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

April 13, 2006

38th Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2006-Apr-13 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Thursday 13 April 2006 Jeudi 13 avril 2006

PRIVATE MEMBERS'

PUBLIC BUSINESS

HAMILTON DAY ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006

SUR LE JOUR DE HAMILTON

HOMESTEAD ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006

SUR LE PATRIMOINE FAMILIAL

HAMILTON DAY ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006

SUR LE JOUR DE HAMILTON

HOMESTEAD ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006

SUR LE PATRIMOINE FAMILIAL

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HYDRO RATES

TRANSIT FUNDING

HYDRO RATES

FIRST NATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE

GOREWAY DRIVE

GENERATING STATION

HYDRO RATES

BOB HUNTER MEMORIAL PARK

TORONTO 101

EASTER AND PASSOVER

VISITORS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

TRANSPARENT DRUG SYSTEM

FOR PATIENTS ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006 SUR UN RÉGIME

DE MÉDICAMENTS TRANSPARENT

POUR LES PATIENTS

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

DRUG SYSTEM REFORM

YOUTH INTERVENTION CENTRES

DRUG SYSTEM REFORM

YOUTH INTERVENTION CENTRES

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

HYDRO RATES

NUCLEAR ENERGY

PROPERTY TAXATION

MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

DRUG SYSTEM REFORM

HOMESTEAD LEGISLATION

SOUTHWESTERN REGIONAL CENTRE

HERITAGE CONSERVATION /

CONSERVATION DU PATRIMOINE ONTARIEN

ASSISTANCE TO FARMERS

NORTH LESLIE LANDS DEVELOPMENT

AMATEUR SPORT

OPP FUNDING

ASSISTANCE TO HAMILTON

PETITIONS

CAFETERIA FOOD GUIDELINES

CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM

LONG-TERM CARE

AGGREGATE EXTRACTION

EDUCATION FUNDING

HEALTH CARE

ORGAN DONATION

BORDER SECURITY

LONG-TERM CARE

COMMUNITY MEDIATION

EDUCATION FUNDING

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

ORDERS OF THE DAY

BUDGET MEASURES ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006

SUR LES MESURES BUDGÉTAIRES

The House met at 1000.

Prayers.

PRIVATE MEMBERS'

PUBLIC BUSINESS

HAMILTON DAY ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006

SUR LE JOUR DE HAMILTON

Ms. Marsales moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 80,

An Act to name the first Wednesday in October Hamilton Day / Projet de loi 80, Loi visant à désigner le premier mercredi d'octobre comme

Jour de Hamilton.

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

Ms. Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): This is indeed a proud moment for me to speak on this private member's bill identifying the first Wednesday

in October as Hamilton Day. This idea is anything but frivolous. In a world too quick to be critical, too cynical to enjoy the moment, I am proposing that we take a day in October of each year to

celebrate the great city of Hamilton. It is said that to celebrate something is to recognize its value.

The ambitious city, as Hamilton was known in 1847, was a hive of industrial activity. Building on the shipping convenience, great companies built their empires:

Dofasco, Stelco, Westinghouse, J.I. Case, John Deere, Studebaker, International Harvester, Firestone, Procter and Gamble, Stanley Steel, Otis Elevator, Life Savers, Wagstaff, E.D. Smith. My

goodness, I could go on. In addition to these well-known manufacturing names, Hamilton was famous for what's known as the rag trade: McGregor, Hathaway, Young's -- empires built by families like

the Southams, the Hendrys, the Piggotts.

What has happened to Hamilton since the lofty days when we were the economic engine of Ontario and, it could be argued, the economic engine of Canada? Well,

Hamilton is reshaping its vision for success. We're rebuilding its dream, and my objective is to have a day to reflect on our past, not just on our past greatness, but to recognize and celebrate

our future, recognizing today's accomplishments as the building blocks of tomorrow's model community.

Hamilton should be synonymous with the word "opportunity." It is said that past performance is the best predictor of future actions. If that is so, Hamilton is

destined for greatness. Hamilton has a great history, forged by location, people and politics. The old slogan, "the ambitious city," at the turn of the last century, was coined because of its

dramatic industrial growth and powerful individuals, whose presence inspired great achievements in industry, education and wealth creation. It is my passion for what I perceive as the huge

potential that exists today in Hamilton that has inspired this private member's bill which is before you today.

Too often we take things for granted, such as our grand city of Hamilton, nestled at the head of Lake Ontario, captured by the majesty of the Niagara Escarpment,

with its panoramic views and vistas, multitudes of waterfalls and the focal point from where it all began: Hamilton harbour. It was this great harbour that provided the perfect shipping opportunity

needed to support the industrial development, and the resting place of the Hamilton Scourge from the War of 1812.

The city of Hamilton has suffered in the past decade by a perception of poor image. Mr. Speaker, what do you think of when you hear "Hamilton"? My experience is

that most people think about a city left behind in industrial pollution after the post-war boom. But I am here to paint a much different picture -- a picture of a beautiful city with more parks per

capita than any other, with some of the most exciting, architecturally interesting buildings and houses dating back to the mid 1850s.

We've not always embraced the legacy of our heritage buildings, and sadly, we've torn so many of them down. It's almost painful to read the books: Vanished

Hamilton by Margaret Houghton or The Grand Old Buildings of Hamilton by Brian Henley. These historians, including Patricia Filer, give us a window to our past. I believe that, as we learn to

celebrate the greatness that is Hamilton, our renewed appreciation for its heritage will emerge as we build our vision for the future.

By celebrating the first Wednesday in October every year as part of the city of Hamilton's tourism month, we want to extend a welcoming hand to all former

residents and children of Hamilton to come home and visit -- rediscover their roots. When my daughters, Andrea and Allison, went off to university, one to McGill and one to Dalhousie, their pride

in Hamilton was dashed by their roommates, who saw Hamilton as less than attractive. How many of us parents in Hamilton have exported our young people? Our young people went off to other cities in

the world to do great things, to find their fame and fortune. This day in October is going to be the rallying cry and a grand day for celebration.

On March 22, 1816, the Legislature of Upper Canada passed

an act to erect and form a new district to be called Gore. They also established a courthouse and a

jail to be erected in the town of Hamilton. One of the major attractions to settlement here was the lovely harbour. Twice the size it is now, it was crystal clear with gleaning white sands; you

could wade out forever. On January 8, 1833, the Legislature passed a further act to define the limits of the town of Hamilton in the district of Gore and to establish a police and public market

therein.

It was during the period of the 1890s that Hamilton became an industrial hub in south central Ontario. The early concentration of iron and steel manufacturing

here was not accidental. Hamilton was in a very advantageous location. Nearby coal supplies in the States and the plentiful supply of iron ore in northern Ontario, plus Hamilton's superb natural

harbour on the Great Lakes, made it the logical focus in the new industry.

An American visitor to Hamilton in 1889, who was greatly impressed with Hamilton's industrial potential, wrote, "Look down upon it from the mountain top and it

is one vast field of tall chimneys and the smoke from its hundreds of factories hangs over the city like a beautiful web." Well, that impression of Hamilton, while economically charged, lingers

even today -- but not with the same positive connotation, I'm sad to say.

Bill 80 is designed to replace those tired old images with today's reality. Yes, we love our Tiger-Cats and we love our Tim Hortons, and yes, Tim Hortons has

become a household name. A famous hockey player and police officer, Ron Joyce, turned Tim Hortons into a Canadian icon, where the term "double double" is now recognized terminology. Yes, it all

began in Hamilton from a dream, an entrepreneurial spirit of hard work and determination.

Hamilton is a city with a destiny to be a world leader in research, in medicine, in education, a model city where diversity is not only accepted but welcomed. We

will be the brain trust of the next generation. Hamilton was blessed with a location as scenic and beautiful as any in the world, from its majestic escarpment to its gracious harbour, bustling with

world trade and beautiful ideas and energy.

I also want to speak to some of the wonderful things about our great airport. Did you know that our airport -- Hamilton airport, affectionately known as HI --

has grown into the number one in the country for courier, cargo and freight shipments? In 2003, one million passengers passed through its gates.

I want to ask you, what do these famous names have in common, names like Eugene Levy, Kathleen Robertson, Martin Short, Dave Rave, Bertram Brockhouse, Roberta

Bondar, Richard Rohmer, Morgan Firestone, Bob Doidge, Ian Thomas, Danny Lanois? They are all Hamiltonians. We have an amazing legacy. We celebrate international artists who call Hamilton home, we

celebrate entertainers, we celebrate war heroes, we celebrate astronauts. We celebrate everyday citizens who strive to enrich this wonderful city. We celebrate the courage of the men and women who

came to our city with only hope to build a future.

I read recently that snowflakes are one of nature's most fragile creations, but when they stick together, they can create immense beauty and stop even the

largest of man's creations. Well, today I will use Hamilton's motto, "Together Aspire, Together Achieve." Hamiltonians are sticking together. We abound with potential as we move forward to achieve

new heights, build new businesses, create new and greater opportunities. Once called "the ambitious city," "Steeltown," "the hammer," "hammer town," the "lunch bucket city," together, let's make

room to celebrate Hamilton. Let's have a Celebrate Hamilton Day. Let's bring us together. Let's forge new ideas, forge new dreams, entrepreneurial spirit. Let's bring all of our businesses together

under one great celebration, under one great flag, and that is of Hamilton. Enriched Hamilton is enriched Ontario, enriched Ontario is enriched Canada, and enriched Canada is enriched citizens, all

the citizens of this mighty land. Let us celebrate Hamilton together.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate?

Hon. Marie Bountrogianni (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): First of all, congratulations to

my colleague from Hamilton West. She encompasses the best of Hamilton right there. Congratulations.

I'm just honoured to stand before you and speak in support of Bill 80, Hamilton Day Act, which seeks to name the first Wednesday in October Hamilton Day. As a

proud Hamiltonian, I'm thrilled to have the opportunity to sing the praises of our great city, and I commend my colleague, the member for Hamilton West, for the opportunity.

When you stop to consider the incredibly diverse scope of all the areas where Hamilton excels -- industry, education, health and culture -- it becomes clear that

Hamilton is a city with heart, drive and vision. Hamilton is a city that has seen rapid growth over the last 15 years. Now the fourth-largest city in Ontario, Hamilton is ranked as one of the top

10 places to do business in Canada. We are renowned as the home of Canada's steel-producing companies Dofasco and Stelco, earning us the nickname "steel city." While we're proud of that steel

heritage, however, I want to be sure that anyone who might not have stayed up to date on everything that's going on in Hamilton knows that we've grown into much more.

Hamilton is also home to McMaster University, one of the leading post-secondary institutions in Canada. The faculty of health sciences at McMaster is renowned

worldwide for its innovative small-group, problem-based-learning method of instruction. I had the privilege of teaching in that program before being elected. Mohawk College is one of Canada's

largest community colleges, also renowned for its health care focus in the form of its unique, experienced-based nursing program. My mother completed her early childhood education studies at Mohawk

College. Together, McMaster and Mohawk are the foundation of Hamilton's strong medical community and its commitment to research and innovation in health sciences.

I'm very proud to be part of a team of local MPPs, including not only the sponsor of today's bill, Ms. Marsales, but also MPPs Ted McMeekin of

Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot and Jennifer Mossop of Stoney Creek, who have worked so hard with me to secure over $400 million for expansion and redevelopment projects for Hamilton Health

Sciences, St. Joseph's Healthcare and St. Peter's Hospital, ensuring that Hamilton will continue to be an innovator, a resource and a champion in the health care field.

