out on a number of occasions. I brought it up just a couple of weeks ago with the private security guards and investigators act, and the fact that we are running into a lot of regulations and that could delay the bill.

I say to the minister that I'm hoping that moving it to the Consent and Capacity Board will be a speedy process. The people who come forward, whether they are emergency service workers, victims of crime, ordinary citizens or good Samaritans, need to know this is a very speedy process, because they are being infected, in some cases, with blood from other people that contains very infectious and deadly diseases. So it's important this process move quickly.

I would suggest that if there's anything we can do with this bill as legislators, it's possibly to move to committee immediately after first reading today and get on with the hearings. We've been through this process before and we need to know, whether we travel the province or whatever, that we are going to be able to satisfy the wishes of all the stakeholders. In the end, we have to be assured that the process is speedy, because life and death depends upon it, and that's why we're here on PAO lobby day today.

I'll be asking our party to support this bill, but after first reading debate.

FAMILY LAW ARBITRATION

Mr. Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): On behalf of New Democrats here at Queen's Park, I want to respond to the statement made today by the Attorney General that accompanied his tabling and first reading of the legislation that was a long time coming. I say, after but a cursory examination of it, that it is our fear the Attorney General and this government have made a bad situation worse.

New Democrats have been very clear that when it comes to the resolution of family disputes, it must be the public law that prevails, and if it's going to be a ruling that people are going to be calling upon the courts to enforce, it must be the public courts that apply that public law. Anything less is a disservice to those families and, most importantly, those kids who rely upon our justice system to provide justice for them when there are rancourous and oftentimes very dangerous family disputes.

It is no solution to suggest that somehow, among others, faith-based arbitrations can continue to resolve family disputes with binding arbitration if they but utilize the Ontario or Canadian law, when in the course of utilizing that Ontario or Canadian law, those inherent biases -- I use that word in the most neutral way -- prevail within the context of determinations in the course of an adjudication.

The Arbitration Act, 1991, supported by all three parties in this Legislature, was not the first Arbitration Act this province had. Arbitration, as we all know, is hundreds of years old. The Arbitration Act, 1991, very specifically contemplates among its earliest sections the prospect there may be certain areas of law that should not be subject to arbitration. It is the New Democratic Party's position that the government should invoke those provisions of the existing Arbitration Act to exclude/exempt, family matters from arbitration.

But let's understand: The real issue here, and the real shame this government has to bear, is Dalton McGuinty's and the Attorney General's abdication of responsibility to maintain a fully staffed and fully resourced justice system for women and children seeking enforceable orders in the course of family breakdowns and women who find themselves prey of some very dangerous men.

The real issue here is the failure of the federal government to appoint a sufficient number of Unified Family Court judges, so that those Unified Family Courts can extend across the province, providing the access and the resource that they do for speedier adjudication of family disputes; the failure of this government to ensure an adequate level of numbers of provincial judges doing family work, its failure to provide an adequate number of courtrooms.

Go into a Family Court some day, Attorney General, and you'll see a sausage factory process. You'll see people having their cases being adjourned week after week, month after month, to the tune of years. You'll see litigants in the family law process being forced into agreements which are not in their best interests, which are not in their children's best interests.

Your persistent failure to adequately resource Legal Aid Ontario to ensure that litigants in the Family Court process -- inevitably women and their children who need and deserve legal representation so that their rights under the existing law in this province can be enforced -- is the shame that you have to bear.

This legislation is not a resolution to the crisis that you've created with respect to the inadequate level of support in terms of legal representation for women and their kids engaged and involved in serious disputes after the breakdown of a family relationship.

Attorney General, you have missed the mark. This is a chimerical response to a very, very serious problem. I say that this legislation should undergo some very, very strong scrutiny by this chamber and by its members.

New Democrats declare once again: Sir, you have taken a bad situation and in all likelihood made it far worse.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order.

Interjections.

The Speaker: I can wait.

ORAL QUESTIONS

POLICE OFFICERS

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. Minister, as you and the Attorney General pointed out, the Police Association of Ontario is here with us today, representing the men and women who serve on our police forces across Ontario. They released a poll today indicating that over 80% of Ontarians believe that funding for police is a top priority. Indeed your government -- you, the Premier and assorted others -- made a promise over two years ago to fund 1,000 new police officers, and we'll only be moving forward in part on that commitment on November 30.

Minister, we've learned that the Toronto Police Service has requested 250 police officers to meet the community safety challenges, including record high levels of gunplay on city streets this summer. Can you confirm that Toronto will indeed receive the 250 officers they need to battle crime that they've applied for under the criteria set out in your program? Can you confirm that?

Hon. Monte Kwinter (Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services): I'm pleased to respond. I'm sure the leader of the official opposition will know that when I made the announcement, I said that we would provide funding for 1,000 new police officers. We will provide full funding, at $70,000 per officer, for 60 officers in the north. We will fund retroactively 400 officers dating back to October 23, 2003, and funding commencing for May 18, 2005. The rest of the officers will be distributed among other police services.

We've sent out a package, the police services across Ontario have responded, and at the end of this month, as I've always said, we will say where that funding is going to go. It would be premature for me to tell you today, because we are going to be making that announcement at the end of the month. I can assure you that there will be a fair allocation of those resources.

Mr. Tory: Again to the minister: From this morning's Ottawa Citizen, we see a picture emerging of just how ineffective this initiative is going to be. The Ottawa Police Service submitted a 60-page application under your 1,000 cops program and, according to the budget chief of the police force, they took great care to meet all of the criteria under the program. The problem is that officials in your government today indicated that Ottawa will receive less than half of the officers they requested to ensure community safety.

In fact, Ottawa has already hired 92 officers and needs to hire another 90 simply to keep up with population growth. They've made a request for 182 officers under your program to service the second-largest city in Ontario.

Based on the comments of your officials, how many officers under your program will be left out, will you say no to, for the city of Ottawa?

Hon. Mr. Kwinter: I find it interesting that you should raise that. I'm not embarrassed to say this. If you talk to Chief Bevan, he will tell you, as he told me, that he is just livid that under your government he did not get the number of officers that he thought he should get. He has asked if I would redress that inadequacy on the part of your government. I can tell you this: that when we allocate those officers, we will have a formula that will be transparent, and I can assure you that Ottawa will get its fair share.

Mr. Tory: Again to the minister: Areas all around Toronto are experiencing, of course, explosive population growth and, unfortunately, growth in crime and violent crimes as well. Durham region is facing significant growth and the police force is being stretched to the limit over a very large geographical area. Under your program, Durham has made a submission for a total of 77 new police officers. Will you guarantee today that Durham, with its population growth and the problems it faces in terms of crime, will receive the officers they say they need to deal with that population growth and with the growth in crime, the 77 officers? Will they receive that under your program?

Hon. Mr. Kwinter: I couldn't be more clear, in that we have received applications from police services right across the province. You have to understand that those applications come with the support of their municipality, their police service boards and their chiefs, and they have to fund their particular portion of it.

