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

March 22, 2004

38th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2004-Mar-22 (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 22 March 2004 Lundi 22 mars 2004

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

COLLEEN ANDERSON

CARDIAC CARE

HEALTH CARE REFORM

MARSHALL PARK SCHOOL

PROPERTY TAXATION

HATE CRIMES

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

HATE CRIMES

REPORT, INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON JUSTICE AND SOCIAL POLICY

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

RECALL ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

SUR LA RÉVOCATION DES DÉPUTÉS

EMERGENCY SERVICE PROVIDER'S INSURANCE PROTECTION ACT (INSURANCE AMENDMENT), 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 SUR LA PROTECTION

DES FOURNISSEURS DE SERVICES D'URGENCE (MODIFICATION DE LA

LOI SUR LES ASSURANCES)

MALTON SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH ACT, 2004

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

STEPHEN HARPER

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

GOVERNMENT'S AGENDA /

PLAN D'ACTION DU GOUVERNEMENT

HATE CRIMES

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

PUBLIC HEALTH

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

HATE CRIMES

GAMING CONTROL

ONTARIO POWER GENERATION

NURSES

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

FAMILY RESPONSIBILITY OFFICE

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

HEALTH CARE

SPORT FISHING

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

PETITIONS

ENERGY CONSERVATION

PROPERTY TAXATION

CHILDREN'S NUTRITION

SUDBURY REGIONAL HOSPITAL

CHILD CARE

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

TUITION

ABORTION

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE /

DÉBAT SUR LE DISCOURS DU TRÔNE

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

COLLEEN ANDERSON

Mr Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka): I rise today to congratulate Colleen Anderson from Sundridge in my beautiful riding of Parry

Sound-Muskoka, who was recently honoured as the 2004 Rural Woman of the Year. The annual award is presented by the Women's Own Resource Centre to mark International Women's Day in honour of the

outstanding women in the Almaguin community.

Colleen Anderson is unquestionably an outstanding member of her community. For more than 40 years she has put in countless hours of volunteer work with many

various organizations. Although best known for her extensive involvement in the Strong Agricultural Society both locally and provincially, her commitment to the community does not end there. She

has made enormous contributions to the Canadian Cancer Society, where she exhibited her deep care and compassion for others by providing palliative care for the dying while being a key figure in

the Lions Club Christmas cheer program, and to her church community. Beyond all this, she collects clothing for the homeless of Toronto, is a lifetime member of the Women's Institute, and continues

to work with the agriculturally based 4-H club of Ontario.

Her commitment to volunteering and the depth of her compassion and care for others serve as a model for all of us, and we are privileged to have such a person in

our community. For all she has given to those around her, and on behalf of all those who have been inspired by her tireless efforts, I would like to thank Colleen Anderson and congratulate her on

being honoured as the 2004 Rural Woman of the Year.

CARDIAC CARE

Mr Bruce Crozier (Essex): Today I would like to call to our Minister of Health's attention a growing health care need in the communities of

Essex-Windsor. In an

article published in the Windsor Star last week, one of my constituents told his story of having to travel two hours to a distant city in order to receive angioplasty treatment

that he required after waiting in a Windsor hospital for a week recovering from a heart attack.

He is only one of many who have had to wait for this procedure because it's unavailable in the area. He, along with other cardiac patients and families of

patients, feels that the Windsor area is in need of its own stand-alone angioplasty program to ensure that patients in our communities do not have to wait or travel long distances to access

important procedures such as this. The Windsor-Essex area patient base has grown steadily over the years, and we do have the numbers to warrant such a program.

On Friday, I told my constituents that I would always fulfill my duty to advocate for the health care they deserve and promised them that I would bring the need

for a stand-alone program to you. I'm confident that the future of health care in our province is bright under our new government, and confident that the minister will continue to bring many

positive changes to our health care. Minister, that's why I'm confident that after hearing my constituent's story you'll consider granting the Essex-Windsor area the stand-alone angioplasty program

that it deserves.

HEALTH CARE REFORM

Mrs Elizabeth Witmer (Kitchener-Waterloo): Tomorrow we begin second reading on Bill 8, a poorly drafted and fundamentally flawed piece of

legislation. However, the government still refuses to commit to additional committee hearings on the bill, despite the fact that the legislation falls far short of addressing the essential concerns

of the health providers, such as hospitals, doctors, unions and others. Furthermore, it does nothing to improve public access to medically necessary services or reduce wait times. This has occurred

because the minister failed to consult with stakeholders during the drafting of Bill 8, and he also failed to respond to their concerns during the committee deliberations.

The bill still gives the minister sweeping powers and no accountability. The bill still undermines local voluntary community governance of hospitals and shifts

more control over hospitals to the health ministry. The bill shifts power to the government to regulate block fees from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. The bill does not make the

Health Quality Council independent, as promised in the Liberal election platform document, yet another broken promise.

minister today to make that commitment.

MARSHALL PARK SCHOOL

Ms Monique M. Smith (Nipissing): In February, the Premier and the Minister of Education requested that all members of this Legislature go back

to school for one day to visit our classrooms and see our education system first-hand. As our students returned to school from March break and as we returned to the Legislature today, it seemed an

appropriate time to report back to you, Mr Speaker, and to the members of this Legislature, about my experience of going back to school in North Bay.

I was lucky enough to visit Marshall Park school on March 11, 2004. Marshall Park is a primary school in the city of North Bay. While at Marshall Park, I visited

the grades 4, 5 and 6 classes of Ms Koski and Mr Dufort. We reviewed how a bill is passed into law and what members of provincial Parliament do, and I answered a myriad of questions. I was given

lovely cards of thanks by Amanda, Maureen and Jessica, signed by members of their class.