What we don't hear said enough of Hamilton is that it's also a beautiful place to live. It is home to a vibrant cultural community. Opera Ontario is quickly

establishing itself as an important venue for operatic talent. Known for its commitment to supporting young Canadians on the brink of international careers, Opera Ontario is becoming the place to

see and hear the best young Canadian singers. I can attest to that. My husband and I were there, and I'm afraid to say that he usually sleeps through opera, but he was crying through the opera that

we went to at Opera Ontario in Hamilton. It was superb; it was amazing.

Many years ago, when my parents immigrated to Montreal, most of their friends came to Toronto after Montreal. But my late father said, "There's a great place

I've heard of called Hamilton. Let's go there; let's try there before we try Toronto," and they never looked back. I was born in St. Joseph's hospital; one of my children was born in St. Joseph's

hospital. It's a place with heart. What you see is what you get in Hamilton. There are no artificial nuances there. The nuances are real. That's the kind of honesty, the kind of heart, the kind of

determination that makes it such a wonderful place to live, a wonderful place to raise children, a wonderful place to work, with our universities, our industries, our tourism, our beautiful

landscape, the harbour, the Mountain. We affectionately call it "the Mountain" even though it's an escarpment, but it's absolutely gorgeous and the views are incredible.

I'm very proud to be here with my colleagues. Thank you very much, Hamilton West member, for this opportunity. Congratulations to you and to all my colleagues

for the wonderful work they do on behalf of our city, all of the colleagues around the House -- Ms. Horwath from Hamilton East. We all love Hamilton. Despite our differences politically, we all

love Hamilton. That's a commonality.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate? The member from Waterloo-Wellington -- no, Kitchener-Waterloo. I have had a rough week on these names, for

some reason.

Mrs. Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I'm certainly pleased to join the debate. I want to compliment the

member for Hamilton West. It's obvious that she takes great pride in her community and seeks today to ensure that Hamilton Day would be recognized the first Wednesday in October. Certainly, she

made a very enthusiastic presentation here, demonstrating why this should indeed happen and why they should have this distinct day of recognition.

I would certainly concur: I think Hamilton is a very, very exciting place. I've had the opportunity to visit there on many occasions, particularly when I was

Minister of Health, when we made some substantial investments in that community. It is a community that can take pride not only in its past, but also as it moves forward into the future with its

outstanding university, college and health institutions.

I want to briefly use this opportunity, though, to speak about the fact that we have many outstanding communities throughout the province of Ontario that, like

Hamilton, have a proud past and that, like Hamilton, are very energetic and very innovative and certainly have a future that is filled with optimism and with hope. I want to just speak for a few

minutes about my community, Kitchener-Waterloo, in the region of Waterloo.

Our region had roots -- there were Pennsylvania Germans who settled there; we've had Scottish people settle there. We've had people from all over the world come

to the region of Waterloo. Again, although it started in the past as an agricultural community, we have now moved forward to a point where we are a thriving community. We have manufacturing, we

have research, we have technology, and our community also is proud to have two outstanding universities: the University of Waterloo and Wilfrid Laurier University. We have a college, Conestoga

College, that has been named number one for eight years in a row. We have two outstanding hospitals in Kitchener-Waterloo and the hospital in Cambridge as well -- so we have three. We are home to

many of the high-tech companies that are quite capable of competing with the Silicon Valley in the south, names like RIM and Open Text.

And of course our community has been represented in the past by some outstanding MPPs. One in particular, who played a very significant role in the life of our

community and made a wonderful contribution when he was here, was John Sweeney, who was loved by people in our community. I had the opportunity to succeed Herb Epp, who has now become the mayor of

the city of Waterloo, and I have been very privileged, since 1990, to serve the region of Waterloo with my colleague Ted Arnott. So it has had proud representation in the past and it has proud

representation today.

Our community, like Hamilton, is enthusiastically moving forward into the future. We are very fortunate in the province of Ontario to have dynamic cities such as

Hamilton or Kitchener-Waterloo -- the region of Waterloo -- making a contribution to this great province. We see a thriving economy, we see thriving art and culture. We are very, very proud of our

communities.

I compliment the member from Hamilton West for bringing forward Bill 80,

An Act to name the first Wednesday in October Hamilton Day. I would agree with her.

Hamilton has been a very significant contributor to Ontario's political, economic and social spheres, and has a rich history of which it can be extremely proud.

Ms. Andrea Horwath (Hamilton East): It's certainly my pleasure to be here today to add my comments about Bill 80,

An Act to name the first

Wednesday in October Hamilton Day, so that we can celebrate Hamilton on a particular day. But I really believe that Hamilton can be celebrated every day of the year, that it has so much to

celebrate that one day really isn't enough to cram in all the wonderful things we should be celebrating about the city of Hamilton. So I spent some time putting together in my mind some of the

things that I celebrate on a daily basis about the wonderful city of Hamilton, and I thought I would share some of those things with this House today.

Before I do that, though, I thought it would be important to acknowledge some wonderful people from Hamilton who are up in the gallery, particularly people who

work on some of the wonderful things that are worthwhile celebrating. We have Alice Willems from the Canada Marine Discovery Centre, which sits as a jewel on our waterfront; she does some wonderful

work there. We also have David Adames from Tourism Hamilton, who does some wonderful work in terms of bringing people not only from Ontario but from across the country and across the world, in

fact, to see the wonderful things our great city has to offer. And what is that? I think it starts with great people. There are a couple of examples are here in the gallery but certainly great

people in every corner of the city of Hamilton, no matter where you look, and those great people bring great community spirit and great community pride to our city every day.

We have a wealth of community organizations that work very hard to provide services and help people with issues that range from everything from settlement

services to violence against women programs to anti-poverty programs and seniors' programs -- a number of people. In fact, Hamilton was celebrated as having the most number of volunteer hours

Applause.

Ms. Horwath: Exactly -- in a country-wide scoring of volunteer hours. Hamilton won that because we really do have a wonderful group of people in

our community who do so much great work. Not only are those people volunteers, but they're also the staff of some of the fabulous organizations that our city is blessed with.

We have a wonderful diversity of people who live in the city of Hamilton. More than 50 languages are spoken. We welcome citizens from literally every country in

the world. As already mentioned by other members from Hamilton, we have fabulous institutions like McMaster University, Mohawk College and of course our medical centre, through Hamilton Health

Sciences, is renowned, as well as St. Joseph's, for their medical research and the groundbreaking technologies they work on on a regular basis.

A skeptic might actually look at the timing of Bill 80 and conclude that perhaps it might be a gesture of political opportunism. I'm sure it was just a

coincidence, because I would disagree with that particular thought. It's only a coincidence, I'm sure, that in 2007, after this bill has been passed, our Hamilton Day will happen to be celebrated

on the very day before the next provincial election -- if the McGuinty Liberals keep their promise around when the election is coming. Anyway, I thought that was a bit of levity to add to the

comments I have today, because regardless of what day it falls on, all of us are going to be there to celebrate our great Hamilton Day.

Who is that and what is that? It includes a burgeoning arts district on James Street North, in the centre of our city. There are other smaller arts districts as

well in the city of Hamilton, including Barton Street and Lock Street. The arts are really thriving in the city of Hamilton. That is led by a world-class art gallery that sits right in the middle

of our downtown.

We have a diverse business sector. We have many active business improvement areas with very active boards of directors that are always striving to provide

superior goods and services to the people of Hamilton. We have Hamilton harbour, which I've mentioned briefly in terms of the Canada Marine Discovery Centre. We also have many sights and

attractions that highlight our natural environment.

The Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs already mentioned the number of waterfalls that Hamilton has and the escarpment Hamilton has, but we have a significant

trail system in Hamilton that people can actually utilize to take advantage of those natural areas, and those trails go throughout the escarpment. They link up with the Bruce Trail, the famous

trail that goes from Tobermory to Niagara Falls. Part of that is in the city of Hamilton. Of course, our community took advantage of that and linked our trail system into that trail system. We have

a waterfront trail, which is a fabulous magnet for people, not only Hamiltonians but many others, as they get some recreation time in the summer. We also have a series of rail trails. We have a

waterfront trail now on Lake Ontario as well and have just completed a lighthouse facility there that adds wonderful opportunities for people to spend time down at our lakefront as well as our

harbourfront.

I have pages and pages of wonderful things that I think we should be celebrating. In fact, part of the Niagara Escarpment, as many people know, is a

UNESCO-designated world biosphere reserve, and that's something that we also celebrate regularly in Hamilton.

We have great urban neighbourhoods in Hamilton. We have great areas of scenic countrysides, beautiful parks, wonderful opportunities for recreation.

We have a very mixed economy: On the one end we have heavy industry, and on the other end we have lush farmland that contributes significantly to our economy. We

have a very mixed economy in the city of Hamilton, and we are certainly extremely lucky to have that.

We have a number of wonderful festivals and celebrations that take place in Hamilton, everything from Festitalia in the fall of every year, to Black History

Month in February of every year, to the Greek Opal Festival, to the annual Racalmutese festival; we have Portuguese celebrations, we have Chinese New Year celebrations, and we have South Asian

celebrations. Our community celebrates on a regular basis, and Hamilton Day will be another opportunity for us to do that.

But I believe there's an opportunity now, in the context of this discussion, to recognize that notwithstanding all the good things that our city stands for and

all the wonderful opportunities to celebrate, including Hamilton Day -- and I'm all for it -- I think we're also obliged to look at some of the aspects we wish we could celebrate but still are not

able to. For example, we still have a crisis in wait times in hospitals, notwithstanding the hard work that our medical facilities do. We saw that with David Malleau, that constituent of mine for

whom it took over a year and a half to have his skull replaced after brain surgery. We have Eric Trimmer, another fellow from Hamilton who is struggling to get treatment in a residential eating

disorder treatment program and has still not been able to do that.

We have a serious need for more affordable housing in our community, but unfortunately the government continues to claw back hundreds of millions of dollars in

federal housing money instead of putting that into the building of affordable housing in our community.

Unfortunately, we have a situation where the national child benefit is still being clawed back. I thought it was important to raise that, because very recently,

another thing to celebrate was a young lawyer from McQuesten Legal and Community Services, Craig Foye, who was sent off to the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights by a

community committee on income security, the Income Security Working Group of the legal clinic system, I believe. Craig was sent there to talk to the United Nations about the problems that Canadian

cities are having in terms of meeting their human rights obligations in regard to income security.

I wanted to quote a little bit from Craig's cover letter to the document that I believe he sent to all of our local MPPs:

"Unfortunately, as the report" -- which I have with me -- "shows and as you may already be aware, the right to an adequate standard of living is not currently

being acknowledged or protected by either the provincial or federal governments. Currently, we have social assistance rates that fall far below subsistence levels of income, and those rates remain

arbitrary numbers with no relation to the actual cost of basic necessities. While efforts have been made to respond locally to the homelessness crisis, we are nowhere close to providing the numbers

of rent-geared-to-income units that are required and the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal continues to evict many thousands of tenants for arrears of rent, many without a hearing."

It goes on to talk about the number of unemployed workers who don't qualify for benefits. "The minimum wage" -- Craig goes on to say -- "falls below poverty

levels, meaning that even those workers working full-time or more may not be able to pull their family out of poverty. Not surprisingly, local individuals and families who cannot afford to feed

themselves must turn to food banks and meal programs in numbers that have not been seen since the Great Depression. This poverty is being experienced disproportionately by many already vulnerable

groups, including, but not limited to: women, seniors, newcomers, aboriginal persons, persons with disabilities, and visible minorities."

That's from Craig Foye of McQuesten Legal and Community Services, an organization that I used to work for. Nonetheless, I thought it was important that we have a

reality check as well about the things we still need to do. If we're going to reach the goals that Ms. Marsales says she wants to reach in the ongoing growth of Hamilton, many of these very basic

issues must be addressed.