What is going to happen is, we have to evaluate if they meet our criteria, where we said 500 officers have to go to community policing and 500 officers have to go to six areas that we have designated. We have to go through that whole process and find out whether or not they meet the criteria, and then we have to allocate them fairly. That means we have to allocate them across the whole province on a formula that basically is based on population and other considerations, and we will do that. When we make that announcement, I will have no trouble standing up to defend how those allocations were made.

MUNICIPAL TAXATION

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Minister, your colleague the Minister of Finance stated that there would be no tax increases on the provincial watch, but as you know as well, only the province can give municipalities the ability to tax. That, of course, is precisely what is called for in the report that came out yesterday called Building a 21st Century City.

Minister, I want to remind you of all of the publicity and fanfare associated with your Premier signing the Taxpayer Protection Act on September 11, 2003. He had a big press conference, and he signed the document that day indicating he would abide by that act.

Section 3 of that act states that if the province gives a municipality the ability to raise taxes, it has to be subject to a referendum. My question is simply this: Is it your government's plan to follow the Premier's commitment to abide by the Taxpayer Protection Act, and therefore should we expect there will be a referendum in respect of these powers being given to the city to create and raise new taxes?

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I'd like to thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. First of all, I think we all realize in this House that for Ontario to be strong, it is absolutely essential that Toronto be strong, and that's what the report is all about. It's all about strengthening the local government in Toronto so that it can achieve the kind of dynamic growth that it's looking for in the 21st century.

We accepted the report yesterday. Staff of both the ministry and city hall have worked on it very diligently over the last year. There are some excellent suggestions in that report. We'll be looking at that, and in due time -- hopefully, before Christmas -- we will be introducing a new City of Toronto Act.

Mr. Tory: That was a very interesting little talk, but there was a pretty simple question that was asked.

It was your Premier who made the commitment to the people of Ontario that he would not raise taxes, and then brought in the biggest tax increase in the history of Ontario. It was also --

Interjections.

Mr. Tory: That is just a fact. As much as you don't like it, it's just a fact.

It was also your Premier, Dalton McGuinty, who signed --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order. Stop the clock. I need to be able to hear the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: It was your Premier who said he wouldn't raise taxes and brought in the biggest tax increase in history. It was also your Premier who signed the Taxpayer Protection Act, and it says -- and it said it when he signed it; there was no asterisk beside his signature -- that you have to hold a referendum before allowing somebody to increase taxes. So I'm asking just for a simple yes or no answer. He signed it; it says what it says. Will he and you, the government, be abiding by what it says -- yes or no?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: First of all, this government is extremely proud of what we've done for the city of Toronto already. Let's take a look at the provincial assistance that we've given Toronto: in the year 2003, $137 million, which grew to $183 million in 2004; in 2005, it's up to $217 million, and by next year it will be $312 million.

I'm sure the Leader of the Opposition would like to see a strong Toronto, a strong Ontario and a strong Canada. That's what this report is all about. We're going to look at the report, look at all the ideas, and come up with the best possible act as far as the City of Toronto Act is concerned, for the people of Ontario and for the people of Toronto. That's most important.

Mr. Tory: Still no answer. Taxpayers in Toronto would at least want from the minister the assurance that the city government will be held to account for how they run their affairs, especially if they are being given any additional ability to levy new taxes. Minister, since you're not willing to state definitively whether you will abide by the Taxpayer Protection Act that your Premier signed, can you assure us at the very least that the new City of Toronto Act, when it's introduced, will accompany any new powers to tax with reforms designed specifically to guarantee greater accountability to the taxpayers of Toronto and Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: We believe that the city of Toronto is a mature level of government and it deserves to be treated with respect, as do all the other municipalities in Ontario. But let me just give you a quote from an individual with which I totally agree. This individual said that we have "to give city governments more latitude to raise some of their own revenue if they choose to do so ... they will then be accountable for whatever they choose to do -- to fund some things that may be priorities for these cities. Right now they have to go and ask for permission to do everything and I don't think that's right."

I agree with that statement, and that statement was made by John Tory.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop the clock. Order.

New question.

TENANT PROTECTION

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): I have a question for the Acting Premier. Who promised, "In our first year in government, we will repeal the misnamed Tenant Protection Act and replace it with an effective tenant protection law"? Was it (

a) the Conservatives, (

b) the Rhinoceros Party, or (

c) the McGuinty Liberals?

Hon. Gerard Kennedy (Minister of Education): The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. John Gerretsen (Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): Let me just say that this government has done more for the vulnerable people, when it comes to their housing situation, than has been done over the last 15 years. And let's just recount some of the things we've done. We've invested $301 million to match the federal government's $301 million for an affordable housing program that will create over 5,300 new units of affordable housing.

We will also be providing housing allowances for over 5,000 lower-income households, and right now we're in the process of hearing that from our service managers throughout the province. We've established a rent bank to help people in emergency situations. We've established a Toronto pilot project in which some 400 units were made available at extremely low rents. We have the lowest rent guidelines -- in 2005 at 1.5% and this year at 2.1% -- that we've seen in this province. We've done a lot and we will be doing a lot in the future as well.

Mr. Hampton: The correct answer to the question is the McGuinty Liberals. This was the Liberal platform and this is what it said: Before the election, Dalton McGuinty called the Tenant Protection Act a "tenant rejection act." He said that it "destroyed rent controls." He promised to repeal it within 365 days of taking office and vowed to replace it with real rent controls.

Acting Premier, today is day 774. Where's the tenant protection and where are the real rent controls that Dalton McGuinty promised?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: I'm sure the member will agree that this is a very complex and complicated issue. There have been a lot of different acts dealing with tenant protection over the last number of years that have been changed repeatedly. We felt that the right way to go about it was to have a consultation process that was led by my parliamentary assistant, Brad Duguid, in a very, very competent fashion.

We will be dealing with this issue, and I can tell you that we are also very proud of the $24 million that has been made available for the strong start program, to make sure we can get affordable housing up and off the ground as soon as possible.

Mr. Hampton: I want to remind people that this is the minister who talked about real and meaningless consultation.

Jennifer Ramsay, who is with the Advocacy Centre for Tenants, says, "I hate to think of myself as naive, but I really believed the Liberals were going to act on this issue." Unfortunately, tenant protection is just another example of how the McGuinty government can't be trusted. The Premier promised "real rent control within 365 days." But here we are on day 774, with no results for tenants: Single parents, seniors, students and new Canadians are still waiting for Dalton McGuinty to keep his promise.

I ask again, when is Dalton McGuinty going to keep his promise of real rent controls, real tenant protection for hard-pressed tenants in Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: As the member well knows, when I made that very unfortunate statement -- it was on the first day that the House sat, about two years ago -- I was referring to an old Tory talking point. He well knows that. Let me just say that we are going to bring in real tenant protection, but the best protection we can give to the vulnerable in our community is to make sure that affordable housing is available, to make sure that housing allowances are available and to make sure that the rent guidelines are at the historically low levels they have been for the last two years.