I was also fortunate enough to visit Mrs Clarke's reading recovery class, where I saw first-hand the power of one-on-one teaching. I then visited the senior

kindergarten class, where we attempted to count to 100 million billion, and I was given a tour of their class.

I was happy to join the students in skipping at recess and was delighted to have lunch with the staff, the hard-working teachers at Marshall Park.

Marshall Park school is a prime example of the great work our dedicated primary teachers are doing in North Bay and across the province. I would like to thank

Nancy Kilgour, principal Gail Jessup and the students of Marshall Park for welcoming me into their school and for making my visit so informative and fun. I recommend to my colleagues here in the

Legislature who have not taken the Premier up on his challenge to get out there and visit their schools. You'll be glad you did.

PROPERTY TAXATION

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): Well, Ontario, guess what? We have another broken promise. It is with great sadness that I rise in the House

today to highlight yet another broken promise by Dalton McGuinty and the Sorbara government. "We will hold the line on small business taxes," otherwise known as Liberal election promise number 99,

was officially broken on March 15, 2004. It was on this day that Finance Minister Greg Sorbara announced that municipalities would be given greater flexibility and autonomy in setting their

property tax rates. This is actually a code for giving small businesses in Ontario another kick in the teeth.

In response to a pre-election question from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business about closing the gap between business and residential tax rates,

McGuinty responded in writing, "Ontario Liberals will uphold this hard cap and I will work with small business to fix the property tax mess." And how can anyone forget the election ads with the now

Premier saying, "I will not raise your taxes"?

Our Bill 40 put in place a hard cap that limited how much of a property tax increase businesses had to bear in one year. The decision by the McGuinty government

to suspend this hard cap is not only another broken promise but also an attack against small and medium-sized businesses in Ontario.

This government is beginning to sound like a broken record on broken promises. If they continue along this path, three and a half years from now they will go

down in history as the one-term McGuinty government.

HATE CRIMES

Mr David Zimmer (Willowdale): Today is International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.

On this day 44 years ago, a horrifying event took place in the town of Sharpeville, South Africa. On March 21, 1960, 69 people were participating in peaceful

demonstrations against the laws of apartheid. They were massacred. It went down in history as the Sharpeville massacre. Six years later, in 1966, the United Nations set aside this date, March 21,

as a day of remembrance. They called upon all nations and all people to renew their commitment to eradicating racial discrimination.

Ontario has long stood as a model for diversity, openness and tolerance. Toronto's citizens come from 169 countries, making it the most multicultural and

multiracial city in the world. Sadly, however, even here, we are not immune from racism and intolerance. This past weekend, my riding, Willowdale, and other ridings saw vicious anti-Semitic

attacks. At Bathurst Lawn Memorial Park Cemetery, 27 headstones were toppled, six benches were knocked over and a menorah was struck down. There was $20,000 in damage. But the real cost cannot be

calculated in dollars. It is counted in tears, in sleepless nights, in locked doors and in anxiety.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you. Your time is up.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Do we have unanimous consent for the member to continue his statement? Agreed.

Mr Zimmer: How angry must a person be to destroy 27 grave markers -- not simply one or two grave markers, but to spend the time and energy and

anger in knocking over 27? How filled with hate a person must be to cause this pain to others.

I know everyone -- everyone -- in this Legislature wants to end this intolerance. We look forward to a day when racial and religious intolerance will be stamped

out in every community, in every town and city, in every part of the world. But we must also do everything we can to eliminate it from here, from our own communities as well, because it still

lurks. It lurks in the dark heart and in the evil mind. Our obligation is to be ever vigilant against it.

Interjection.

The Speaker: I thought you were going to request unanimous consent because you had not gone in the routine. Are you asking for unanimous

consent?

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): Yes. My mike isn't on.

The Speaker: The member is asking for unanimous consent to make his statement. Agreed.

M. Gilles Bisson (Timmins-Baie James): Merci beaucoup, monsieur le Président et cette Assemblée. Je veux amener à l'attention de

l'Assemblée un petit problème qu'on a dans la communauté francophone.

Imaginez-vous la surprise des citoyens et des citoyennes de cette province quand ils faisaient application pour avoir le baptistaire. Vous connaissez ce

document, le petit baptistaire qu'on utilise pour être capable de demander un passeport, pour avoir des documents officiels de nos gouvernements fédéral et provincial ? Ils ont

appris qu'il est impossible, dans la province de l'Ontario aujourd'hui, à cause des changements qui étaient faits au logiciel du bureau responsable des baptistaires, d'avoir nos

Au-dessus de ce problème, excusez-moi, le gouvernement, ce n'est pas vous. Imaginez-vous, les Libéraux sont sensibles ces jours-ci. Le problème

est que le gouvernement précédent avait fait des changements au système logiciel, et quand le changement était fait, il n'y avait pas la capacité dans le ministère

Deuxièmement, on appelle cela de l'ouvrage qui n'a pas été fait à l'intérieur du ministère mais à travers des contractuels qui

ont été payés par le ministère pour faire cet ouvrage. On demande au gouvernement de s'assurer une fois pour toutes que tous les services qui sont donnés à travers le

gouvernement provincial, une fois sortis du gouvernement provincial comme privatisation -- qu'il s'ensuit --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mrs Donna H. Cansfield (Etobicoke Centre): The previous NDP and Conservative governments have left our energy sector a disaster. So imagine my

surprise when I heard a conversation that took place last Friday on Metro Morning. These are the folk, the NDP, who used Hydro to buy a rain forest in Costa Rica and they cut our lifeline by

cutting a lucrative contract to Manitoba.