The national child benefit clawback is an exacerbation of the poverty problems we have in Hamilton. If this government had only stopped the clawback, it would

have helped.

We continue to see the Liberal government allowing things like Liberty Energy, ABP Recycling and other noxious waste management proposals to escape full

environmental assessment processes, which is not a good thing for the air quality in the city of Hamilton.

We see a need for further growth services in the city of Hamilton. There are a number of other issues here, concerns I have that I've raised in this House and

that need to be addressed.

We have a property assessment system that hopefully is going to get fixed. It's currently in a shambles. In fact, the member who brings the bill forward, the

member from Hamilton West, will know this very well because one of the hardest-hit areas in terms of property tax assessment is in a ward that sits in the riding that she represents, which is ward

1. Unfortunately, the ward councillor is taking the hit for that, but it's really the provincial government that needs to fix the tax assessment system that's driving people out of their homes,

particularly seniors. The business improvement areas have asked to create new property tax classes that would see properties -- actually this is not the case. It's the residents of those very

neighbourhoods that are affected by property tax problems who would like to see property taxes changed to have a new class of property around universities and colleges that can be taxed

specifically as investment properties, as student housing, rather than residential, because that is in part what's driving up the property assessments near McMaster University in ward 1, which is

represented very ably by a friend and colleague of mine, Brian McHattie.

Nonetheless, these issues have not been dealt with by the McGuinty Liberal government. I'm really hopeful that they will see the light and begin to address some

of these issues.

Air quality is an ongoing problem. We have a monitoring station that we lost under the Harris government in Hamilton East. I'd really like to see that monitoring

station re-established, particularly since there's been a new development in the east end, a significant contributor to our air shed, which is an expressway. That was a very difficult project for

our city, but, nonetheless, it's on the way. It's being built. We need more than ever to make sure we're monitoring our air quality.

There's also the ongoing systemic issue of the government not dealing with the problem we have around our ability to have a fair, equitable and appropriate

balance of payments, if you want to call it that. The downloading has crippled our city. I'm sure there are lots of things David Adames has in terms of ideas on tourism. There are many other

projects the city would like to undertake but they're hamstrung by lack of funding room in their budgets because this government -- and I congratulate them for, year after year, topping up our

city's ability to meet expected needs, but still the city is calling for a systemic response to the ongoing budget problem. They shouldn't have to come here every year, cap in hand, begging for

some money.

You know what? I have many more, but the bottom line is, the balance of issues that I think are most important for Hamilton Day is celebrating the positive.

We're extremely proud of our city. Every single one of us who sits in this House is extremely proud of this city. We have very much to celebrate, but we also have a heck of a lot of work to do. I'm

hoping the member from Hamilton West, the member from Stoney Creek, the member from Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot and the member from Hamilton Mountain will work with me and try to push

some of these other issues forward. It's a very nice idea to have Bill 80, and I'm going to be supporting it, but we also need some very real action on behalf of Hamilton's concerns. I look forward

to their support on all the initiatives that I'm putting forward to try to move the yardsticks that I've just mentioned.

I wanted to quote a saying that I found in a book of quotations by someone named William Jeffrey Prowse, and it goes like this. I hope Mr. Prowse forgives me for

changing around a little bit of the wording, but it reminded me of Hamilton and I thought I should share it with you:

Though the latitude is rather vague

And the longitude is also uncertain

The persons I pity know not the city

The beautiful city of Hamilton.

I look forward to supporting this bill. I also look forward to being able to help solve some of the other serious concerns that our city has. Notwithstanding

that, Hamilton is a great city. We have so much to celebrate. I'm very proud to be here on behalf of the constituents of Hamilton East.

Ms. Jennifer F. Mossop (Stoney Creek): I am very pleased to wade in on this debate. I had an interesting conversation with some other members

in the House, because you have to wonder -- we're a provincial Legislature, and one says, "Why a Hamilton Day? Why not a London Day or a Kitchener Day or a Chatham Day or a Sioux Lookout Day?" We

had one suggestion from the member from Hamilton East, which was potentially that this was political opportunism. She didn't say where that suggestion came from, but it was certainly the first time

I had heard that suggestion. She says she doesn't think it's valid. I can only say, why even raise it? I know it is not a valid suggestion because I happen to know that the member who is

introducing this bill is one of the most fiercely proud people of her hometown, the city of Hamilton. That says a lot. If you know anything about Hamilton, you know it deserves a Hamilton Day

because its people are so fiercely and rightly and deservedly proud of their city. The one thing I have learned in my many years -- and I've spent my entire professional career working in Hamilton

-- is that there is a deep sense of pride and ownership in the city of Hamilton.

I think to some extent it has to do with all the things that we've heard people talk about today. It is probably one of the most beautiful places in the world.

I stand in my corner of Hamilton in awe, truthfully. I stand and look at the escarpment. I look out over Lake Ontario. I look at the tender fruit land. It's the best in the world. We have lost a

lot of it to development, but it's still there. The orchards, the fruit trees, all of those things are in my riding and they are part of Hamilton. I look at the bay and I wonder sometimes what it

must have been like when people first arrived from Europe, when they came to this corner of the world and they saw the harbour, the lake and the escarpment. They must have thought they were in a

paradise, because with the escarpment also came the ability to grow fruit that you can't do in any other part of the world. It is unique and very special. There are all those attributes. There are

the people, the physical attributes, the geography, which have been referenced. There are all the great things that have happened in Hamilton because of those people over the many years.

But there is, to a certain extent, also an underdog component to the psyche of Hamilton, and it comes for a number of reasons -- partly because it is right en

route between the great United States of America and the capital of our province, and sometimes people have a tendency to drive right past it and don't stop. But any time somebody takes the time to

stop in Hamilton and look around, they all say, "I had no idea it was so beautiful. I had no idea you had so much to offer in the area of the arts."

Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): What about the Tiger-Cats?

Ms. Mossop: And the Tiger-Cats. But people know about the Tiger-Cats. Everybody knows about the Tiger-Cats.

When you bring all these components together, having a Hamilton Day makes total sense. It makes total sense to me.

I reference the fact that I've spent my entire professional career in the Hamilton area. I myself am always very proud and gratified when people call me one of

Hamilton's own. But I have to tell you that I have very deep roots in the Hamilton area. My ancestors lived in Dundas --

Mr. Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): Oh.

Ms. Mossop: -- Member McMeekin, on Governor's Road. My great-great uncle worked at the Hamilton Spectator back in the mid- to late-1800s, so I

have a deep history in the area. I felt very much like I came full circle when I ended up working at the Hamilton Spectator just about five years ago.

Mr. Leal: We used to watch you in Peterborough, Channel 11.

Ms. Mossop: There you go. Yes, Channel 11 from Hamilton. Actually there's something people don't know about Channel 11. You can see Channel 11

in Hamilton, which was one of the great independent television stations. It was the first big independent television station in Canada. You can still, to this day, see that via satellite, from

Hamilton to Bermuda to Whitehorse. Hamilton brings television entertainment and news to that wide a swath of the planet. There are lots of those little-known tidbits we have about Hamilton.

I just wanted to address this. I'm glad to have the opportunity to do this. I cannot think of anybody more appropriate to have brought this forward. It does

make sense. You can make arguments, though, "Why don't we have a day for every city in the province?" but there are special reasons why Hamilton deserves a day, and I've just outlined them. It is

that fierce pride. It is those lesser-known things about Hamilton. Just because of where it has been situated, it gets bypassed every once in a while. This is a great opportunity to let people know

all those things that I know they want to know. So thank you, member from Hamilton West.

Mr. McMeekin: I'm pleased to join my esteemed colleague in sharing a few words about Hamilton, my hometown. I was born and raised in Hamilton.

I grew up in the northeast end and then, later in life, when my mom and dad had a few bucks to buy a house, we went to the mountaintop. We saw the city from on high, on top of the escarpment there.

I grew up in the west end of the city. It's a great place.

I'm very fortunate. I went back to school as a mature student and graduated from Mohawk College before going on to McMaster where I met my wife, who graduated

eventually from the McMaster medical school, one of the most innovative medical schools in the world. In that context, I retired from politics after being elected the youngest member of Hamilton

city council back in the 1970s. Thinking I'd never get involved in politics again, we moved out to Flamborough, and you know what? I fell in love with the beautiful town of Flamborough, and as fate

would have it, I had the opportunity to serve a couple terms out there as the mayor of Flamborough.

We have an interesting history there. As you know, the city of Hamilton is now a greater city of Hamilton, it's a bigger city of Hamilton, and it's much more

diverse now that it includes the former municipalities of the city of Stoney Creek and the township of Glanbrook and --

Mr. Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): And dedicated MPPs.

Mr. McMeekin: That's right -- and the towns of Dundas, Ancaster and Flamborough. We bring to the new city of Hamilton a rich agricultural

culture -- over $1 billion contributed through the agricultural sector -- and of course some wonderful places to spend a few hours or a few days: the lion safari, Flamboro Downs, Rockton World's

Fair, Flamboro Speedway, Wentworth village, the Carnegie Gallery, the Dundas school of art, and of course all the festivals: Buskerfest, Cactus Festival, Rockton Berry Farm, what have you.

I go so far back, I think I'm probably the oldest Hamilton member here. I remember when Paul Henderson, Pit Martin and Buddy Blom played for the Memorial

Cup-winning Hamilton Red Wings in the old Hamilton Forum, now a housing development. We've been involved as a family for some 50 years as season ticket holders to the on-again, off-again

Tiger-Cats. Talking about living between memory and hope -- although yesterday's news of Corey Holmes and some others coming to Hamilton has got us all pretty excited.

My colleague from Hamilton East mentioned that we're the number one city in Canada on a per capita basis in terms of volunteerism and volunteer donations

Ms. Mossop: And artisans.

Mr. McMeekin: And artisans. One of our greatest strengths is our artisan community, our diversity. In fact, Hamilton was the departure point

for many of our immigrants. As the grandson of a Scottish immigrant who landed in Hamilton, I treasure that part of our history.

I want to comment just briefly, because I think the member for Hamilton East was on to something about the poverty issues in the city. I want to compliment the

great city for the action it's taken with the round table on poverty, a great initiative. When I was growing up in the east end, I was one of those northeast-end kids who sat on the curb looking

for trouble. Actually, trouble was looking for me. I remember the YMCA street worker who befriended me. I thought that 25-cent membership, Frank, that I paid every month at the Y -- it didn't; it

was one of those groups that picked it up for the poor kids. It's funny how things come around. Later in life, I served as president of the Hamilton-Burlington Y. I served overseas, and as mayor of

the town of Flamborough, now part of the city of Hamilton, built a partnership family YMCA.

Great city, great future. We want to look back with pride and ahead with hope.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate?

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): I'm pleased to join in the debate on this private member's bill brought forward by the member for Hamilton West.

I think it's important for the residents of Hamilton and I would say certainly the constituents of the honourable member's riding to understand exactly what it means that she would bring this

private member's bill forward.

As members of this Legislature, a private member's bill opportunity is in fact something that's very cherished when you consider that we, as members of this

Legislature, are elected here to four-year terms and private members' business is something that is the very special privilege of each and every one of us as members. But it is not something that

you can bring forward for debate every day or every other day. Every member is allocated one private member's business ballot and we often wait an entire year, and sometimes, depending on how the

business of this place takes place, some members end up going through an entire session of Parliament without being able to actually table a bill. So as members of this Legislature, we consider

very carefully what it is that we want to use this hour for in order to raise an issue of ultimate importance to us for the Legislature to consider, to debate and in fact to provide profile for the

entire province. Clearly, the member from Hamilton West considers this her opportunity to take that very special time of legislative debate to talk about and to honour her city. Who can argue with

that? We support that. We honour it as well by joining in this debate, and I commend her for her initiative in doing so.