We are proud of the work we've done, and we're going to bring in the kind of legislation that I think we will all be proud of in the near future.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): New question.

Mr. Hampton: To the Acting Premier again: I think tenants would probably be getting more from the Rhinoceros Party on this issue than they've obviously gotten from this government.

Tenant advocates came to Queen's Park today. They say the McGuinty government's broken rent control promise has meant more unfair rent increases, especially for lower- and modest-income tenants. That's because they can see that decontrol remains the law of the land; it gives landlords a free hand to raise rents when a rental unit is vacated. Dalton McGuinty promised real rent control and real tenant protection in 365 days. On day 774, will the McGuinty government finally keep its promise and introduce real rent controls that guarantee affordable rental housing for tenants? Will you do it now?

Hon. Mr. Kennedy: To the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: Let me just say this: This is very much like the first question, and I've already stated this government is very proud of the record it has with respect to what we've done in the housing area for the vulnerable and low-income people in this province. It's a very complex issue. We will be dealing with it in due course, and we will be bringing in the kind of tenant protection laws that all of us can be proud of.

Mr. Hampton: The minister says that this has become a real complex issue. Well, Dalton McGuinty said, "We will provide real protection for tenants," and, "We will introduce real protection for tenants from excessive rent increases." He said all those things.

Let me tell you another problem here: arbitrary evictions. The Tenant Protection Act has set up a sort of kangaroo court system that lets unscrupulous landlords drive tenants out of their homes on to the streets without a hearing. The former Ombudsman called it "a mechanical exercise devoid of human consideration." He said that tenants deserve better. You said tenants deserve better 774 days ago. When will the McGuinty government bring in real rent control and end the unfair, arbitrary evictions that are driving tenants out of their homes and on to the streets?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: Just let me repeat again: We will be bringing in

an act, and it will give real protection to tenants. But let me give some quotes of what people said about some of the earlier initiatives we had when we had the low rent guidelines. Michael Prue, what did he say? He said on April 20 in Hansard, "I stand up to actually applaud this government for reducing rents by 2% in the coming year. I believe that this is a good thing." We agree with Michael Prue. What did Gail Nyberg say, the former program coordinator of the Federation of Metro Tenants' Associations? "We're very pleased. Tenants need help now and this is a big step.

It's a positive sign that this government is listening to both sides." We listen, we consult with the people as we have, and we will bring in a piece of legislation that we can all be proud of and that will protect tenants in this province.

Mr. Hampton: Minister, the reason tenant advocates came here today is because they've been talking to your government for 774 days, and as usual, they heard the promises of the McGuinty government, but there is no delivery, no keeping of the promises. They point out that tenants want to live in safe, secure, well-maintained apartments. Unfortunately, the Tenant Protection Act leaves many tenants living in squalor, in rundown buildings, while disinclined landlords refuse to maintain the properties, and when the landlord finally does do some maintenance work, they get a free hand to raise rents through the roof.

Acting Premier, Minister, it's time to give the Tenant Protection Act the Mike Holmes treatment. Tear down the old act and build the new one that you promised. It's day 774. When are you going to keep the promise you made -- real rent control, real tenant protection?

Hon. Mr. Gerretsen: First of all, let me also welcome the tenant advocates who are here today in the House. They have a very important job to do, and certainly to make government aware of the demands of the people that they represent is extremely important.

But let's just talk about some of the other initiatives. This was what David Miller said on August 31 this year: The announcement -- and this is with respect to affordable housing program -- provides Toronto with much-needed federal and provincial funding for affordable housing, and he's delighted that $116 million will be invested in affordable homes in this city.

That's what's important, to make sure that the vulnerable in our society have the housing that they deserve. That's exactly what we're doing, and we will be dealing with the Tenant Protection Act as well.

POLICE OFFICERS

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): My question today is for the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. Minister, according to the PAO today, it's quite obvious that we're in desperate need of police resources. You're now 26 months into your mandate, and there are a lot of communities desperately looking for assistance under the 1,000 cop program.

The city of Barrie, as you know, is one of the fastest-growing communities per capita in our province. Chief Wayne Frechette and the Barrie Police Services Board are responsible for the safety of the citizens of this very rapidly growing city. The city has applied for 34 net new officers under your Safer Communities-1,000 Officers Partnership program.

Minister, can you assure us, to the best of your ability, that the city of Barrie will receive the approval and funding they need for those 34 officers that they have very, very faithfully applied for?

Hon. Monte Kwinter (Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services): I think the member should understand that when we put out the call for these officers, we got considerably more responses than the 1,000 officers we have committed to. What we have to do is evaluate them, (

a) to find out if they meet our criteria, and (

b) to find out if in fact we have them available.

You should know that what we have done is very significant. Your government's community policing programming was supposed to lapse in five years. We have not only extended that, we've extended it in perpetuity. By the time we are finished with this program, we will have provided $67.1 million a year in perpetuity.

Now, whether Barrie, Ottawa or any other community is going to get what they ask for, I think it would be unrealistic because there aren't enough police officers to go around. But we will apportion them fairly and transparently and make sure that every police service is dealt with in a fair and upright manner.

Mr. Dunlop: They wouldn't have applied for them if they didn't need them. That's the problem.

We've learned that the region of York, under the leadership of Chief Armand La Barge, who is also the president of the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police, and the police services board in York region have applied for the most in the province. They've applied for 148 community policing officers and 143 of the specific program officers under your 1,000 cop announcement.

Minister, of the 291 net new officers -- and that's, of course, more than even the city of Toronto applied for -- 160 of those would fall into the retroactive hiring practice. The question really is more on funding now. When can York region expect to see their application for the 291 new officers approved, but, more importantly, when will they actually receive funding or get their cheque for the 160 officers that they have retroactively hired since October 2003?

Hon. Mr. Kwinter: I'm sure the member knows how the process works. What has happened is that various police services -- and I have to stress that funding of police officers is a metro or a municipal responsibility. What we are doing is helping them out with this program, as you did when you were in government with your community policing program. So it isn't our responsibility to fund all the policing in Ontario. What we have done is that we want to help those municipalities that don't have the fiscal capability of doing it. So we are doing that, and we are going to be providing that funding.

Also, I'm sure you know, because it's exactly the same process you used, all of this funding is done in arrears. We have to make sure that these people were actually hired and that they meet our criteria. They then bill us for their share, and we pay them in arrears. That's the way it was done before; that is the way it's going to be done now.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): New question.

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): My question is for the Acting Premier. Yesterday yet another Ontario citizen was shot on the street, the latest victim of a rising wave of gun violence. Ontario citizens are afraid. Eighty per cent of Ontarians feel that gun violence is a growing problem. But what do they see? They see a McGuinty government that is apparently more concerned with banning pit bulls than addressing the crisis of gun violence.

My question is this: Can you explain why the number of police officers on our streets, measured on a per capita basis, is declining under the McGuinty government?

Hon. Gerard Kennedy (Minister of Education): The Attorney General.