The Tories as well squandered a North-American-wide economic boom and failed at the same time to renew our generating capacity, and yet I wonder why. I wonder if

it's because Mr Tom Long received over $2 million in a contract; Mr Paul Rhodes got more than $800,000; Michael Gourley received more than $4 million; Leslie Noble received more than $300,000;

and Jaime Watt received $800,000. Maybe they were too busy signing contracts to keep our lights on.

But better still, the member from Rainy River has taken up hydro hypocrisy. Throughout the election, and for years, the NDP has been demanding that coal-fired

plants in Ontario be closed or converted. They even put it in the 2007 pledge for their platform. They wrote the Ontario Clean Air Alliance as well to close all the plants. It was their promise. At

least it was until Mr Hampton, the member for Rainy River, cried to keep the coal plants open. He even said he ran on keeping the coal plants open -- unbelievable.

HATE CRIMES

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): I rise on behalf of the Progressive Conservative caucus to support the sincere and heartfelt remarks

made by the member from Willowdale.

There are some matters that are above politics and partisanship, and I know that all members share our sense of revulsion with the recent anti-Semitic attacks in

Toronto and Vaughan. While we may disagree on many things in this House, I know we would agree that all citizens of this province have the right to feel safe, secure and welcome in their

communities and neighbourhoods.

The despicable and cowardly actions perpetrated against members of our Jewish community are intolerable. We have a responsibility to do everything in our power

as a province to combat this type of heinous behaviour.

Noble sentiments and fine-sounding words will not do the job. We need to take concrete actions. I was proud to be a member of a government that established a

specially trained team of crown attorneys to prosecute hate crimes. I know that all members would want to build on that initiative, that all members would want the Attorney General of Ontario to

prosecute the perpetrators to the full extent of the law and support police efforts to increase security at places of worship.

These recent events remind us that we must never become complacent in our battle against hate crimes.

REPORT, INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I beg to inform the House that on March 9, 2004, the report of the Integrity Commissioner, the Honourable

Coulter A. Osborne, regarding the MPP Compensation Reform Act (Arm's Length Process), 2001, was tabled.

REPORTS BY COMMITTEES

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I also beg to inform the House that during adjournment, the Clerk received the reports on intended appointments

dated March 1 and March 8, 2004, from the standing committee on government agencies.

Pursuant to standing order 106(e)9, the reports are deemed to be adopted by the House.

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT

Mr Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on general government and move

its adoption.

Clerk at the Table (Mr Todd Decker): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

Bill 31,

An Act to enact and amend various Acts with respect to the protection of health information / Projet de loi 31, Loi édictant et modifiant diverses

lois en ce qui a trait à la protection des renseignements sur la santé.

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

Pursuant to standing order 72(b), the bill is therefore ordered for second reading.

STANDING COMMITTEE

ON JUSTICE AND SOCIAL POLICY

Mr Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on justice and social policy and move its

adoption.

Clerk at the Table (Mr Todd Decker): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:

services de santé, édictant une nouvelle loi relative à l'accessibilité aux services de santé et abrogeant la

Loi sur l'accessibilité aux services de santé,

prévoyant l'imputabilité du secteur des services de santé et modifiant la

Loi sur l'assurance-santé.

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

All in favour, say "aye."

All against?

I think the ayes have it.

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

The division bells rang from 1353 to 1358.

The Speaker: Mr Flynn has moved adoption of the committee report.

All those in favour, please rise one at a time.

Ayes

Arthurs, Wayne

Bartolucci, Rick

Bentley, Christopher

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bountrogianni, Marie

Bradley, James J.

Broten, Laurel C.

Brown, Michael A.

Brownell, Jim

Bryant, Michael

Cansfield, Donna H.

Caplan, David

Chambers, Mary Anne V.

Colle, Mike

Cordiano, Joseph

Craitor, Kim

Crozier, Bruce

Delaney, Bob

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duguid, Brad

Duncan, Dwight

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Fonseca, Peter

Gerretsen, John

Gravelle, Michael

Jeffrey, Linda

Kennedy, Gerard

Kular, Kuldip

Kwinter, Monte

Lalonde, Jean-Marc

Leal, Jeff

Marsales, Judy

Mauro, Bill

McGuinty, Dalton

McNeely, Phil

Meilleur, Madeleine

Milloy, John

Mitchell, Carol

Mossop, Jennifer F.

Orazietti, David

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Peters, Steve

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Qaadri, Shafiq

Racco, Mario G.

Ramsay, David

Rinaldi, Lou

Ruprecht, Tony

Sandals, Liz

Smith, Monique

Smitherman, George

Sorbara, Greg

Takhar, Harinder S.

Van Bommel, Maria

Watson, Jim

Wilkinson, John

Wynne, Kathleen O.

The Speaker: All those against, please rise.

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Barrett, Toby

Bisson, Gilles

Dunlop, Garfield

Eves, Ernie

Flaherty, Jim

Hampton, Howard

Hardeman, Ernie

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Klees, Frank

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Martiniuk, Gerry

Miller, Norm

O'Toole, John

Ouellette, Jerry J.

Runciman, Robert W.

Scott, Laurie

Tascona, Joseph N.

Wilson, Jim

Witmer, Elizabeth

Yakabuski, John

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 60; the nays are 25.

The Speaker: The motion has been carried and the report shall be received and adopted.

Pursuant to standing order 72(b), the bill is therefore ordered for second reading.