Now, having said that, I want to take this opportunity to make the Legislature aware that there will also be a bill coming forward in honour of Aurora, in

honour of Newmarket, in honour of Richmond Hill, in honour of Whitchurch-Stouffville, in honour of King township -- all places that I have had the opportunity to represent -- and I look forward to

having the opportunity over the next 25 years of my career here to table one of those bills at the appropriate time, subject to the grace of the electorate and all that goes with that.

I had the privilege of serving in this province as Minister of Tourism. It wasn't until I had the opportunity in that capacity to really become familiar with

Hamilton. I knew Hamilton, as we all do. In fact, I grew up with a very good friend by the name of Siegfried Tepper, who was not born in Hamilton but he certainly grew up there. Our families were

friends and I would visit with him because my sister lived in Hamilton. We played in Gore Park. I remember those days very well. Siegfried Tepper studied at McMaster. He is an accomplished pianist,

renowned worldwide. He is a composer, a conductor. He headed up the Burlington chamber orchestra -- I was on the board of that organization for a number of years -- and he now travels the world. He

does so by a calling. He was and continues to be incredibly proficient as an artist, as a composer of classical music. No one can perform Mozart the way he does. He has taken his talent and, as I

say, he's now travelling the world. He has been called to a Christian ministry and he uses his talent and his calling to not only entertain people and distribute the beauty of music, but also to

make his message of Christianity one that is relevant in many parts of the world.

I mentioned before that, as tourism minister, I became familiar with Hamilton. You know, I must admit, and I say to many people who often talk about Hamilton

as Steeltown -- no one should take that in a negative sense. In fact, that is a huge compliment to the industrial history, the strength of that city. But beyond that, I agree with the member from

Stoney Creek that it is in fact one of the most beautiful cities, I believe, not only of this province but in this country. Every time I drive up that mountain along the escarpment, I am incredibly

amazed at how beautiful that view is and the privilege that people have of living there. On occasion, there's a hue that we all would like to see disappear. All of us in this place have a

responsibility in terms of the environment to ensure that the air matches the beauty of the escarpment. I think there are a number of initiatives that government and all of us in this place can

undertake to ensure that we work towards that. I want to compliment the city for the good work that it has done in terms of overcoming some of its challenges, its economic challenges, over the

years.

As Minister of Tourism, I stood beside my colleagues at the time who were advocating for Hamilton as the home of the 2010 Commonwealth Games. I worked with the

committee that was advancing that proposal. I want to again take this opportunity to commend the volunteerism within that city, because the work that they did I believe was second to none. They

made citizens of Hamilton proud, and I can tell you that, in my humble opinion, Hamilton should have been awarded the privilege of hosting those games -- to the credit of Delhi, who will host those

games. I'm sure that there will be other opportunities for the city of Hamilton to step forward in that regard.

I want to just read into the record an

article that appeared in the Hamilton Spectator not too long ago, and I think it's appropriate to wrap up my remarks in

this place with this story. The headline on April 7 reads -- I'm sure the members must have read this with a great deal of interest -- "John Tory Waves Blue Flag in Hamilton."

I will quote this: "After bunking overnight at the Sheraton Hamilton, Ontario Conservative leader John Tory got a chance to sample some other corners of the

city yesterday.

"He was booked for a couple of local radio shows, a swing through Hamilton Health Sciences, a face-to-face with McMaster University president Peter George and

a tour and meeting with executives of Arzon Ltd. in the city's east end.

"But Tory's most significant Steeltown stop took place Wednesday, the evening before, at a standup reception at the Chamber of Commerce overlooking the harbour

on Bay North.

"It was not just a party fundraising event. It was the first reception for an Ontario PC leader held in Hamilton in six years, indicating how much the party's

fortunes have slumped here," and that is true. I want to put members on notice that we intend to change that. "They obviously hope the fundraiser was a first step in turning that around.

"Guests included sitting Conservative MPPs Cam Jackson, Tim Hudak, Elizabeth Witmer and Ernie Hardeman, plus former local MPPs Brad Clark and Toni Skarica.

"Also spotted were the likes of Orlick Industries owner David Braley, Fellfab founder Don Fell, St. Joseph's Healthcare CEO Kevin Smith, executive consultant

Grant Walsh, former police chief Colin Millar, former city councillors Don Ross and Terry Anderson and council candidate Judi Partridge.

"Tory, who took over the leadership from Ernie Eves about 17 months ago, was smooth and composed, delivering his tidings in a confident, rapid-fire

manner."

I just want to, on behalf of John Tory and my caucus colleagues, express our support for Hamilton. We commend the member from Hamilton West for bringing this

forward, and we look forward to continuing to do what we can as a caucus to support Hamilton in showcasing all the very best that it has to offer this province.

The Deputy Speaker: Ms. Marsales, you have two minutes to respond.

Ms. Marsales: First, I want to thank my guests who took time out of their very busy schedules to come here and help us celebrate Hamilton.

Alice Willems, Drina Omasic, and David Adames, thank you ever so much.

I want to thank my esteemed colleagues for speaking to this bill. Minister Bountrogianni, member McMeekin, member Mossop, member Horwath, member Klees, thank

you all so very much for speaking to this.

These members joined some political giants from Hamilton, names like Thomas McQuesten, Ellen Fairclough, John Munro, Lincoln Alexander, our own Dr. Stuart

Smith, and how about Sheila Copps, one of the most dominant political figures, a woman from Hamilton who rose to be the first deputy prime minister of Canada?

We have barely scratched the surface of Hamilton's remarkable assets and legacy. Did you know that one of the first cities in the world to have widespread

electric lights for streets and homes was Hamilton? It was known as Electric City. But today, Hamilton is also recognized as a leader in cogeneration, thanks to and a tribute to the engineering

genius and leadership of someone named Don Marsales.

Hamilton has so much to celebrate. Today we are a community of aspiration. We are a community of the future. We're a community of hope, dreams, entrepreneurial

spirit. We are going to stick together to make this one of the greatest communities to be proud of in Ontario, in Hamilton, Canada.

Thank you for all of your support today. I look forward to everybody coming to Hamilton, joining in this great celebration. On the first Wednesday in October

of every year, we are going to have a party. Let's celebrate Hamilton.

HOMESTEAD ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006

SUR LE PATRIMOINE FAMILIAL

Mr. Hudak moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 75,

An Act to amend the Assessment Act with respect to homesteads / Projet de loi 75, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'évaluation foncière a

l'égard des patrimoines familiaux.

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

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I thank in advance my colleagues of all three parties who are going to address this bill.

We all know, as MPPs from across the province, that working families, seniors and young people are facing higher taxes, higher home heating costs, increased

user fees and, as we saw yesterday, escalating energy costs in Dalton McGuinty's Ontario. Rapidly increasing property assessments and resulting property tax increases are now simply unaffordable to

the beleaguered Ontario taxpayers, who have experienced, in the last several years, volatile property assessment increases for a number of reasons, and very importantly because of a hot housing

market in various parts of the province.

The facts are that the average assessed home in Ontario has leapt from $179,000 in 2003's taxation year to $232,000 for 2006 taxes. In this past year, the

average provincial assessment increase in the residential tax class was 14.35%, with many municipalities represented by members here in the assembly today reporting increases from 15% to 35%, and

those were just averages. I know that some people in Peterborough, for example, probably experienced double or even triple the average, and they're very concerned about the tax increases that come

about as a result. In fact, from the work of many of my colleagues, we've been getting e-mails and distressing letters about shocking assessment increases, some hitting the triple digits from the

past year alone.

I want to thank a number of individuals who are now joining us in the gallery who have come here from across the province of Ontario in support of the

Homestead Act. As well, a number of organizations have put their support behind the principles of the Homestead Act, and I do appreciate what they have done to help this legislation gain momentum.

I'd like to mention Lawrence Barker, the executive director of the Canadian Snowbirds Federation. Bob Topp, president of the Waterfront Ratepayers After Fair Taxation, WRAFT, has joined us today.

Brian Maguire is here today as well, and he joined us yesterday in the assembly. He represents the Federation of Urban Neighbourhoods and also is the chair of the Confederation of Resident and

Ratepayer Associations in Toronto. Peter Baker, an old friend of the family whom I haven't seen in years, has joined us as well. He's the co-chair of the Federation of North Toronto Residents

Association. Terry Rees is another, from the Federation of Ontario Cottagers' Associations. I was very pleased, furthermore, that Mayor Michael Di Biase and Councillor Meffe from the city of

Vaughan have become 100% behind this bill, passed a resolution and took the time to join us this morning in a press conference indicating that they are 100% behind this bill. I appreciate their

efforts to be here today. I also want to thank members of the PC caucus -- Garfield Dunlop, Norm Miller, Frank Klees, John Yakabuski, Laurie Scott, among others -- who have given great advice on

this bill. Those five, particularly, are going to bring their own remarks today.

I think members know that the scathing report of the Ombudsman that came out a couple of weeks ago had some excellent recommendations, and we hope the Minister

of Finance will actually direct MPAC to take up those recommendations.

The Ombudsman's report, though, also indicated some long-term solutions to the issue. His 22 recommendations address the issues of today, but the Ombudsman, in

his appendix, particularly talked about advice he had heard surrounding caps on assessment increases and the unfairness of taxing individuals, particularly seniors, on the unrealized capital gains

of their homes. It was not in the Ombudsman's mandate to actually endorse this -- he said that was in the hands of legislators -- but the fact that he took the time to include such ideas in his

report I take as hints for legislators to pursue. Those aspects are captured in our legislation, Bill 75, the Homestead Act, today.

The Canadian National Taxpayers Coalition has also written to my office, and I'll give you excerpt from the letter: "I am writing you today" -- that was to me

-- "to express our appreciation for your action of introducing the Homestead Act, 2006, in the provincial Legislature. Your ideas of limiting the skyrocketing assessment within Ontario and its

effect on everyone, particularly senior citizens and those on fixed incomes, are very accurate." I appreciate the support of the Canadian National Taxpayers Coalition, as well as the Canadian

Taxpayers Federation.

I have another set of endorsement letters, but I think in the interest of time I'll move on to some real-life examples.

Here's a letter sent by a constituent to Norm Miller, the member for Parry Sound-Muskoka, that he was kind enough to share with me: "Our assessment increased

by 177.6%. This is not only ludicrous, as there were no properties like ours that have been sold in the last year, but from where we sit, it looks like a smash-and-grab attempt on the part of the

government. It is difficult not to be cynical when the last time we had to appeal our assessment on the same property, the island" -- I guess they live on -- "miraculously increased by 50%.... The

fourth generation of our family is now enjoying the legacy that is our family cottage, but they worry about losing that legacy, as many other families across the province." That was from Jane

Mackinnon and Sally Skinner.

Here's an e-mail from Brendan Egan from Oakville. He says, "Please do something. My taxes have gone up 35% to 45% over the last four years, just because the

area I'm in, north Oakville, has gone crazy with real estate prices, but the tax rate has gone up at the same time." He wishes us all the best on the legislation.

David Harrison writes from Fort Erie, the town in which I grew up. Mr. Harrison says, "I am a 68-year-old retired senior with 20 years of experience providing

government, banks and trusts and large corporations with effective, retrievable and readable policies and procedures. Based on my experience of MPAC, they are sorely in need of major overhaul." He

wishes us the best on MPAC and has come fully behind this bill because of the impact on his permanent residence in the town of Fort Erie.