Hon. Michael Bryant (Attorney General): I'm happy, in a supplementary, to provide more information for the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. But let's be clear: Notwithstanding anything that was just said, this government is investing more money in police services than that government ever invested in police services. This government is putting into place 1,000 new police officers. They made the promise to do it; we're doing it.

Make no mistake about it: The investments that are going into public safety, policing and prosecutors, doing everything we can to prevent violence, are in fact at a level that puts public safety first. The suggestion that anybody in this House thinks that somehow dogs are more important than the 44 dead Torontonians, than the 70 people shot, is absolutely outrageous. And you should be --

The Speaker: Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Hampton: People have heard the McGuinty government announce, reannounce and reannounce again more police officers, but they don't see it happening.

I want to quote someone who said this two years ago: "The number of police officers per capita in Ontario has dropped more than 8% in the past 10 years. We need more police officers to keep our communities safe." Who said that? Dalton McGuinty.

What has happened after two years of the McGuinty government? Measured on a per capita basis, the number of police officers on the street is now down by 9%. You're not keeping pace, not even with the Conservatives.

Now municipalities are saying they are cash-strapped. You force them to pay two thirds of the cost of new police officers while you pay only one third of the cost. Will the Acting Premier guarantee cash-strapped municipalities today that if they cannot pick up the full two thirds of the cost that you demand, they will still get new police officers under the McGuinty government?

Hon. Mr. Bryant: The Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services.

I just want to bring to the attention of the leader of the third party that between 1990 and 1995, based on police officers per 100,000, the NDP government decreased the number of police officers by 5.246%.

Hon. Mr. Kwinter: I can tell you that in 1990 the NDP had 20,685 police in Ontario; in 2004, the year we were in government, 23,214. Those are the numbers, and I challenge you to challenge those numbers.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Stop the clock.

New question.

SKILLS TRAINING

Mr. Lorenzo Berardinetti (Scarborough Southwest): My question is to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities. This year, our government announced that it would provide $6.2 million to fund pre-apprenticeship training programs across the province. First of all, I'd like to say I'm proud of this commitment and this government's focus on learning.

Of this money, I know some has been used to fund pre-apprenticeship programs for at-risk youth. The record of the previous government speaks for itself. Year after year, they clawed back and cut programs that helped at-risk youth, leaving them with few avenues to pursue. Minister, can you please tell me about the portion of this funding that will specifically go to help at-risk youth, a demographic that was so neglected by the previous government?

Hon. Christopher Bentley (Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities): I'd like to thank the member from Scarborough Southwest for his question. I'd also like to thank you for your advocacy on behalf of your constituents and in particular on behalf of those who don't always have somebody to advocate for them.

You're right: We're working very hard to provide opportunities for all Ontarians, with particular regard to those who are at risk. Of the $6.2 million committed for various pre-apprenticeship programs, we made an announcement about a month and a half ago, in the Scarborough area, specifically about some programs targeted at at-risk youth.

We committed $1 million for five separate pre-apprenticeship programs in areas such as construction, craft workers, cooks, general carpenters, and brick and stonemasons, to assist those who would otherwise not have the opportunity to obtain up to 40 weeks of in-classroom and job placement training, so that they'd learn basic skills -- literacy, job -- and be able to go on to the type of apprenticeship which provides a real opportunity for the future.

Mr. Berardinetti: Thank you for that answer, Minister, and happy 50th birthday, by the way.

We know that it's our government's goal to have 26,000 registered apprentices in Ontario by 2007-08. The five projects funded by our government will help to address pre-apprenticeship training. However, at-risk youth will continue to need assistance, especially if they cannot afford to continue with their training.

Minister, what further programming does our government have in place to assist at-risk youth in becoming independent and accessing work and learning in order to help them become well-contributing members of society?

With respect to youth who may not want or are not able to continue with a pre-apprenticeship or apprenticeship program, we have programs such as Job Connect, which provided up to 97,000 young people last year with information and assistance in terms of literacy, job skills and related training.

This past summer, we ran the summer jobs program. It's a $50-million program every year which provides a $2-per-hour incentive to employers. We hired 57,000 young people through that program -- 4,400 hired through the various government ministries and agencies. We're working with our colleague the Minister of Education on the Learning to 18 project, and his very important initiative that allows schools to be used for after-hour activities, which the previous Tory government cut.

POLICE OFFICERS

Mr. Robert W. Runciman (Leeds—Grenville): My question is to the Minister of Community Safety. We've been advised that the London Police Service has put in a request for 77 police officers under your program to help deal with a growing violent crime rate, including a record 13 murders this year in London. Despite it being two years late, you've announced allocations that would be made public on November 30. Can you guarantee today that London will receive funding for the 77 officers they've requested in terms of ensuring community safety in the city of London?

Hon. Monte Kwinter (Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services): Let me just repeat what we're doing. We've sent out these forms; we've sent out the information. Police services across Ontario have responded. They have said that they are prepared, on their part, to fund their share of a number of police officers, to the tune of whatever it is -- 77, 80, 100, 200; whatever it is. That number, of all of the people who are saying they're prepared to do it, is a number that exceeds 1,000. We have to take a look at those numbers to find out if they meet our criteria.

Half of them go to community policing and the other half go to the six areas that we've identified. Once we have done that and we make sure that they're prepared to do that, we will then, on a formula basis that is fair, transparent, and equitable, assign those officers.

I can't guarantee anything to you today because you're throwing out numbers that may or may not have any relevance. But I can tell you this: When the time comes, we will make that allocation, and I am prepared to stand up and defend what that allocation is.

Mr. Runciman: It's certainly relevant to the city of London: 13 murders -- I think, on a per capita basis, the highest murder rate of any municipality in Ontario. Their request was put forward based on what they believe they need to ensure community safety, especially in the face of a rash of violent crimes which are fuelled by guns, gangs and the illegal drug trade, yet you're making them wait another week, on top of the two years that they've already waited.

The Essex police force has sought funding for four new officers under the program. The Perth and Chatham-Kent forces are also seeking new officers. Minister, will you guarantee today that on November 30, police forces in Essex, Chatham-Kent and Perth will receive the 11 officers they need to ensure community safety? Will you do that?

Hon. Mr. Kwinter: One thing I can guarantee is that every single police service that applied for officers will get police officers. I can't guarantee what the number is going to be, because there are several permutations. Number one, we are providing 60 police officers for the north, and we're funding those $70,000 per officer. So we have to find out what officers want to go there.

I have to say, the member from Simcoe North issued a press release in July or August, calling for us to retroactively fund officers that were hired after October 23 and have already been put on the street, and we agreed. So we have provided 400 officers retroactively. They will start being paid as of May 18. But that will fit into the equation.

When you ask these particular questions about, "Will they get this or will they get that," it all depends on how many of them are retroactive, how many of them are current. We will go through that. We will assign them on a fair and equitable basis. Again, I think that those municipalities should be satisfied --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. New question.