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: There's a document on our desks entitled Real, Positive Change Gains

Momentum. It's going to be delivered by the Premier. I wonder if he could start by changing the size of his envelopes. Look at that. Do you believe that?

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I'm sure that members who are here sometimes understand what a point of order is all about.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

RECALL ACT, 2004 /

LOI DE 2004

SUR LA RÉVOCATION DES DÉPUTÉS

Mr Barrett moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 39,

An Act to amend the Election Act respecting the recall of Members of the Assembly / Projet de loi 39, Loi modifiant la Loi électorale en ce

qui concerne la révocation des députés de l'Assemblée.

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

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): By way of comment, this bill amends the Election Act to establish processes by which members of the

assembly may be recalled. In addition to being subject to the usual recall processes, a member who is the Premier and president of the executive council is subject to a province-wide recall process

that is similar to the electoral district recall but in which all the qualified voters in the province may participate.

EMERGENCY SERVICE PROVIDER'S INSURANCE PROTECTION ACT (INSURANCE AMENDMENT), 2004 /

LOI DE 2004 SUR LA PROTECTION

DES FOURNISSEURS DE SERVICES D'URGENCE (MODIFICATION DE LA

LOI SUR LES ASSURANCES)

Mr Wilkinson moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 40,

An Act to amend the Insurance Act to protect emergency service providers from rate increases to their personal contracts of automobile

insurance / Projet de loi 40, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les assurances visant à protéger les fournisseurs de services d'urgence contre l'augmentation des taux dans leurs contrats

d'assurance-automobile personnels.

Interjections.

Mr John Wilkinson (Perth-Middlesex): I want to introduce to the members my niece Sarah. This is her first day as a page. She comes from the

great riding of Oak Ridges.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I'm going to caution members not to do that again, please.

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

Mr Wilkinson: Speaker, I'm sure you would agree with me that when you call 911, you want the emergency response to be as quick as possible. It

came to my attention recently that if in the performance of his or her public duties the driver of an emergency vehicle is involved in a collision, he or she could face an increase in personal

automobile insurance premiums.

I believe and I hope all of the members agree that the number one priority of firefighters, paramedics and police should be responding to an emergency just as

quickly and safely as possible. They should not fear that performing their duty could cost them and their families increased automobile insurance premiums.

MALTON SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH ACT, 2004

Mr Qaadri moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill Pr2,

An Act respecting the Malton Seventh-day Adventist Church.

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

MOTIONS

PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I seek unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding

private members' public business.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): All those in favour? Did I hear a no? All those in favour? Agreed.

Hon Mr Duncan: I move that notwithstanding standing order 96(d), the following change be made to the ballot list for private members' public

business: Mr Hardeman and Mr Barrett exchange places in order of precedence such that Mr Hardeman assumes ballot item 51 and Mr Barrett assumes ballot item 10; and that, pursuant to standing order

96(g), notice be waived for ballot items 7, 8, 9 and 10.

The Speaker: The government House leader has moved and seeks unanimous consent to put forward a motion -- did I hear "dispense"? Dispense.

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

STEPHEN HARPER

Mr Toby Barrett (Haldimand-Norfolk-Brant): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I rise to seek unanimous consent on a motion of congratulation

congratulating Calgary Southwest MP Stephen Harper on his success on being chosen as federal Conservative leader and leader of the official opposition.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): The member has asked for unanimous consent -- and did I hear without debate?

Interjections.

The Speaker: Let me just hear: Do I have unanimous consent? Agreed.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Without debate.

STATEMENTS BY THE MINISTRY AND RESPONSES

GOVERNMENT'S AGENDA /

PLAN D'ACTION DU GOUVERNEMENT

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Welcome back.

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. It's good to be back, and it is my

distinct pleasure to welcome all the members back to this House.

With each new session, we're given the honour and the distinct privilege of serving the people of Ontario.

Notre gouvernement s'est engagé à faire oeuvre commune pour bâtir une province plus solide qui offre à tous et à toutes une

qualité de vie plus élevée.

I was saying, Speaker, that our government is committed to working together to build a stronger province with a higher quality of life for all.

Last fall, we were elected to deliver real, positive change.

Soon after taking office, we took action on our commitment by introducing a progressive legislative agenda in this House. We stopped the previous government's

irresponsible tax giveaways to corporations and private schools, and we passed legislation to ensure responsible electricity pricing. The rate freeze -- the one that cost taxpayers $862 million so

far -- is about to be lifted.

During the last session, we introduced several other pieces of legislation that are still before this House. If passed, they will help to continue our agenda

for real, positive change in a number of important areas.

For example, we introduced the Commitment to the Future of Medicare Act. This bill will ban pay-your-way-to-the-front-of-the-line health care in Ontario. It

will improve accountability. During this session, we'll continue seeking advice on ways to improve this bill as it moves through the House. We've also introduced legislation to ensure that patient

privacy is protected.

To help to protect green space and build clean, vibrant communities, we introduced legislation that will discourage urban sprawl. We've also introduced a bill

that will give municipalities more control over their own growth, and just last week, as part of our plan to work with our municipal partners as we grow strong communities together, we announced

our intention to give municipalities the tools they need to ease the pressure on residential property taxes.

Our government has also acted on its commitment to ensure greater accountability right across the broader public sector. We've introduced legislation that

would give the Provincial Auditor sweeping new powers to perform value-for-money audits of hospitals, school boards, universities, colleges and other transfer partners. Our legislation would also

open crown-controlled corporations like OPG and Hydro One to review by the Provincial Auditor. We have already taken important action to open OPG, Hydro One and their subsidiaries to the Freedom of

Information and Protection of Privacy Act and the Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act.