Just to review for members of the assembly the items contained in the Homestead Act, I would like to highlight the four following main policy initiatives.

If the Homestead Act became law, it would effectively cap increases on residential property assessments for tax purposes at 5% a year. This annual cap would be

maintained as long as the owner of the home remains the same. Once the home is sold, the assessment for tax purposes would revert to current value assessment.

The bill, if passed, would allow transfer of ownership within a family. If the residence were transferred to a spouse or child of the owner, the cap protection

would remain in place.

Furthermore, it would create an incentive for home improvements. Currently, homeowners are concerned that repairs and improvements to their homes will result

in higher assessments and, therefore, higher property taxes. Under the Homestead Act, Ontario homeowners could make up to $25,000 in home repairs and improvements or additions per year -- it would

act as a deductible -- without fearing their assessment would go up by that value.

Fourth, it would create property tax reduction for seniors and the disabled. Under the Homestead Act, seniors and the disabled would not pay property taxes on

the first $10,000 of their principal residence.

The last highlight: It would also require MPAC to maintain a record of the current assessed value of the land and property and provide that copy to landowners

within 24 hours free of charge.

There's no doubt that when we came into office as the Mike Harris government in the mid-1990s, we inherited an assessment system that was broken. You had

values in the city of Toronto from the 1940s; in the GTA it was often the 1970s; in Niagara, where I'm from, it was in the 1990s. It was a bizarre assessment world, where folks living in modest

homes ended up paying higher taxes because of higher assessments than some living in mansions that had been assessed in the 1940s. We were also in an environment that had just recently gone through

decreasing property values in the province of Ontario, and then, through the mid- and late 1990s, modest increases. Today, a hot housing market has propelled assessments to skyrocketing levels that

are simply no longer affordable to average middle-class families, seniors and young people in the province.

I think all members of the assembly here today support that Canadian dream of home ownership: the opportunity for a young family to buy a home, the opportunity

for that family, once they have children, to pass it on to their children, or for those who have a secondary residence or a cottage to pass it on from generation to generation to generation. There

is a value in Canadian home ownership that helps define our identity. That value is threatened today because of the skyrocketing assessments, meaning seniors and young families can no longer stay

in residences, particularly those that have been in their families for a long time.

I do appreciate the advice I've received from my caucus colleagues here today, and also members opposite here today who may not be in my party but share the

same views and the same principles of this bill, whether it's in Peterborough or Flamborough or here in the city of Toronto or in Brantford, in Oak Ridges or in Parry Sound-Muskoka, who want to see

an assessment system that makes sense, like they have in Florida or Michigan or the province of Nova Scotia. I hope I can count on members of all three parties for their support today.

The Deputy Speaker: Further debate?

Mr. Rosario Marchese (Trinity-Spadina): Thank you, Speaker. I'll be sharing my time with the member from Beaches-East York.

It's going to be a pleasure, for the brief time I have, to be able to attack the Tories as best I can, and share that attack on the Liberals as equally and as

respectfully as I can. I want to say, it is a blessing to have the Conservative Party in opposition, it is, because I have seen remarkable changes in the Conservative Party since they have been in

opposition. In fact, while we still disagree on almost 95% of the cases, there are issues that we think are interesting from the point of view of opposition, and there are times when we agree with

them. It's a remarkable metamorphosis. It's good to see you here, John, right beside me. It is good that you're fighting for some of the folks here, fighting for a reduction in their property taxes

-- and well-deserved, because we have a problem with the system.

God bless the Tories. When they introduced the current value assessment system, boy, were they gung-ho. They were so gung-ho, in spite of the opposition that

we presented as New Democrats. I don't remember these folks coming here saying, "This is going to be evil." But they've realized -- good -- because they now have the experience of current value

assessment to know the full impact, so they're here saying, "We support the Tories now, in opposition, but we had doubts about them when they introduced the bill." That's okay. There's still time

for people to have a better assessment of this current value assessment scheme that we're dealing with today, and the member from Erie-Lincoln is concerned, legitimately so, by introducing a very

modest bill that will give some measure of protection.

But the other problem that the Tories introduced was the download. You remember now: downloads, uploads -- for you it means nothing; I understand that. What

the government did was to say, "We're going to take half of the property taxes that go to education and we're going to lift them up," which is called uploading, "and the province will pay for

that." But then what they did to make it so-called revenue-neutral was that they downloaded to the cities, to the municipal sector, a whole lot of other responsibilities: ambulances, public health,

housing -- about a billion bucks and more of the social services. That's called downloading. That was supposed to be revenue-neutral. The Tories still insist now in opposition that it was; we New

Democrats say that it was never revenue-neutral. That meant that property tax owners and tenants and businesses had to pick up more of the costs. That's what it meant. They deny it -- "they"

meaning the Tories beside me -- but it's a reality; that's what happened. That's the big problem that needs to be solved.

Now, the bill that the member from Erie-Lincoln introduces today is a modest --

Mr. Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): What an exaggerator you've become.

Mr. Marchese: Dunlop, you're going to have an opportunity to speak. I want to hear him, and you want to hear him, too.

Interjection: I don't want to hear him.

Interjections.

Mr. Jeff Leal (Peterborough): Frankly, I want to hear you, too.

The Deputy Speaker: I'd like to hear him too, so let's have some stability here.

Mr. Marchese: Thank you, Speaker. I'm always addressing you as well.

While this bill makes a modest attempt to deal with the problems, it doesn't deal with the fundamentals. Maybe my colleague Michael is going to talk about a

lot of these things; I'm not quite sure which ones he's going to touch on. But the whole idea of the bill provides that the first $25,000 in repairs, improvements made by an owner "will not be

considered to increase the current value of the land." That's okay. It's a marginal value. You'll make a couple of dollars of savings -- small, though.

The other matter of the disabled and those 65 years of age or over who would have their assessment "reduced by an amount of up to $10,000" -- that might save a

hundred bucks for senior citizens, more or less, give or take, here or there. That's okay. That would be fine as a modest improvement to the disaster they introduced it's not so bad, I guess. I'll

leave my colleague Michael to speak about the caps.

But the real problem here is that we've got to take off of the shoulders of the property tax owners -- that includes seniors, yes, and others -- we've got to

lift up education and we've got to slowly say to the province, "We have to start paying for that." How do we pay for that? Through a fairer income tax system, an income tax system that says that if

you're working and you have a higher income, we want to be able to have you share a little of that income with seniors who no longer have the ability to pay for the kinds of things that we need in

society.

An income tax system is better because it says that those who have an income can pay a little more, and for most seniors who are poor or who no longer have the

kind of income that could permit for these kind of payments, it can help. But if you whack them over and over again with property tax increases, including current value assessment increases that

jack up the tax even more, they're stuck; they're alone without a little help.

The Liberals have done nothing to deal with this. You recall Sorbara, the former Minister of Finance, said, "We're going to review this for a year and a half."

He did; he reviewed it for a year and half, came back, and you know what? The fee to appeal your property taxes went up from 20 or 25 bucks to 75 bucks. That's all we got from Sorbara: "You're

going to get whacked, if you go to appeal your taxes, from 20 or 25 bucks to 75 bucks." Thank you very much, Minister of Finance, for all your good help and your review for a year and a half.

The Tories set up the Municipal Property Assessment Corp. and the cities have to pay for that. The cities have to go and get the tax rolls. They have to pay

for that, and you have to pay for that. It's not the province that pays for it; cities have to pay for the cost to get the property tax rolls -- a system set up by my good friends -- John's friends

-- who were then in government.

So what do we have to do? We've got to lift the property tax base: Six billion dollars out of the $18 billion that is coming out of property taxes is for

education alone. The other big one is social assistance: ODSP, Ontario Works and related drug programs -- $1.3 billion on the backs of property owners that has nothing to do with municipal services

whatsoever; about one billion bucks for social housing, courtesy of the former Conservative government, downloaded on property taxpayers; one billion bucks, courtesy of my friends here on the

right, $1 billion. What has that to do with municipal services that a homeowner gets for providing social housing? Nada; zip; nihil; nothing. That's courtesy of my good colleagues now in

opposition, so cozily ensconced in their seats. It's beautiful to see them here; I hope they'll stay here for a long while.

But I want to say that the Liberals, God bless them, have done absolutely nothing. You've got the Minister of Finance here, full of hubris every day, talking

about, "Oh, we're so great in doing so much." They're doing absolutely nothing.

Yes, this system needs a review, but the real system review has to do with making sure the province picks up for things that have nothing to do with property

taxes, and until we do that, the system will be unalterably broken. What this new bill does is a little tinkering, to fix the fundamental problems they've caused. So by and large --

Mr. Dunlop: Are you going to vote for it or not?

Mr. Marchese: By and large, we support it, even though --

Interruption.

The Deputy Speaker: Member take his seat. I remind our guests in the galleries that the excitement is on the floor and we wish you would just

quietly listen to it. Thank you.

Mr. Marchese: My colleague will speak about some of the other measures here. I just wanted to put on the record for the good folks who are

here supporting this member and this party on this modest bill that it will give you a little modest help if we pass it through, but I tell you that unless we do the fundamental changes -- that's

where I'm going to see whether your friends here are going to be on our side when we talk about how the province needs to take on the uploading of those social costs that have nothing to do with

property taxes.

Mr. Wayne Arthurs (Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge): I think the member for Trinity-Spadina got it right, in part, when he said there are some

fundamental problems and those fundamental problems deal with the regressive nature of property tax when it has to support social programs. We got there over a long period of time, and we got there

very fast over the eight years the former government was in office, by driving down those social programs on to the municipal property tax base. They're the ones that are really growing. That's

where the pressure point is. It's not just assessment issues.

Speaking more specifically to the bill, the work we need to do on that front has only just begun. Certainly the fair sharing of ambulance that was committed to

by the former government -- they downloaded that, but never fulfilled that obligation. They allowed the municipalities to pick up a bigger and bigger share. We're moving it back up so that it will

be a fairly shared program at 50-50. We're moving up the public health costs on to the province --

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: Order.

Mr. Arthurs: So we're acknowledging and recognizing the regressive nature of property tax and --

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: I remind the member from Huron-Bruce and the member for Simcoe North that we're listening to the speaker who has the

floor.

Mr. Arthurs: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We can't reverse that trend in a matter of months, and frankly, even in a matter of a year or two. So we can't divorce the issue of the assessment from that

fundamental issue of the regressive nature of property tax.

I find this specific piece of legislation very interesting. I think it could have been written by Mike Harris and I want to tell you why. If one looks closely

at the legislation -- I'm going to give you a couple of example, and if you have pencil and paper, you may want to keep a note of some numbers. These are rough.

Let's assume that the assessment on a property is $200,000, for lack of a better number; it's a nice round number. Let's assume that for the next taxation year

the assessment is going to go up 10%. That seems like a pretty good starting point. Let's assume the property owner puts $25,000 into that property to put in a basement apartment, because this

property owner is buying an investment property. It's not his or her principal residence.

With that $200,000, if they're paying 1% of that in taxes -- it's a nice round number; it's not accurate in every municipality by any means -- they're paying

$2,000 in taxes right now. With a reassessed value, at 10%, and the $25,000 investment in the basement apartment, and with the cap in place, my calculations have that person saving -- over what

they would pay on the full assessed value, with the improvements, of $245,000 -- some $422.50 on their tax bill. Now, that's great for the landlord, but they're not just saving it once; they're

saving it year after year. I don't think that's a fair system. I don't think it's a fair system to the vast majority of property owners in the province of Ontario.

Are there disparities in the system as a result of the growth of assessment on certain property classes? No doubt. Waterfront property in particular, as the

member from Niagara indicated in his comments -- sorry, I always want to get it right.