PROTECTION FOR

HEALTH CARE WORKERS

Ms. Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): I have a question to the Minister of Labour. On July 7, 2005, a Ministry of Labour inspector issued two orders requiring an employer in a long-term-care home to use safety-engineered medical devices and to provide training for these. The employer filed an appeal with the Ontario Labour Relations Board requesting suspension and removal of the orders. On August 11, the OLRB dismissed the employer appeal. But on September 2, in a follow-up inspection of the home, the same ministry inspector rescinded the very orders that he had issued in July.

Minister, how is it that an inspector could rescind orders that had been upheld by the OLRB and leave workers in this home with no protection from needle-stick injuries?

Hon. Steve Peters (Minister of Labour): I thank the member for the question. Certainly, ensuring health and safety in our workplaces is an extreme priority with our government. In 2004-05, we visited over 192 acute care facilities and issued over 2,000 orders. Sixty-eight of those orders were for needle-stick injuries.

I do not have the specifics of the case you brought forward today. I pledge to the member that I'll have an answer for her on the specific case following question period today.

Ms. Martel: I'd be happy to give the minister the specifics of the case, but let me point out that this wouldn't have happened at all if it were mandatory in Ontario for employers to use safety devices. This is the case in the United States, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and frankly, it should be the law in Ontario, too.

Every year, 33,000 health care workers suffer a needle-stick injury. They may be exposed to 33 blood-borne diseases, including hep C and HIV/AIDS, and all the pain and suffering that go with that. These injuries are entirely preventable with the use of safety-engineered devices. Minister, will your government adopt my private member's bill and stop the tens of thousands of needless needle-stick injuries in Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Peters: Certainly, the ministry recognizes the importance of needle-stick prevention. That's why this past year the Ministry of Health invested over $11 million in support of safety-engineered medical equipment. As well, the Ministry of Labour is working very closely with the Ministry of Health, as well as our health and safety partners, and looking toward where we go in the long term in developing additional measures and programs. My staff, as recently as September 22, 2005, met with the ONA, the SEIU and the Alliance for Sharps Safety and Needlestick Prevention to ensure that my staff are briefed.

As well, last night I had a demonstration given to me of two safety devices that can play a very important role in ending needle-stick injuries. So it is an issue that we are looking at. We are working with the Ministry of Health and our health and safety partners.

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE /

VIOLENCE FAMILIALE

Ms. Monique M. Smith (Nipissing): My question is for the minister responsible for women's issues. Minister, you've shown tremendous leadership in protecting women and children from domestic violence in our province. I'm pleased that this government's comprehensive domestic violence action plan has continued to help prevent abuse before it happens and get women and children the support they need when it does happen.

Domestic violence has a great impact on children of women who are exposed to domestic violence. Children who witness violence are at increased risk of experiencing social, emotional and behavioural problems, and we know that many of them are at risk of becoming victims or perpetrators of violence themselves. With today's busy schedules, families see less of their children, and most often our educators are spending more time with our children. Minister, can you tell this House today the details about the announcement and what it means for our education professionals?

Our first and foremost priority is breaking the cycle of domestic violence. We had a tremendous announcement yesterday at OISE at the University of Toronto. We hope that within these next six months, we'll have a training package that will be the best practices of Ontario. We will raise that level to a province-wide standard and hope to be able to implement that for the start of the next school year.

M me Smith: Madame la ministre, comme vous nous l'avez expliqué, la ministre déléguée aux Affaires francophones, M me Meilleur, s'est jointe à vous, la ministre déléguée à la Condition féminine, hier afin d'annoncer l'aide aux professionnels en enseignement qui recevront la formation appropriée afin d'appuyer et de venir en aide aux étudiants qui seraient exposés à la violence domestique.

Il y a plusieurs femmes et enfants francophones en Ontario qui vont bénéficier de cette annonce. Madame la ministre, pouvez-vous aujourd'hui nous expliquer comment cette annonce améliorera les services pour les femmes francophones victimes de violence domestique?

Hon. Ms. Pupatello: The minister responsible for francophone affairs.

POLICE OFFICERS

Mr. Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): My question is to the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. As you may recall, my father served for years in the policing community, completing his career as the chief of police in Thunder Bay, and also as the OACP chair. Not only that, but my grandfather was also the chief constable in his community in Poland before coming to Canada. As such, policing is always a concern of mine.

Minister, across the north, police services have made requests under your 1,000 officers program for the much-needed new hires to ensure law and order across what are very often large geographical areas. We know that the North Bay Police Service has requested four new officers, Thunder Bay has requested eight, Sault Ste. Marie has requested 14 and Sudbury has requested 15. You made a commitment to provide full funding for 60 officers across northern Ontario under your 1,000 officers program.

Will you guarantee today that the police services in North Bay, Thunder Bay, Sault Ste. Marie and Sudbury will receive the 41 officers they need, and will you tell us how much of that funding these officers will receive to ensure 100% funding?

Hon. Monte Kwinter (Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services): I'm glad that the member raised a question about the north, because we're very proud of how we've done this program for the north. What had happened, as you know, is that in the previous government, under their community policing program, they provided a maximum of $30,000 per officer. When we initiated our program, we raised that to $35,000 per officer. We met with police officers in the north, we met with the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police, and they said that the north has a particular problem.

Because of that problem, they will not be able to take up -- notwithstanding that it's $35,000 now, as opposed to $30,000, we have to increase it.

I can tell you that a lot of discussion took place, and we finally came up with the number of $70,000 per officer for the north. We are going to be providing $70,000 per officer, for 60 places in the north. I can't tell you exactly, but you can do the arithmetic. If there are 60 requests, they will all get them. I can tell you that every police service in --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener—Waterloo): My question is also for the Minister of Community Safety. In my community of Waterloo, the police responded to 156,000 calls for service last year. That's up 6.1%, as the population increases. Waterloo has asked for 79 new officers to help ensure community safety across the region, Guelph has asked for 13 and Halton for 64, in order to help deal with the very explosive population growth.

Minister, the need for these officers is real, and it's immediate. Will you guarantee today that Waterloo, Guelph and Halton region will receive funding for the 156 new officers they need to ensure community safety when you make your announcement on November 30?

Hon. Mr. Kwinter: I can't guarantee the number but I can guarantee that they will get officers. But I think it's important to understand that we set guidelines for what we're going to fund. We want to make sure that half of these officers are doing community policing. The other half have got to be involved in youth crime, guns and gangs, organized crime, indoor marijuana grow-ops, dangerous offenders, domestic violence, Internet luring and child pornography.

It is up to those police services to designate that they in fact are going to be allocating those officers to those particular activities. If they don't, and if they say, "We're not prepared to do that," they will not be eligible for funding. That is why I can't give you an exact number, because we have to take into consideration all of those situations that we have to address.

We will make the announcement at the ending of this month. It will be fair, it will be equitable and it will be transparent.

PROPERTY TAXATION

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches—East York): My question is to the Acting Premier. Does the McGuinty government believe that seniors struggling with skyrocketing property taxes should be forced out of their homes and on to the streets?

Hon. Gerard Kennedy (Minister of Education): The minister responsible for seniors.