I'm proud to say as well that our government will continue moving forward with the legislation we introduced that would eliminate the waste of taxpayer dollars

on partisan, self-promotional government advertising. Since taking office, we have put a complete stop to this practice. This legislation will ensure this waste of taxpayer dollars never happens

again.

We've also introduced legislation that would require cabinet ministers to attend two thirds of question periods in this House. I can assure this House, and

members opposite of course, that our cabinet is more than ready to meet this commitment.

During this session, our government will work with members to move forward on these and other important initiatives, and we will do so at all times in a manner

that respects this institution and the people we have the privilege of serving. We'll continue to consult with people inside and outside this House to improve our legislation.

But our work is just beginning. Notre program de vrais changements positifs est sur sa lancée. Our agenda for real, positive change is gaining

momentum.

Our government is preparing legislation that would, if passed, provide up to eight weeks of job-protected leave for those taking care of seriously ill family

members.

We're going to address something that has gone unaddressed for far too long, and that is the issue of school bus safety. We believe that we must do everything

possible to ensure that our children arrive at their schools safe and sound. It is a fundamental trust that parents place in our public education system. We will introduce legislation shortly to

help meet this commitment.

Our government will also make important announcements designed to keep our economy strong and competitive, because when our businesses grow and prosper, it

means jobs and opportunity for families throughout the province.

Speaking of growth, we embrace our responsibility to bring forward a plan that will ensure Ontarians have a lasting, reliable supply of clean and affordable

electricity.

We are committed to acting on the priorities that we ran on and that Ontarians voted for. Over the past several months, we have been consulting with Ontarians

to hear about the priorities and results that they expect from their government. We were open and honest about the fiscal challenges facing our province: a $5.6-billion deficit and another $2.2

billion in risks. They gave their best advice on how we can deliver the change Ontario needs to be strong, healthy and prosperous.

When we asked people about meeting the goal of healthy Ontarians and a healthy Ontario, they shared their experiences and their expectations. When we asked for

ideas on better student achievement, we heard from people who care deeply about excellence in their public schools. When we asked about improving the quality of life in Ontario, people spoke

passionately about the clean, safe communities they want and deserve. When we asked about how Ontario could have better workers for better jobs in an innovative economy, they talked about making

the most of Ontario's single most precious resource, its people. When we asked about more active citizens contributing to a stronger democracy, one thing was clear: People want government to work

better for them.

We're listening, and we're going to take still more action. We're going to keep delivering the real, positive change that Ontarians want, need and deserve.

We're going to use people's ideas to help guide our budget-making in this year and over the course of the next four years. We're seizing the opportunity to focus government resources on the

priorities that matter most to Ontarians. We're going to work with our partners to achieve real, measurable results.

The people of Ontario will see progress in education when they see higher test scores in literacy and numeracy; smaller classes in the early years; fewer

students dropping out of high school; more students going beyond high school to an apprenticeship, university or college; and more qualified new Canadians working in their chosen trades and

professions.

In health care, we'll achieve the results that Ontarians want and need. I'm talking about things like shorter waiting times for cardiac care, cancer care and

hip replacements; improved access to care in the community, outside of hospitals and other institutional settings; and healthier living for all of us, but especially for our children, with less

obesity, less smoking and more physical activity.

I recently attended one of the budget town hall meetings held by our government, and so have many of the members here today. The people of Ontario understand

the nature of the challenges facing our province. They know that change is not going to happen on all fronts all at once.

Interjections.

The Speaker: I'm having difficulty hearing the Premier. Premier, you may continue, please.

Hon Mr McGuinty: I was saying that the people of Ontario understand the challenges facing our province. They know that change is not going to

happen on all fronts all at once. They are prepared to work with us to make progress on their most important priorities.

Mais elle comptera sur son gouvernement pour manifester du leadership pour ainsi avoir un but commun. But people will look to government, their government, for

leadership, for a sense of common purpose. That means that our ideas must be bold, our minds must be open and our resolve to make change happen must be strong. This is the kind of leadership our

government intends to provide during this session and over the course of the next four years.

Someone once said that what matters most in each and every age are the ideals that inspire our efforts and the integrity of those efforts. Here are our ideals.

We can have an Ontario that knows prosperity and purpose, an Ontario that is both competitive and compassionate, an Ontario that is the envy of the world, with a quality of life that is second to

none.

Mr Ernie Eves (Leader of the Opposition): The government has been elected now for almost six months. They have been sworn in for five and a

half months, and they have worked all of 32 days in five and a half months. Then the Premier has the unmitigated gall to come into the House today, having actually worked about one month of the

five and a half that he has been the Premier of the province, and wring his hands about things that he can't do anything about.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Could you stop the clock, please? The opposition had the courtesy of listening to the Premier to some extent. Leader of

the official opposition.

Mr Eves: Before October 2, the Premier had every answer to every problem in the province. He could eliminate cancer waiting lists just like

that. He could balance the books just like that. He could do all kinds of things. Once elected, it appears as if he can't do anything. There's a lot of hand-wringing in this statement. I don't know

why you would even bother to read this statement, quite frankly.

Talking about consultation, you have consulted. You had all the answers. Why don't you just implement the plan you gave to the people of the province of

Ontario last September? What's wrong with that plan? Or did you never intend to implement it in the first place?

With respect to the future of medicare in the province, he might want to make the commitment today that after second reading, Bill 8 will go out for public

hearings yet again. With the 199 amendments that will have to be made to the bill, you won't even be able to recognize it when it is done at the end of the day.