Mr. Hudak: Erie-Lincoln.

Mr. Arthurs: Erie-Lincoln. Waterfront property is taking a big hit on the assessment front.

One of the questions I'd be asking the mayor of Vaughan, since he was at the press conference this morning, is, if he has a 10% or 15% average assessment

increase in property tax classes in his municipality, did he reset his tax base down by 10% to reflect that assessment growth? If he did, he's acting responsibly; if he didn't, he's gouging his

taxpayers, because then he's marking that up another 5% and claiming that's his tax increase. So that's the first question that has to be asked: Is the municipality that has a 10% or 15% tax

increase resetting so that that first 10% becomes net zero and that person who had the small tax increase or assessment actually gets a break? That's the first and most critical question that has

to be asked.

I could probably go on for some considerable time. Unfortunately, in private members' public business, our time is limited and it needs to be shared around.

This legislation, although well-intended to begin to address an issue, favours those who can acquire property, who can invest in property, and from the municipal standpoint in no way addresses a

legislative framework that's very difficult -- I'd be asking the question. It's very difficult to find how one deals with municipalities that aren't doing what they should do. What they should be

doing is resetting their residential tax rate, making that clear in their tax bill and then applying whatever they need for additional service costs. That's a fair approach in the short term as we

try to deal with this fundamental question of the regressive nature of property tax and the implications of having social programs on property tax, let alone trying to deal with the anomalies, in

particular the anomalies around waterfront property and/or some anomalies in very large assessment increases in pockets of property in municipalities. But those things don't deal with the vast

majority of people and the implications for them.

I thank you for your time and look forward to the balance of the debate this morning.

Mr. Dunlop: I'm very pleased this morning to speak to the member for Erie-Lincoln's private member's bill, the Homestead Act, 2006. It's

legislation that I'm glad is being debated here today. If the members of the assembly do not support this bill, then the government absolutely has to do something.

Throughout time, assessments have been a problem. We know that. I've been around politics for 25 years, and long before I was there, there were issues around

assessment. As far as I know, when the Mike Harris government brought in the current value assessment, there were a number of areas where we had to make amendments -- not a question. And you know

what? We're making an amendment today, and I believe that long into the future, circumstances will come up where we'll have to make other amendments to the MPAC system, to the current value system.

It's just a fact of life in a province the size of Ontario.

What bothers me today is how this has hit taxpayers across our province. This is at a time when they're seeing gasoline at 99 cents a litre this morning. I

guess that's probably doubled since Dalton McGuinty came to office. We've now seen the Minister of Energy -- well, it was a broken promise, but the Premier came up with -- what? -- a 16% increase

in electricity rates. And now we've seen, with the property assessments, huge increases across our province.

The member from Uxbridge makes a good point about the tax rate. There's no question about that; that's an issue. But you have the power and the authority on

that side of the House to correct that as well. You can do that.

I'm very concerned that we're driving people out of their homes. A lot of people think, because a lot of the issues here have been brought up by waterfront

cottage property associations, that cottages are only for the rich. I can tell you that throughout the province there are literally thousands and thousands of lakes, and I'm going to zero in on

lakes for just one moment. Most of them are not mansions. Most of them are not for very wealthy people. A lot of people who are fourth, fifth and sixth generation have passed down these places,

these summer cottages and recreational homes, to their families for the future. They don't want to sell them. That's where they go to have their family time. I can tell you that in a riding like

Simcoe North, I have about 500 kilometres of shoreline; most of it is lined with cottages. They're not all mansions. They're not all permanent residents; they're people who use them from May to

October.

I appreciate -- the whip's giving me the eye right now; he wants me to sit down because there are four other speakers who want to make comments on this

fantastic bill. I urge everybody in the House to support this bill today. I hope we can have a recorded vote on it.

Mr. Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): In the five minutes that I have, I've got so much to cover. I'd like to start by congratulating the

member from Erie-Lincoln for this bill. New Democrats will be supporting the bill in spite of the fact that we do have some reservations. I'd like to deal with that in the body of my speech.

This bill, as my colleague from Trinity-Spadina has correctly stated, flows from a mistake made by the previous government. It flows from the fact that they

put all their eggs in the basket that market value assessment, CVA, was going to work for the benefit of all of the people of Ontario. Quite clearly, it has not.

It also flows from the misconception of that government that a great many things should be taken from the property tax, things which are not related to the

ordinary workings of municipalities. It is well respected in law and in history in this country that municipal taxation was supposed to deal with things of a local nature. It was supposed to be for

the roads. It was supposed to be for the sewers. In some cases, it was for rural schoolhouses when communities were isolated. It was supposed to be for things of that nature. It wasn't a tax; it

was assessment. It was an assessment per household in order to accomplish common village and town goals. But I'll tell you, they took it a whole step further, and I'm going to get to that in the

end.

Today I attended, at 10 o'clock, the press conference held by the member from Erie-Lincoln. The press had a number of very real questions, which I think are

going to have to be answered during the life of this bill, should this bill be sent to committee. They questioned, and quite rightly so, that there is a lack of support from the Association of

Municipalities of Ontario, who see that this may cause some difficulties for their member associations and for municipalities, because as you cap the money at the top that you're getting in, that

will actually reduce the amount that is available to the municipalities unless you cap the bottom, unless you cap the decreases as well, and it is not revenue neutral. If the cap goes in at 5%, it

will result in lower revenues for the municipalities. Or, in the alternative, then all taxpayers are going to have to pick up the difference. Therefore, those who have properties that escalate more

than 5% will be subsidized by the rest of the taxpayers. That is an alternative that many people are going to look at very carefully and perhaps more than a few would not support. We need to look

at not increasing the burden on taxpayers.

Notwithstanding that, I do believe the bill is timely. We all have residents. I have people in Beaches-East York and people who own cottage properties, and

people come to see me from all over Ontario who are concerned about losing their homes. This is particularly from amongst those people who are retired, those on fixed incomes, those who are

disabled and those who have low-paying jobs. We know that something needs to be done.

New Democrats believe that this is something that can work in the short term. We believe that the cap of 5% should be implemented, but we do not believe it is

a long-term solution. It is something that should be done in the very near future and possibly only for couple of years until we come to more permanent solutions.

We believe that the transfer that maintains the caps in perpetuity as properties are handed down from generation to generation may be problematic as well. But

in terms of what we are saying, a short term will not really result in this.

The home repairs is a good idea because so many home repairs that take place in this province are done outside of municipalities actually knowing about them.

Many people do these home repairs surreptitiously so that they don't have to claim it. We'd like it to be right out in the open and have it regulated. We would like to know that it is happening. To

allow a certain amount of money to be exempt is a good idea.

Last but not least, we agree with the provision as it relates to seniors and the disabled.

Last fall, the New Democratic Party realized that this was a really huge issue out there when people started to get their assessments and when people were

starting to talk. I remember asking questions of the finance minister on the day that we decided to do something and we were ridiculed. We were told that this was ridiculous and that the Liberal

Party and the government had absolutely no intention of doing anything. We could have guessed that, because they had commissioned the now Minister of Immigration and Citizenship to do a report.

That report has been hidden, it has never been released to the public, and if any members of the Liberal Party have seen it, they are the only ones. The minister promised to do something and has

literally done nothing.

I tell you, we set up our own task force. It has some great members on it: Alex Cullen, a former member of this legislature, now a councillor in Ottawa; Ethel

LaValley, the reeve of Lake St. Peter; Chris Charlton, who many know is now a member of Parliament in Hamilton; Tam Goossen, a former school board trustee of the Toronto board and Jeff Atkinson. We

are holding meetings and have held meetings across Ontario, meetings in Toronto, meetings in Hamilton, Ottawa, London this Tuesday night, Peterborough and Thunder Bay in the future, possibly

Sudbury, back to Toronto and Hamilton again. We would like to hear from ordinary people because the long-term solution is uploading the download. That's the long term solution. If you want to get

in touch with us: www.ouchassessment.org.

Mr. Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): It certainly is a pleasure to join the debate today on private members' business. Let me say from the

outset that as a private member, I will be supporting this bill today. I do that for a number of reasons. If I had to characterize this bill, I guess I would say it's a well-written bill. Whoever

the staff people were who worked on this bill did a good job. Now, the audacity in bringing it forward, however, is startling. It's still not going to prevent me from supporting it, however.

I've got a long and strong background of property tax reform. During the early 1990s and into the mid 1990s, I chaired both the Oakville and the Halton

citizens' committee on property tax reform. What we did -- a group of ordinary citizens, maybe some people even in the public gallery today -- is that we took about a year and a half out of our

lives and we sat down and we looked at property tax systems in Ontario. We advised the various levels of government and the various parties as to what should constitute a fair property tax system.

What we came up with when we looked at CVA and when we looked at MVA was that it wasn't based at all on any ability to pay. The great Canadian tradition of taxing based on your ability to pay: MVA

does not have that; CVA does not have that either. It's not based in any way on the services you receive from the level of government. And it alters your consuming habits: It often puts seniors in

a position where they have to sell their homes at a time when they're on a fixed income and the property values are escalating.

What we're saying, and what I'm saying today certainly, is that something needs to be done about it. Something needs to be done to correct the damage that was

inflicted by the previous government on the taxpayers of this province. This is a very small step. It's a step that I'm supportive of. As I said, as a private member, I would like to see a lot more

done, and I hope to see a lot more done in the future.

This certainly sets the tone, this certainly stimulates the debate, but I don't think anybody who is paying attention to this issue today should make any

mistake as to where this property tax system came from -- and that was from the previous government. Despite the advice of citizens' committees such as the one I chaired telling them all the things

that were wrong on this, despite looking at various other taxation systems from around the world, the previous government, the Mike Harris government -- some members present today in the

Conservative Party at that time -- decided that they were going to inflict this damage on the people of this province. That is wrong. That is simply wrong.

By supporting this bill today, it goes a short way and small way to making some corrections to a terrible damage that was done to Ontario taxpayers during the

Mike Harris days.

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): It's my pleasure to rise today in support of Bill 75, the Homestead Act, brought forward by the member

for Erie-Lincoln. It's about allowing people to stay in their homes, not be forced off because of skyrocketing assessment. Many people are retiring in Parry Sound-Muskoka and many are on fixed

incomes. In the short three minutes I have to speak on this bill, I wanted to read some of the many letters I've received to illustrate how some constituents in Parry Sound-Muskoka are being

affected.

I'll read a letter from Gord and Robin Anderson:

"In 1987 we purchased our property on a small rural lake in Joly township for the sum of $20,000. Being young and willing to work hard we set about building

our dream home.... Unfortunately it has become apparent that the home we could afford to build, maintain and enjoy debt-free is slowly being forced from us due to property taxation. Our biggest

household expense next to groceries is property taxes. It eclipses our hydro, heating, insurance and every other household expense.... The only service we have is road maintenance. There is no

garbage pickup, no street lights, no municipal sewers or water. So why are we as residents paying over $6,084.68 a year in taxes? This year we are looking at a tax bill that could be as high as

$9,500, due to yet another drastic increase in our property assessment. Is this not an unfair tax burden? It in no way reflects our income or ability to pay. Ontario is becoming a province where

only the rich can afford waterfront.... We are being forced out by government. Is there not a fairer tax system? Please consider addressing this problem. As citizens of Ontario, we shouldn't be

forced out of our home because of rising taxes. We respectfully await your reply.

"Gord and Robin Anderson."

Another letter from Georgian Bay township:

"Dear Mr. Miller:

"I and my wife are retired permanent residents in Georgian Bay township....

"We just received our new assessment which has gone up 66%....