Hon. Dwight Duncan (Minister of Finance, Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): Of course we don't believe that. We do believe that assessments are only one part of the municipal property tax equation. We do believe that there are tools available to municipalities to mitigate whatever negative impacts there may be resulting from higher assessments that individual taxpayers have endured as a result of this year's assessment. We are concerned about the system. We are looking forward to Mr.

Morin's response with respect to issues present at MPAC, and we look forward to working with our municipal partners to ensure that senior citizens aren't penalized, that nobody is unfairly penalized as a result of a change in assessment that may or may not have occurred in the context of broader assessments across not only one particular municipality, but indeed across any number --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Thank you. Supplementary?

Mr. Prue: Perhaps you might want to explain that in a little bit more detail to the MPP from Northumberland, because in the recent edition of the Coburg Daily Star, Mr. Rinaldi tells struggling seniors, those people who built this province, and some of those who fought for us in time of war, that they, and I quote, "might have to rethink home ownership." He went on to state, and I quote, "If people are on a fixed income and property tax bills keep rising, the choice might be to sell, downsize and live on the difference."

Will the Acting Premier, will the minister ask the MPP for Northumberland to apologize to seniors for his insensitive remarks, and are you prepared to make sure that your government does everything possible so that seniors don't end up on the streets?

Hon. Mr. Duncan: The member from Northumberland represents his citizens, including senior citizens, well and owes nobody an apology. Let me tell you, you know, I can't use what I'm thinking, it's unparliamentary, but that member voted for a $125 senior property tax credit for senior citizens, and what did you do? You voted against it. You voted against it. You ought to be ashamed of yourself for that. Let's talk about your being booed out of a hall in Ottawa for your position. I'm sure the House isn't aware of that. Tomorrow, I'll table the newspaper account of that particular meeting, when Mr.

Prue was booed, literally booed out of a hall in Ottawa. By the way, they were right to do that, because you don't know what you're talking about. The member for Northumberland and many members of this caucus are engaging in an active discussion about the fairness of MPAC and how it works. We welcome the work being done by Mr. Morin, and we look forward --

The Speaker: Thank you.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop the clock.

New question, the member for Northumberland.

HEALTH CARE

Mr. Lou Rinaldi (Northumberland): My question is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Minister, the previous Tory government closed the Port Hope hospital in the riding of Northumberland, despite public outcry. In response to the public's needs regarding the loss of health-related services in the municipality of Port Hope, our current government announced on Thursday a new community health centre in the municipality of Port Hope, as well as a satellite centre in Trenton, to provide primary health care for individuals and families.

Minister, could you please tell the House about new initiatives such as the community health centre in Port Hope and satellite centre in Trenton.

Hon. George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): This is the one that they call Lou back home. They know him as Lou because he's always there, in the local community, working on behalf of the local community. I was very pleased, on behalf of our government last week, to send a message to the people of Port Hope that, unlike the days when that party was in office, Port Hope will not be forgotten. Port Hope will not have our back turned on it. I too know a little of that feeling, as an MPP from a riding that had a hospital closed by those rascals.

But I'm pleased to say that as part of our $75-million investment in community health centres, we're moving forward with a new community health centre in Port Hope and a satellite community health centre in Trenton. We know that they're an integral part of a good system of primary care, particularly working hard to address those circumstances where the underlying health circumstances require a little bit more. That's what Port Hope is going to get from this government: a little bit more.

Mr. Rinaldi: Minister, the community health centres are a great way to enhance access to primary care, but surely the government's doing more. Could you tell the House what other initiatives the government's launching to enhance access to primary care in Ontario, and could you tell us how those will benefit the residents of my community and all of Ontario?

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: Our government's strategy with respect to health care is the renewal of community-based health care services. At the heart of that is the idea that we must renew primary care -- accordingly, our government's initiatives with respect to 39 new community health centres, 150 family health teams, the work that we've been doing to increase the size of our medical schools. I'm pleased to say that I'm a part of a government that in two short years has reversed the trend created by those rascals when they were in government that saw policies which --

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order. You might want to rethink "rascals."

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: I withdraw, Mr. Speaker. I withdraw the offensive word "rascals."

Hon. Sandra Pupatello (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for women's issues): Say "little rascals."

Hon. Mr. Smitherman: Can I replace it with "little rascals"? It's trademarked.

The Speaker: Just withdraw. New question.

POLICE OFFICERS

Mr. Norman W. Sterling (Lanark—Carleton): My question is to the Minister of Community Safety. Kingston has applied for 16 --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Michael A. Brown): Order. I would like to be able to get on with petitions in a few minutes. The member for Lanark—Carleton.

Mr. Sterling: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Minister, Kingston has applied for 16 new officers; Smiths Falls and Gananoque, four each; and Ottawa, 182 officers. Ottawa has received funding for only 90 officers. I don't know what Minister Gerretsen has said publicly with regard to the need for officers in Kingston, but I do know that Minister Watson has publicly said that Ottawa deserves 182 new officers. For once, I agree with Minister Watson. The question is, will Minister Watson deliver for the city of Ottawa and will you deliver for the rest of eastern Ontario?

Hon. Monte Kwinter (Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services): If you take a look at the numbers of those requests that came in from municipalities across Ontario, there are far more than we will be able to allocate under the 1,000 officer plan. The previous government, when they had their community policing program, had 1,000 officers. We announced, as a campaign commitment, that we will provide an additional 1,000 officers. Not only are we doing that, but we've extended in perpetuity your program, to the tune of $30,000 per officer forever. So when we are finished, we will be providing $67.1 million per year to municipal policing.

We have a formula, and it really has nothing to do with the request that comes in. We will take a look at that formula, so that it's fair, and make sure that it's allocated on the basis of population and other criteria, including those areas that we have designated, and we will then make that allocation.

The Speaker: Supplementary?

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton—Victoria—Brock): My question is also for the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop the clock.

The member for Haliburton—Victoria—Brock.

Ms. Scott: My question is for the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. The city of Kawartha Lakes in my riding of Haliburton—Victoria—Brock has made a submission seeking funding for two new officers under your program, yet they've had to wait over two years to hear your response. The city of Peterborough has requested 11 officers to ensure community safety. Port Hope is seeking three new officers under your program. All these have been made to wait two years since you first promised these officers.

Will you guarantee Kawartha Lakes, Peterborough and Port Hope will receive the 16 officers they need to meet community safety concerns on November 30? Will you commit to that today, Minister?

Hon. Mr. Kwinter: Notwithstanding that you seem to think they've been waiting for two years for my response, the program was just announced on May 18, 2005. All municipalities have been invited to submit their requests and they're going to be reviewed in a way that, if they meet our criteria, if they meet the requirements under this program, they will get their fair share. I can't tell you the exact number because we have to allocate it across the whole province. I can't be in a position where someone says, "Well, how come they got this and we only got that?" It will be transparent. They will be able to see exactly how they were allocated. That is the way the system will work.