Talking about tax benefits to companies and individuals, our economy has to be competitive on an individual basis, on a corporation basis, and especially on a

small business corporation basis. So far, what you have done is raise taxes for the small business community, you're giving municipalities the ability to raise property taxes on their businesses

again, you're going to eliminate tax credits for research, innovation and development, and yet you talk about providing leadership and letting the province go ahead.

To date, you have broken at least 19 of your 251 campaign promises. We could go on and on and rhyme them all off, but some of the most important ones, of

course, are that we will:

Not add a cent to the debt. I wonder if the Premier can stand in his place today and say that during the four- or five-year term -- it's supposed to be four

years -- he's not going to add a cent to the debt of the province.

Cap hydro rates at 4.3 cents a kilowatt hour until 2006.

Respect MPPs and democracy, with elections every four years. Where is that piece of legislation? That wouldn't take any more than five minutes to draft.

Stop all 6,600 houses on the Oak Ridges moraine. He only broke that promise 5,700 times.

Cancel the P3 hospitals in Brampton and Ottawa. You're going ahead with them.

A public inquiry into meat inspection -- not done.

"I won't raise your taxes" -- raising everybody's taxes all over the province.

Reduce auto insurance rates by 20%. You've allowed auto insurance companies to raise rates for an additional six months. And that's the basis upon which you're

starting. All you had to do was implement the three regulations that were already passed and in place and they would have been zapped as of July 22, but you let them go till January 23.

Provide two cents of provincial gas tax for municipal transit.

Hold an election every four years like clockwork. Again, it's a five-minute bill.

Interjection.

Mr Eves: "It's coming"? You've had five and a half months. It's a five-and-a-half-minute solution.

Make Ontario's chief medical officer of health an independent officer of the Legislature.

Govern with honesty and integrity. We'll feed you a few of your own quotes during question period about honesty and integrity and transparency in

government.

Respect the outcome of the Kawartha Lakes referendum on amalgamation. How come we haven't done that?

Provide mental health care. The Liberal government defeated a committee amendment to recognize the promotion of mental health in Bill 8, and the government

majority defeated that. So much for mental health.

Provide autism treatment beyond the age of six. You're now going to court to prevent parents of autistic children from getting the relief they deserve.

We could just have rhymed off the 19 promises you've broken so far and the rest of the 251 to come.

The Speaker: Before I ask for the next response, could I get a bit of order in the House and stop this shouting across.

The next response, the member from Kenora-Rainy River.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): I remember when the now Premier said, "Choose change." I remember when he said, "A Liberal government

would deliver energetic, responsible government," that it would "put the public good and ordinary Ontarians ahead of private interests and political cronies."

I remember when the people of Ontario said they weren't interested in any more toll highways such as the 407; when people voted against P3 private hospitals,

private MRIs, private CAT scans; when people said they weren't interested in private hydro; when they weren't interested in privatizing the LCBO, TFO or TVOntario. I remember when people said they

wanted to see two cents a litre of the gas tax go to municipalities so they could provide for public transit and highways and 8,000 nurses and implement the Rozanski report -- put $3 billion back

into our schools.

Imagine their surprise when they got a consultation piece from the new government that said, "Well, what do you think about privatizing TFO and TVO? What do

you think about privatizing the LCBO? What do you think about more private hydro and, oh, more private toll roads?"

Then people got a look at the so-called "save medicare act," and did they find that it was going to do away with the private P3 hospitals? No. Is it going to

do away with private CAT scans? No. Is it going to do away with private MRIs? No. Is it going to end the privatization and cutthroat bidding of our home care system? No.

Imagine when they heard the Premier musing about doing away with the universality of the Ontario prescription drug benefit program, something that Ernie Eves

and Mike Harris wouldn't even consider.

This hasn't been change; this has been an attempt to take the discredited program of the previous government, repackage it and somehow sell it in another way

to the people of Ontario.

Just last week, we heard the Premier's good friend and soulmate, John Manley, come and tell us that the Liberal vision of hydroelectricity for Ontario is "all

nuclear all the time," and then he said, you know, many of these should be private, privately run nuke stations. I look over at the Conservatives, and I say to myself, "My God, they're even

stealing your hydro policy now." All nuclear, all the time, and make it private. You guys are accomplishing more out of office than you did in office, because Dalton's going to do it for you.

The problem, though, is that the real issues remain. In communities in my riding, municipal daycares are being shut down. Do you know why? They're being shut

down because a government that said that they were going to put more money into qualified, quality, regulated child care -- it hasn't happened. So municipality after municipality is being forced to

shut down child care. The Premier says, oh, you're going to bring in legislation that will allow people to take time off work to deal with situations where someone in the family is grieving. It's

more basic than that, Premier. The very daycares that allow parents to go to work are being shut down and you're the government that's allowing it to happen.

Across the province, we see young people who are trained as nurses who are now looking at working -- in Ontario? No, they're looking at working in Texas, in

California, in Manitoba, in British Columbia, in Alberta. Why? Because the promise to hire 8,000 new nurses doesn't seem to be there. It doesn't seem to be there, and these people can't wait around

much longer. They've got to make decisions.

Then there's the case of a city like Toronto, which has had to come forward and say that the public transit system is on the verge of collapse. They're

wondering where that two cents a litre is.

So forgive me if I say that the government that promised change seems to be delivering more of the same old, tired program that people voted against. New

Democrats, though, are not going to let you get away with it.

HATE CRIMES

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): It's my understanding that there is a request by the Premier.