"We are not selling, have no prospect of income to cover this new assessment....

"Unless the Ontario government wants us pushed off our land, what are we to do?"

Another one from Huntsville:

"I live on 75-foot-wide lot on Mary Lake that I bought in 1968 for $3,300. In 1972, I built a modest house on it (24 by 40) with plans of retiring

there....

"This year many things have come up that has left me wondering how to survive without having to sell....

"My spouse has a part-time job and our total income for 2004 was $37,723. My property tax for 2005 was $3,378, almost 10% of total income, and with a 64%

increase in the assessed value, who knows what it will be."

Tim Hudak's Homestead Act would provide stability, limiting assessment increases to 5% and allowing people to continue to afford to stay in their homes.

I will let the other PC members continue with this debate.

Ms. Jennifer F. Mossop (Stoney Creek): I'm pleased to rise to speak on this bill, which attempts to address a concern that many people have. I

have a tremendous problem with the fact that people are potentially, and in reality, being driven out of their homes by higher tax rates, homes they've owned for a long time that they had the great

foresight or the great fortune to have purchased in a lovely area. Because we have a red-hot real estate market, property assessments are going through the roof, and thus, in many cases, so are

their taxes.

This brings us to an issue I keep raising. I think that if your property has gone up and you've got a good investment, that is a source for celebration. Then

we need to talk to our local municipalities and say, "What about that tax rate?" Our government took the education tax rate, which is based on property value assessment, and mitigated it. We made

it revenue-neutral so they wouldn't have this huge spike. That can be done everywhere with municipalities in this province.

But the fact of the matter -- I'm sorry we have to keep going back to it -- is that as 2007 and that next election come closer and closer, I keep hearing from

members of the former government, "Yes, well, you're right. That amalgamation thing didn't really work out. Trust us. If you elect us again, we'll fix it." And, "You know what? That MPAC thing --

you're right. It didn't really work. It is a bit of a hash. But trust us. If you elect us, we'll fix it."

What's being proposed today is not much more than a Band-Aid at this point. I have a tremendous amount of difficulty with that whole concept. We have a

thoughtful Ombudsman's report right now with 22 recommendations, which we are looking at. We, as a provincial government, are addressing the tax rate. We are also addressing some of the downloading

issues. We are uploading public health costs. We are uploading land ambulance costs. We are moving in that direction to try to ease -- with our Ontario municipal partnership fund, we have been

mitigating some of the damage done by the social services downloading.

It was a tremendous disaster. It's not something you can unscramble overnight, but it is something we are working at incrementally, because it is unfair, it

did not work, and we were left with such a mess that we're working at. There's a certain amount of gall in all this.

Also, the measures that are proposed today are a band-aid. It kind of works but it doesn't work. It's a bit like Whac-a-Mole, because if you whack it down here

with a cap, it's going to pop up somewhere else, and that's just a reality. So somebody is going to get hurt anyway. I even have a letter here from the township of Wainfleet which says that they're

not going to be supporting this private member's bill, the Homestead Act. They don't think it's the answer. It's not the answer. But I appreciate the fact that he is attempting to address an

incredible mess that was made by the previous government.

Mrs. Carol Mitchell (Huron-Bruce): I can't tell you how pleased I am to rise and speak to this. I was head of a county that was not only

forced into an amalgamation, but then survived downloading -- one service after another till we were on our knees begging for mercy. And then the audacity of bringing forward a private member's

bill to once again tinker with a system that is fundamentally flawed.

There are caps in place right now. Municipalities can already address those caps. The riding that I have the honour and privilege to represent has all these

anomalies. I have a large lakeshore. I have increases that are not sustainable by my constituents, I can tell you. I have low-growth areas. I have agriculture; it is facing a crisis right now. I

look at all of those things.

Interjection.

Mrs. Mitchell: Please don't say to me from the opposite side that this is grandstanding. I begged you to not force amalgamation. I begged you

to not dump on our rural communities, communities that could not afford to sustain these services.

We as a government recognize that we have much work to do. I can tell you, when I hear from members across that we aren't doing anything -- last week in the

riding of Huron-Bruce we announced almost $1 million in uploading ambulances. That's per annum. That's a $300-million commitment that we put on the table. I'm only talking about one service.

I also want to talk about what taxation does and the deficit that we have, not only in the services we provide. I want to talk about the infrastructure deficit

we face as well. So capping was in place. It's a tool that can be used by the municipalities today. But I can tell you, it's not the answer, it's not the long-term answer. It's about recognizing

where the appropriate place is for those services and that infrastructure to be paid for. Once again, I see a recommendation coming forward to tinker, so that we can stand up and say, "We tinkered,

we did this." But, I say to the people who are watching today, I was there, I saw it and the devastation that it caused in our rural communities. We will be a long time getting it turned

around.

Mr. Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): I want to support my colleague on this bill. It makes a great deal of sense. It's timely, it's important.

It is unconscionable that residents of this province -- seniors, people on fixed incomes, anyone -- should have to lose their home or their cottage because of

an assessment issue that, quite frankly, has unintended consequences. I believe that the member's proposal makes a great deal of sense.

As for some of the technical issues, I want to point out to members of this House that the capping that's being proposed -- the homestead component of this

bill -- is not something new. There are jurisdictions where this is being done and has been done for a number of years; the state of Florida is just one of them. I suggest that rather than making

excuses about why this couldn't work, we find out how to make it work. The objective here is to take a principle of assessment, ensure that it fits the requirements and the needs of our province

where there are incredibly inflated prices going on in the real estate market. This is a practical way to deal with that.

I support this member and I look to this government, that has now been in government for two and a half years, to stop nickel and diming around this issue as

the government that has the responsibility to in fact do something about this issue.

Mr. John Yakabuski (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke): It's a pleasure to rise in support of my colleague from Erie-Lincoln's Bill 75 today, the

Homestead Act.

I want to thank Councillor Gerry Belisle from the township of South Algonquin for his input helping me with this issue, and also for having resolutions passed

in that township with regard to Tim's act and current value assessment in general, and the workings of the Municipal Property Assessment Corp.

Today we've heard a lot of talk about the past, but we're dealing with the issue of today. Two and a half years ago, this government across the floor promised

to deal with a system that we were all aware was not functioning properly any more, and the reason is -- and my colleague articulated that -- when this system was brought into place, no one

anticipated the massive short-term serious assessment increases that properties were going to have in this province, which have changed the dynamics entirely with regard to the taxes paid by people

and the assessment --

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker: Order. Let's calm down. I can't hear the speaker. The member for Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke has the floor.

Mr. Yakabuski: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is our responsibility as legislators to recognize when something has to be amended or changed. We do

it all the time in legislation. I commend my colleague for showing the courage and the initiative to bring forth this act because, after a year and a half of wringing their hands, hemming and

hawing and tap dancing on this issue, they came back with nothing.

Shame on the former finance minister for shelving the report of his parliamentary assistant that was designed to do something about this very issue. I commend

my colleague for doing something. We're not suggesting this is the be-all and end-all, but this is a courageous start on an important initiative to address a system that has to be addressed in the

province of Ontario. He talked about somebody writing a letter to him that said, "Please do something." That was so important and so pertinent because this government has done nothing on this

issue. Mr. Hudak is at least doing something. I'm not sure this is the exact answer, but I look at a lot of the components of the bill, and it goes a long way to satisfying many of the needs.

If this government, in legislation of its own, is prepared to do something that addresses this need, the need to correct this inequity in this province, then

table legislation and bring it forward. They've put a 90-day extension on appeals, so they recognize that there's a problem.

Mr. Marin, the Ombudsman, produced a scathing 94-page report of a system that needs to be re-evaluated. For goodness' sake: To criticize Mr. Hudak for bringing

forth a bill that acts on some of those issues and some of those recommendations when this government chooses to sit there and do nothing is, quite frankly, surprising.

As I said, I want to talk about how MPAC is working. In fact, if you get your property notice, it will say, "Property values as of January 1, 2005." Well, I

have been given evidence to show that they've used property values going well into 2005 for determining assessments -- not property, but sales, sales going well into 2005 -- when in fact right on

their own letters it says we only use stuff to January 1, 2005. So there is a serious issue that the government needs to address.

This bill that will cap assessments on those properties and deal with the reality of exploding assessments in the 21st century is a very significant step, and

I support Mr. Hudak's bill. If there are positive amendments that can be proposed at committee, I'm sure he's prepared to look at that, and we're all prepared to look at that too.

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): I'm pleased to join the debate today on the Homestead Act introduced by my colleague and friend

the member from Erie-Lincoln. He's introduced it because, as we've heard today, there is growing, widespread concern about property assessment in Ontario.

I can tell you that one of the first problems that came to my office when I was elected was about MPAC. It was about seasonal residents, trailer park owners,

sugar bush, golf course owners, full-time residents, equestrian centres. They were all united in telling me there's a problem with MPAC.

Was MPAC bringing fairness to our property tax system? Does it need some changes? Yes, it does. Many members have said this. When I say it has been a problem

for the two and a half years since I've been here, you've had lots of time to act over there as a government.

When you see the average residential property assessment go up 30% in Ontario -- in Haliburton county alone, I think we had the highest increase in assessments

in Ontario in the last assessment round. My riding of Haliburton-Victoria-Brock is blessed with many, many lakes, and certainly the waterfront owners are upset. As has been said here, there are

people who have inherited cottage properties and made them their permanent homes. They are seniors on fixed incomes. To hear their stories of improper accumulation of data, the reverse onus on the

landowner to say that it's wrong, the roads travelled trying to get that information to prove that it's wrong -- I have letters from my constituents. They were shocked. It "does not seem fair.

People who have worked hard, saved well, expect with good planning to enjoy retirement. Now that can all be erased by taxes." They talk about MPAC assessing them as being on fully operational roads

when they are on seasonal roads. What are they left to do? Seniors are going to be forced out of their homes because they cannot pay the increase in the tax assessment. This is what's wrong.

I commend the member from Erie-Lincoln for bringing this to the forefront to try to fix this system that is obviously broken. I have had many municipalities

come to me to say, "Please try to do something." Not all have endorsed the member for Erie-Lincoln's plan, but many have. North Kawartha has sent me endorsements of that plan. They have seen

increases that are incredible. I know that in Peterborough county alone, MPAC received over 2,000 requests for reconsideration of their assessments. So people across the province, not just in my

riding -- seniors, people on fixed incomes, working families, disabled -- have been affected.

The member from Erie-Lincoln has done a good job in suggesting some changes. Will it fix all the problems? I don't know, but the fact is that we're discussing

it here today because we want to take it to committee and do the right thing for the people of Ontario and address the weaknesses in the system. My colleague from Erie-Lincoln has my full support

on this bill.

The Deputy Speaker: The member for Erie-Lincoln, Mr. Hudak, has two minutes to respond.

Mr. Hudak: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank my colleagues all for their remarks.

I want to take a little bit of time as well to thank John Clancy, my executive assistant, who is shortly moving into the real world and leaving this place. I

thank him for all his extraordinary efforts in my office and on this bill, and Nicole Goodman, who I'm blessed to have as a very hard-working intern. I know she enjoyed working for the member for

Oakville as well last time around. She has worked incredibly hard on this legislation. I want to thank them, as well as my caucus colleagues, many of whom had a chance to speak today, for helping

me develop this bill.

As well, with us in the assembly are various groups representing taxpayers across the province of Ontario, seniors' groups, taxpayers and homeowners who want

to see a fundamental change in the way the assessment system works because they, like us, support the value of home ownership. They want to be able to maintain their homes and pass them on to the

next generation.