PETITIONS

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I have a petition here signed by a number of my constituents.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas without appropriate support, people who have an intellectual disability are often unable to participate effectively in community life and are deprived of the benefits of society enjoyed by other citizens; and

"Whereas quality supports are dependent on the ability to attract and retain qualified workers; and

"Whereas the salaries of workers who provide community-based supports and services are up to 25% less than salaries paid to those doing the same work in government-operated services and other sectors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to address, as a priority, funding to the community agencies in the developmental services sector to address critical underfunding of staff salaries and ensure that people who have an intellectual disability continue to receive quality supports and services that they require in order to live meaningful lives within their community."

I affix my signature, as I agree with the petition.

DISABILITY BENEFITS

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

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

"People with disabilities are entitled to the full support of their government with respect to income security and the dignity of a job; and

"The Ontario disability support plan does not provide an adequate income to cover the ever-increasing costs of living that people with disabilities face, and those who receive ODSP and find employment are punished with an earnings exemption that is far too low and needs to be increased; and

"An ODSP recipient will have their earnings clawed back by the McGuinty Liberal government if they earn more than just $160 a month as an individual or only $235 a month as a family; and

"Employment not only gives people on ODSP the dignity of a job and the pride in making meaningful contributions to their community, it also enables them to augment Ontario's inadequate disability cheque and keep up with the ever-rising cost of living.

"Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario for an immediate increase to the employment earnings exemption threshold for ODSP recipients so they are able to keep more of what they earn without the government clawing back their disability support."

I agree with this petition, and send it down by way of David.

MACULAR DEGENERATION

Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the government of Ontario's health insurance plan covers treatments for one form of macular degeneration (wet), there are other forms of macular degeneration (dry) that are not covered.

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

"There are thousands of Ontarians who suffer from macular degeneration resulting in loss of sight if treatment is not pursued. Treatment costs for this disease are astronomical for most constituents and add a financial burden to their lives. Their only alternative is loss of sight. We believe the government of Ontario should cover treatment for all forms of macular degeneration through the Ontario health insurance program."

I will affix my signature to this petition, which I already have, and give it to Nathan.

CANCER TREATMENT

Mr. Cameron Jackson (Burlington): "Whereas Ontario has an inconsistent policy for access to new cancer treatments while these drugs are under review for funding; and

"Whereas cancer patients taking oral chemotherapy may apply for a

section 8 exception under the Ontario drug benefit plan with no such exception policy in place for intravenous cancer drugs administered in hospital; and

"Whereas this is an inequitable, inconsistent and unfair policy, creating two classes of cancer patients" in Ontario "with further inequities on the basis of personal wealth and the willingness of hospitals to risk budgetary deficits to provide new intravenous chemotherapy treatments; and

"Whereas cancer patients have the right to the most effective care recommended by their doctors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Parliament of Ontario to provide immediate access to Velcade and other intravenous chemotherapy while these new cancer drugs are under review and provide a consistent policy for access to new cancer treatments that enables oncologists to apply for exceptions to meet the needs of patients."

I sign this with my support as well.

PLANT CLOSURE

Mr. Howard Hampton (Kenora—Rainy River): "To the Legislature of Ontario:

"Whereas the city of Kenora is a community that depends on the economic contribution of the Abitibi Consolidated paper mill; and

"Whereas Abitibi Consolidated has publicly stated their intention to permanently close one machine and indefinitely idle the other; and

"Whereas the surrounding natural resources should bring an employment and economical benefit to the communities; and

"Whereas the government of Ontario recently relaxed the control of wood rights and allowed the companies to ship wood fibre to other areas to be processed;

"Whereas the Ontario government has allowed for increased electricity rates in northern Ontario;

"I, the undersigned, petition the Legislature of Ontario as follows:

"

(1) Ensure Abitibi Consolidated is committed to maintaining both paper machines in Kenora;

"

(2) The government will assist Abitibi Consolidated by reducing electricity rates, subject to point (1) above being guaranteed;

"

(3) If Abitibi Consolidated fails to commit to point (1) above, the government shall, through the Minister of Natural Resources, immediately revoke Abitibi Consolidated's wood licence for the Kenora and surrounding area;

"

(4) The government shall immediately implement a comprehensive investment strategy for the northern Ontario forest industry, particularly the Kenora area;

"

(5) The government will ensure community-based timber commitments remain today and into the future so that community-based employment is sustained."

This petition has been signed by over 130 individuals, and I have affixed my signature as well.

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr. Khalil Ramal (London—Fanshawe): I read this petition on behalf of my constituents of London—Fanshawe.

"Whereas without appropriate support, people who have an intellectual disability are often unable to participate effectively in community life and are deprived of the benefits of society enjoyed by other citizens; and

"Whereas quality supports are dependent on the ability to attract and retain qualified workers; and

"Whereas the salaries of workers who provide community-based supports and services are up to 25% less than salaries paid to those doing the same work in government-operated services and other sectors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to address, as a priority, funding to community agencies in the developmental services sector to address critical underfunding of staff salaries and ensure that people who have an intellectual disability continue to receive quality supports and services that they require in order to live meaningful lives within their community."

Mr. Bill Murdoch (Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas without appropriate support, people who have an intellectual disability are often unable to participate effectively in community life and are deprived of the benefits of society enjoyed by other citizens; and

"Whereas quality supports are dependent on the ability to attract and retain qualified workers; and

"Whereas the salaries of workers who provide community-based supports and services are up to 25% less than salaries paid to those doing the same work in government-operated services and other sectors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to address, as a priority, funding to community agencies in the developmental services sector to address critical underfunding of staff salaries and ensure that people who have an intellectual disability continue to receive quality supports and services that they require in order to live meaningful lives within their community."

I've signed this.

OPTOMETRY SERVICES

Mr. Shafiq Qaadri (Etobicoke North): I have a petition here addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas it has been over 16 years since the last OHIP fee increase for Ontario's optometrists;

"Whereas the remuneration optometrists receive from OHIP for the comprehensive eye care provided to seniors, children, diabetics and others does not cover the costs of providing these services;

"Whereas the OHIP-insured services optometrists provide seniors, children, diabetics and others are no longer sustainable at the current levels of reimbursement;

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

"That it encourage the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care to immediately initiate meaningful OHIP fee negotiations with the recognized representative body for Ontario's optometrists, the Ontario Association of Optometrists."

I send this to you, Speaker, by way of page Kumail.

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr. Jerry J. Ouellette (Oshawa): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas, without appropriate support, people who have an intellectual disability are often unable to participate effectively in community life and are deprived of the benefits of society enjoyed by other citizens; and

"Whereas quality supports are dependent on the ability to attract and retain qualified workers; and

"Whereas the salaries of workers who provide community-based supports and services are up to 25% less than salaries paid to those doing the same work in government-operated services and other sectors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to address, as a priority, funding to community agencies in the developmental services sector to address critical underfunding of staff salaries and ensure that people who have an intellectual disability continue to receive quality supports and services that they require in order to live meaningful lives within their community."

I affix my signature in support.

FIRE AT RECYCLING PLANT

Mr. Jim Brownell (Stormont—Dundas—Charlottenburgh): I have a petition.