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I understand that there's unanimous consent for the following motion to

be moved and be put to a vote after each of the three parties are given five minutes to speak. The motion reads as follows:

As representatives of the people of Ontario, the Legislative Assembly condemns the recent acts of anti-Semitism and expresses its continuing support for the

government of Ontario's long-standing zero tolerance policy toward hate crimes.

The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent that the Premier put forward this motion? Do I have unanimous consent on that? Agreed.

Hon Mr McGuinty: Just before beginning, if I might, I'd like to acknowledge in the gallery the presence of representatives of the Canadian

Jewish Congress, Ed Morgan and Bernie Farber; representing B'nai Brith, Mr Frank Diamond and Ms Ruth Klein; and representing the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy, Mr Hershell

Ezrin.

The Speaker: Move the motion now that you've had unanimous consent to move that motion. Just for the procedural nature of this, move that

motion now.

Hon Mr McGuinty: I move the motion as follows:

As representatives of the people of Ontario, the Legislative Assembly condemns the recent acts of anti-Semitism and expresses its continuing support for the

government of Ontario's long-standing zero tolerance policy toward hate crimes.

I want to begin by thanking all members for granting unanimous consent to speak on this important matter because, in a very real sense, it would be tempting to

say no; tempting to say that if we speak out, we only give these cowardly hatemongers the attention they crave, and that would only encourage them. It can be tempting to remain silent in the hope

that that would make the ugliness go away. But to remain silent would be wrong, because while hate may crave attention, the fact is that it feeds off silence, it depends on indifference and it

festers in the darkness. That's why hate so often comes in the night, when things are quiet and we're sleeping, when it's dark.

Hatred is the stuff of cowards, and cowards like to work under cover of darkness. It's up to the rest of us to stand up, to speak up here and now, in the light

of day. It is up to us to express our outrage at the expressions of hate that have occurred in this, our province.

We know from history that silence would be tragically wrong. This occurred to me this week as I gazed at a photo on the front page of the newspaper, a photo of

a door, a woman and a man. What struck me most was not the ugly scrawl written on the door, but the strength written on the face of that woman. The story below identified her as Maria Leib, an

81-year-old Ontarian and Canadian who was forced from her Romanian home during the Holocaust.

I thought to myself that she could have remained silent; she could have remained behind her door. But there she was, on the front page, arms crossed, looking

the camera in the eye. There she was, speaking out, standing up to hate. She told a reporter that she wanted her door cleaned up. "I want it erased," she said. "I never want to see it again." We

can erase hate if we speak up. We can check its spread by expressing our outrage. We can watch it wither under the light cast by courage.

I've often said that none of us is as strong or as smart as all of us. It is equally true that an attack on any one of us is an attack on all of us, so all of

us must stand up and speak out. Let every Ontarian express outrage at the expressions of hate that have marred this community, let every Ontarian repeat that our land is a place of acceptance,

tolerance and love, and let every Ontarian echo Maria Leib's words when speaking of the stain of hatred. She said, "I want it erased. I never want to see it again."

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Ernie Eves (Leader of the Opposition): I am pleased to support the Premier's motion introduced in this Legislature this afternoon. I am

saddened like all Ontarians and revolted by the actions that made its introduction necessary.

The anti-Semitic attacks that we have seen in Vaughan and Toronto last week and over the weekend represent an attack on the fundamental rights of all citizens

in our society to live in a safe and secure home, community, province and country. They are an attack on the very principles of equality and tolerance that are fundamental to who we are as a

Canadian society. They indeed are an attack on freedoms and liberties and on the democratic principles that we all hold so dear.

These actions and attitudes have no place anywhere in the world, especially not in the great province of Ontario and the great country of Canada. They must be

condemned in the strongest and most forceful way, and those perpetrators of these hateful crimes must be prosecuted in the strongest, most effective way possible.

Members of this House, of all parties, have always supported efforts by whatever government to eradicate hate crimes in Ontario. The government has established

a specially trained group of crown prosecutors to tackle hate crime, to work with other crowns and police officers on hate crime. I think that we must continue to be vigilant, to support

prosecutors and law enforcement officers and encourage the strongest sentences for all hate crimes, especially to increase security at places of worship.

In a letter last week to the Canadian Jewish Congress, we certainly expressed our support for the Jewish community and for law enforcement officers and

prosecutors in their efforts to bring these offenders to justice. I wish to recognize the fact that B'nai Brith has been a leader in this as well.

I want all members of the House, and indeed all members of our society, to join with the Jewish community in a solidarity rally this Wednesday. All members,

I'm sure, will support all efforts to eliminate this cancer and this activity from our society. By standing up and being counted today, we will ensure a better tomorrow for future generations of

Ontarians and Canadians to come.

Mr Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): I'm pleased to add my support to this motion. I'm sure that all members of this House feel, as I do, that it's

not enough just to condemn these acts of anti-Semitism, but that it is indeed up to this Legislature to ensure that there are actions taken against those who have perpetrated this horrendous crime

to ensure there are consequences to this kind of action.

Our country has always been known as a civil society. What we are seeing today is very uncivil, and it threatens the very fabric of our society. People have

come from every corner of the world to this land, because they believe there is freedom here to worship, regardless of culture, regardless of creed, regardless of religion. It is that freedom that

has been such an attraction to people from around the world to this country. Let us never lose that, and let us know, as a Legislature, that whatever steps need to be taken, we will take to ensure

there are true and known consequences for the kind of actions we've seen.

I want to thank and recognize the response of the Toronto city police and York Regional Police. We want to ensure that they will have our absolute support in

whatever steps they feel need to be taken to prosecute.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): On behalf of New Democrats, I want to say a few words about the resolution and a few words about the

wider situation.