We did receive 200 e-mails in the last two weeks alone, when it was announced that this bill was being accelerated in the assembly. We invited all those

individuals to come here today, and over 50 of them came to join with us and also to host a press conference.

To the member for Beaches-East York, I appreciate all the work he has done on behalf of the NDP caucus. I thank him for his kind words as well. Of course, we

are committed to the principle; I, as the introducer of this bill, am committed to the principle. I'm open to amendments to make this bill even better, Mr. Speaker, and I appreciate the suggestions

from my colleagues.

I appreciate the comments from the member for Oakville as well, who indicated that as a member of the government side, he too will be voting in favour of this

bill, and I know there are others.

My colleague from Oak Ridges said it very well. This legislation exists and works and has tremendous support in the state of Florida. There's similar

legislation in California, Arizona, Michigan, Minnesota, Maryland, New Mexico, Oregon and Texas, and in the province of Nova Scotia. A substantial proportion of the population of North America has

an act like the Homestead Act because taxpayers from coast to coast to coast realize that we need protections in place from skyrocketing property tax increases.

That's why I ask for all members' support to make this a reality and to support the Homestead Act today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Deputy Speaker: The time provided for private members' public business has expired.

HAMILTON DAY ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006

SUR LE JOUR DE HAMILTON

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): We will first deal with ballot item number 27, standing in the name of Mrs. Marsales. Mrs. Marsales

has moved second reading of Bill 80,

An Act to name the first Wednesday in October Hamilton Day. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour, say "aye."

All those opposed, say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it. It's carried.

Ms. Judy Marsales (Hamilton West): I'm sorry, Mr. Speaker, we were standing to call for a vote.

The Deputy Speaker: You're just a little late.

Ms. Marsales: Can I refer this bill, then, to the standing committee on finance and economic affairs?

The Deputy Speaker: A request has been made to refer this bill to the standing committee on finance and economic affairs. Agreed? Agreed.

HOMESTEAD ACT, 2006 /

LOI DE 2006

SUR LE PATRIMOINE FAMILIAL

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bruce Crozier): We shall now deal with ballot item 28, standing in the name of Mr. Hudak. Mr. Hudak has moved second

reading of Bill 75,

An Act to amend the Assessment Act with respect to homesteads. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour, say "aye."

All those opposed, 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 1201 to 1206.

The Deputy Speaker: Mr. Hudak has moved second reading of Bill 75.

All those in favour, please stand and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Arnott, Ted

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Brownell, Jim

Dunlop, Garfield

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Horwath, Andrea

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Klees, Frank

Kormos, Peter

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Leal, Jeff

Levac, Dave

MacLeod, Lisa

Marchese, Rosario

McMeekin, Ted

Miller, Norm

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Parsons, Ernie

Prue, Michael

Runciman, Robert W.

Scott, Laurie

Sterling, Norman W.

Tascona, Joseph N.

Van Bommel, Maria

Wynne, Kathleen O.

Yakabuski, John

Zimmer, David

The Deputy Speaker: All those opposed, please stand and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Arthurs, Wayne

Delaney, Bob

Dhillon, Vic

Marsales, Judy

Matthews, Deborah

Mitchell, Carol

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Qaadri, Shafiq

Sandals, Liz

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 28; the nays are 9.

The Deputy Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Mr. Tim Hudak (Erie-Lincoln): I move that the bill be referred to the standing committee on general government.

The Deputy Speaker: Shall the bill be referred to the standing committee on general government? Agreed.

All matters dealing with private members' public business having been completed, I do now leave the chair. The House will resume at 1:30 of the clock.

The House recessed from 1208 to 1330.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

HYDRO RATES

Mr. Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I have a statement regarding electricity prices. The people of the province are used to being

nickel-and-dimed by this government, and, sadly, they are getting used to broken promises. But the hydro increases that the Premier is blindly defending are more than just nickel-and-diming; they

are a body blow to our farmers, our small businesses, seniors and others living on low and fixed incomes, and families across the province.

You have been warned that your misguided energy policy would result in higher prices, and the chickens are now coming home to roost. Prices are skyrocketing in

places like North Bay, while their member, who also promised to cap rates, sits idly by. North Bay residents will now pay $229 per year more than they did in 2003. Did the member for Nipissing

think about speaking out about the impact that massive price increases would have on her constituents?

The member told this Legislature on October 19, 2004, "When I was going door to door last fall, I spoke to a number of voters who were very concerned about the

stranded debt of Ontario Hydro." I think that if the member goes door to door now, people are going to be delivering a very different message to her. They're going to talk about the broken promises

of the McGuinty government, the promise not to increase hydro rates and the way they have not only broken it but shattered it, along with any shred of credibility they have left.

TRANSIT FUNDING

Mr. Mario G. Racco (Thornhill): Population has skyrocketed in the 905 region. It only makes sense for the provincial government to expand the

vital Spadina subway line northward to the Vaughan Corporate Centre in my riding of Thornhill. Not only will this ease the burden on the Yonge line, but it will finally make major steps to

recognize the needs of commuters in the GTA.

This initiative makes economic sense, because it will improve the quality of life for the entire GTA. The subway extension will create nearly 500,000 jobs and

provide a cleaner environment for all Ontarians.

While the province has remained committed to improving the lives of Ontarians, the question still remains whether the federal government will take the next

step and continue the investment made by the provincial government. The province has put $670 million in the bank to expand the subway. This money is earning interest. Ontarians want to know when

the federal and local governments will match our funding.

Yes, it is good news that the province has begun to expand the subway into my riding of Thornhill, but Ontarians must expect more from their federal

representatives. Now is the time to bring the subway into the growing 905 region. I encourage my constituents of Thornhill and Concord, and all Ontarians, to lobby their federal representatives to

ensure that public transit remains safe, reliable and affordable.

HYDRO RATES

Ms. Laurie Scott (Haliburton-Victoria-Brock): The residents of Niagara Falls live on the doorstep of a huge source of electricity that goes to

homes and businesses throughout Ontario, yet they've been hit by double-digit price increases of $14.86 per month.

Their anger at this government must be palpable, yet where is their government MPP? Has he been standing up for them? Is he taking the government to task for

breaking their promise in such a cavalier way? No. They sit quietly on the backbenches defending the government, right or wrong.

Kim Craitor proudly told this Legislature in December 2003, just after his election, "Niagara Falls is also the centre of hydroelectricity generation for all

of Ontario and a large part of the United States.

"I'm pleased to be part of the Liberal government that has taken a keen interest in hydro issues we are currently facing in Ontario."

He has been silent on hydro ever since that December. And look where that keen interest has got the residents of Niagara Falls. Will he be pointedly proud of

his record on hydro when he leaves here to run for mayor of Niagara Falls? Because there's nothing to be proud of. I'll bet he never takes it into his campaign literature.

Upset constituents who want to let him know what they think can reach him at 905-357-0681.

FIRST NATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE

Mr. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): I rise today in the Legislature on a very sad note. Last night, yet another tragedy in the community of

Kashechewan: A young girl by the name of Tammy, four years old, died as a result of a fire in a house where 21 people happen to live.

It's a story we see across the north and across many aboriginal communities in our province, something I'm sure we're not at all proud of. I think it points to

the neglect we've had over the years in subsequent governments to deal with the issue of making sure that First Nations communities are properly serviced when it comes to infrastructure. In the

case of Kashechewan, there's not even a fire truck, not a volunteer fire department, nothing to put out the fire. My heart goes out to the community -- I'm sure with all members in this House -- to

see that this tragedy has happened.

But from this tragedy, let us try to take something positive back to our First Nations communities across Ontario. We are in desperate need across all these

communities to provide emergency fire services. I have been working with Minister Kwinter and the chiefs and others from NAN and Mushkegowuk tribal council, along with other communities in the

James Bay and the north-western part of Ontario. I'm glad to see that Minister Kwinter has moved forward in responding to the tragic fire we had last January where two men died in a jail in

Kashechewan. We're working towards repairing that infrastructure and making sure that doesn't repeat.

But the challenge continues: a young girl, Tammy, four years old, dead, yesterday. Why? Because we don't have basic services in those communities. On behalf of

the community, I ask this, and this comes directly from the community and Chief Leo Friday: that we provide emergency fire services to all these communities so a tragedy like Tammy's death never

happens again.

GOREWAY DRIVE

GENERATING STATION

Mr. Kuldip Kular (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): I am delighted to rise today to acknowledge the groundbreaking of Sithe Global Power's

Goreway Drive Generating Station in my own riding of Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale.

Upon its completion, the natural-gas-fired power plant will be capable of producing 875 megawatts of electricity, which is enough to power about 330,000 homes.

In addition, the plant will help close all coal-fired generating stations in Ontario by 2009. With all the premature deaths and hospital admissions linked to coal emissions, the Sithe plant is a

welcome addition, not only to Brampton but to all of Ontario. This plant will generate about 900 construction jobs and 30 full-time positions -- not a bad feat for the third-largest city in Ontario

and one of the fastest growing in all of Canada.

The Sithe plant will not only keep the lights on in Ontario, but will allow us to maintain a clean, stable supply of power while closing down our dirty

coal-fired generating stations. Setting up a natural gas electricity generating station in my own riding further solidifies the McGuinty government's commitment to keeping Ontarians healthy.

HYDRO RATES

Mr. Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): The hydro price increases announced yesterday that have shocked many constituents in Waterloo-Wellington

and across the whole province have shocked me as well. Millions of families, farmers and small business people are being jolted with double-digit price increases.

According to today's press, the average Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro residential customer will see an increase of $92 a year, the average Guelph customer an increase

of $121 a year, and in London it's a whopping increase of $165 a year. According to the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, a typical small business in this province may see an annual

increase of $960 on their hydro bills. A quarter of CFIB members responding to a recent survey said their businesses are facing significant harm because of the rising cost of electricity, such that

some may have to close their doors.

What makes yesterday's announcement all the more reprehensible is that this is yet another broken promise by the McGuinty Liberal government, which surely

means government members will be ashamed of their party again today. They are going to receive some interesting feedback from their constituents this weekend. Next week, I'm sure this legislature

will hear from the government members, doing their jobs as local representatives, voicing their constituents' concerns, even if it upsets a few people in the Premier's office.

Let's hear from the members for London-Fanshawe, London North Centre and London West. Let's hear it from Kitchener Centre, Guelph-Wellington and

Perth-Middlesex -- not the all-too-familiar refrain about how great the government is, but what they are actually hearing in the constituencies about this latest broken promise. Let them bring

those concerns into this Legislature.

BOB HUNTER MEMORIAL PARK

Mr. Tony C. Wong (Markham): Last week I was very pleased to announce that the McGuinty government provided $100,000 in support of the Bob

Hunter Memorial Park, funded through the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. This one-time grant will help the Rouge Park Alliance to coordinate a park management plan. Gord Weeden, chair of

the Rouge Park Alliance, said, "This investment towards park management and ecological restoration demonstrates, once again, the McGuinty government's commitment to protecting Rouge Park's and

Ontario's reservoir of biodiversity."

Created in honour of the late Bob Hunter, the Bob Hunter Memorial Park serves as a reminder of his determination and dedication to the Rouge Valley forest and

surrounding greenbelt. As Bobbi Hunter, wife of the late Bob Hunter said, "Bob spent his life dedicated to the care and preservation of the planet. That a portion of this earth will bear his name

and that future generations will be able to enjoy and explore the natural heritage is the greatest honour we could give."

The McGuinty government's commitment to the greenbelt plan is based on our belief that a healthy natural environment and strong economy go hand in hand, and

the creation of the park works towards realizing that commitment. I encourage Markham residents and all Ontarians to visit the park and enjoy the good things our natural heritage has to of