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas a fire on October 18, 2005, alerted the neighbours in the vicinity of Refine Industries Ltd., Long Sault, Ontario, to the establishment of a rubber recycling facility in the former Gildan Activewear plant, we, the neighbours of this facility, request that the Legislative Assembly of Ontario conduct a thorough investigation of the establishment of this facility in a residential neighbourhood and the ensuing fire of October 18, 2005;

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

"Investigate the fire that occurred at Refine Industries Ltd., Long Sault, on October 18, 2005; and

"Through the Ministry of the Environment, determine whether the facility was operating with a valid certificate of approval; and

"If Refine Industries Ltd. was not operating with a valid certificate of approval, prosecution should follow, to the full extent of the law; and

"The neighbours living in the vicinity of this facility at Long Sault do not want to compromise their health by having to breathe in foul odours and/or particulates; and

"Therefore, because of the problems already created in the community by Refine Industries Ltd., it should be closed down permanently."

I shall have this delivered by Andrew, and affix my signature.

QUEENSWAY CARLETON HOSPITAL

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

"Whereas the Queensway Carleton Hospital is one of the most efficient hospitals in the country;

"Whereas the Queensway Carleton Hospital's priority should be providing excellent patient care and not money for Paul Martin's Liberal government;

"Whereas the number of senior citizens served by the Queensway Carleton Hospital is growing rapidly in the west end of Ottawa and Nepean;

"Whereas the federal Liberal government led by Paul Martin has a surplus potentially as high as $10 billion;

"Whereas all provincial political parties in Ontario have acknowledged the significant fiscal imbalance;

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

"The Ontario Legislature call upon the federal Liberal government to immediately cancel its plans to dramatically increase the rent for the land now being used by the Queensway Carleton Hospital, and that the hospital be charged only $1 rent per year."

I'm pleased to sign this petition, as have George Smitherman and Jim Watson.

MANDATORY RETIREMENT

Mr. Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads as follows:

"Whereas existing legislation enforcing mandatory retirement is discriminatory; and

"Whereas it is the basic human right of Ontario citizens over the age of 65 to earn a living and contribute to society; and

"Whereas the provinces of Alberta, Manitoba, Prince Edward Island, Quebec, Yukon and the Northwest Territories have also abolished mandatory retirement in various forms; and

"Whereas ending mandatory retirement is a viable means of boosting the Ontario labour force and accommodating the growing need for skilled workers;

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

"The Ontario government should act by abolishing mandatory retirement in the province of Ontario. This is best achieved by passing Bill 211,

An Act to amend the Human Rights Code and certain other acts to end mandatory retirement."

Since I agree, I'm delighted to sign this petition.

SERVICES FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): I have a petition from folks who work at the Orillia branch of Simcoe Community Services. It says:

"Whereas without appropriate support, people who have an intellectual disability are often unable to participate effectively in community life and are deprived of the benefits of society enjoyed by other citizens; and

"Whereas quality supports are dependent upon the ability to attract and retain qualified workers; and

"Whereas the salaries of workers who provide community-based supports and services are up to 25% less than salaries paid to those doing the same work in government-operated services and other sectors;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to address, as a priority, funding to community agencies in the developmental services sector to address critical underfunding of staff salaries and ensure that people who have an intellectual disability continue to receive quality supports and services that they require in order to live meaningful lives within their community."

I'm very happy to sign this.

PROPERTY TAXATION

Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas many owners of seasonal trailers kept at campgrounds have raised their concerns over the impact of property taxes on seasonal trailers and the unfairness of imposing a new tax on persons who use minimal municipal services;

"Whereas this new tax will discourage business and tourism opportunities in Ontario and will cause many families to give up their vacation trailers altogether;

"Whereas the administration of this tax will require a substantial investment in staff, time and resources across the province of Ontario;

"Whereas some representatives of the recreational vehicle industry, campground proprietors and trailer owners have suggested an alternative sticker or tag system to establish fees for seasonal trailers;

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

"That the Parliament of Ontario immediately abandon the assessment and taxation of recreational trailers used on a seasonal basis in 2004; and that the government of Ontario consult with all stakeholders regarding the development of a fair and reasonable sticker or tag fee that would apply to recreational trailers used on a seasonal basis."

I affix my signature.

NOTICES OF DISSATISFACTION

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): It is my obligation now to inform the House that pursuant to standing order 37(a), the member for Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey has given notice of his dissatisfaction with the answer to his question given by the Attorney General concerning sentencing credit arrangements and hiring of police officers. This matter will be debated today at 6 p.m.

Pursuant to standing order 37(a), the member for Kenora—Rainy River has given notice of his dissatisfaction with the answer to his question given by the Minister of Energy concerning hydroelectricity prices. Again, this matter will be debated today at 6 p.m.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Hon. James J. Bradley (Minister of Tourism, minister responsible for seniors, Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to move a motion respecting the business of the House for this evening.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Is there unanimous consent for the government House leader to move such a motion? Agreed.

Hon. Mr. Bradley: I move that notwithstanding any standing order or the order of the House earlier today, the House continue to meet beyond 6 o'clock for the purposes of completing the two scheduled late shows and consideration of the motion for third reading of Bill 169,

An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act and to amend and repeal various other statutes in respect of transportation-related matters, following which the Speaker shall adjourn the House until Wednesday, November 16, 2005, at 1:30 p.m.

The Acting Speaker: The government House leader has moved that notwithstanding any standing order or the order of the House earlier today, the House continue to meet --

Hon. Mr. Bradley: Dispense, please.

The Acting Speaker: Dispense? Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

OPPOSITION DAY

VIOLENT CRIME /

CRIME VIOLENT

Mr. John Tory (Leader of the Opposition): I move that the Legislative Assembly call upon the government,

To recognize that under the watch of the McGuinty Liberal government, the province of Ontario has witnessed a record number of gun-related homicides in 2005; and

To recognize that the province of Ontario has fallen victim to excessive gang-related crime and youth violence with no coordinated youth strategy put forward by the McGuinty Liberal government to address and reverse this trend; and

To recognize that Premier McGuinty and the Attorney General were missing in action this summer when gun homicides were a weekly occurrence and when Ontarians needed their leadership the most; and

To recognize that the McGuinty Liberal government has failed to make any effort to effectively lobby the federal government to toughen sentencing for gun crimes; and

To keep its promise to hire 1,000 new police officers, not just to promise them over and over, and to keep their promise to "build safe communities with more police and more prosecutors."

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Mr. Tory has moved opposition day number 3. I'm pleased to recognize the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Tory: In a perfect world, some issues would remain outside of politics. Some issues, like the safety of our children and the safety of our communities and our streets, would be taken for granted as a priority we can all agree on. Unfortunately, there is today, I believe and we believe in the Progressive Conservative Party, a crisis on our streets, a crisis of mounting gun violence.

The crisis is centred on but by no means limited to the city of Toronto, where just last night there were two more shootings, including the fatal shooting of a 29-year-old i