First of all, to the Jewish community, New Democrats want you to know that we share your vision of a free, open and tolerant Ontario. We will not tolerate

anti-Semitism, racism or discrimination of any kind. We condemn the terrible acts of anti-Semitic violence perpetrated against Ontario's Jewish community in the past few days. We hurt for the men

and women who survived the Holocaust and sought safe haven in our province, only to be confronted with ugly, cowardly, contemptible anti-Semitism here.

We must speak out. We must confront this, and we must be constant in the confrontation of this. We cannot be silent even for a second. And there are real,

practical steps we must take.

Many police services now have hate crime units: police officers who are specifically designated to look into these issues, investigate them and seek

prosecution of them. When we see incidents such as we have seen over the past few days, it tells us that we must redouble our efforts on this front, that we need more specially designated hate

crime units within our active police services, so that those who perpetrate these acts will know there is a greater likelihood that they will be found out. I would advocate strongly: We must act

now to increase the number of officers who are designated specifically to deal with these cowardly issues.

Second, we need in this province, we need within the public service of Ontario, an anti-discrimination secretariat whose job it is to work with school boards,

colleges and universities, municipalities and public bodies across the province to ensure that we are providing education, that when children go to school, they understand how ugly, how awful, how

terrible any act of racism, any act of discrimination of this type is. This is not a costly issue. This would not cost a great deal of money. It would be a direct way, a direct step in taking this

on. I believe that there are school boards, colleges, universities and community organizations across the province who are prepared to enlist in this battle immediately, but leadership must be

shown. That leadership must take the form of an anti-discrimination secretariat that says boldly and bluntly, "We recognize that these cowardly acts exist and, as a province, we're prepared to take

it on and to take it on directly. We're prepared to work with all of those organizations across the province who feel the same way."

I suspect the vast majority of Ontarians are prepared to enlist in this struggle today. So I say to the Premier, I say to members of the government, I say to

all of the members of the Legislature: These are two steps that would not take a lot of policy debate, they are two steps that would not take a great deal of money, but they are real, practical

steps which would send a very clear signal, an unmistakable signal. They are very clear steps which could have broad, positive repercussions across the province almost immediately.

I thank all members for taking part, for participating in this, but the time for action is now. There are real, positive, practical steps that we can take now,

and I encourage all of us to do that.

The Speaker: Mr McGuinty has moved that, as representatives of the people of Ontario, the Legislative Assembly condemns the recent acts of

anti-Semitism and expresses its continuing support for the government of Ontario's long-standing zero tolerance policy toward hate crimes.

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

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Just before we get to oral questions, I would first like to draw your attention to the following special

guests in the Speaker's gallery: the Honourable Dr Paul Robertson, Minister of Development of Jamaica, and Vivia Betton, Consul General of Jamaica. I would like all members to welcome them

here.

ORAL QUESTIONS

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Mr Ernie Eves (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Premier of the province. Premier, I would like to ask you today about the

open, honest and transparent higher standard of government that your government referred to in its throne speech. I would like to talk to you in particular about the potential conflict situation

with respect to the Minister of Finance. I would like to ask you a very simple and direct question: At any time has the Minister of Finance offered, or have you requested, his resignation?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Let me thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question and take this

opportunity at the outset to say that I have the greatest confidence in our Minister of Finance and to also state that our Minister of Finance is not only a man of ability, but also a man of

integrity, a man of honesty and a man who has acted appropriately in all circumstances. It is my hope that at some point in time the Leader of the Opposition will come to see this for what it

actually is. If the Leader of the Opposition does not have any confidence in my opinion and judgment on this matter, then I would refer him to the Integrity Commissioner and a letter he offered in

connection with this matter.

Mr Eves: The mere fact that the Premier won't answer a very simple question with a yes or a no certainly has to tell a lot of people a lot of

things; otherwise, he could very simply stand in his place on a supplementary and give us a simple yes or no to that question.

I would like to ask a further question with respect to this matter, Mr Premier. On February 18 this year, cabinet approved an order in council approving a new

vice-chair of the Ontario Securities Commission. Did the Minister of Finance declare a potential conflict in this appointment and remove himself from deliberation with respect to this

appointment?

Hon Mr McGuinty: I'm sure the Leader of the Opposition will want to make reference to the Integrity Commissioner's letter of March 8, which,

although it was delivered to the Minister of Finance in confidence, was made public. I want to emphasize that the letter was made public notwithstanding the fact that it was delivered to the

minister in confidence. His conclusion is as follows: "When your conduct is assessed in its appropriate context, given the narrow range of available alternatives, I do not think that you were in a

position of conflict as a result of not taking the remedial action that you took on February 25, 2004, earlier." I believe that ends the matter.

Mr Eves: Two very simple, direct, matter-of-fact questions, and two answers that tend to obfuscate and avoid answering the questions.

Premier, you stated on several occasions that when cabinet ministers find themselves under a cloud, they should relinquish their responsibilities in the

interim, pending the outcome of any investigation. You yourself stood in your place in this House last June 17 and said to me, "You cannot fob this matter over to the Integrity Commissioner. It's

about you, your judgment and your standards." I couldn't have said it better myself, Mr Premier. That's exactly what this is about. It's not a matter to be fobbed over to the Integrity

Commissioner, whether somebody technically breached a

section of the Members' Integrity Act.

The issue here is what your standards are with respect to clouds or potential conflicts hanging over, I would suggest to you, the most senior minister in your

government. I ask you, very directly, a third question: Is it appropriate --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you.

Hon Mr McGuinty: I say to the Leader of the Opposition that in my judgment this minister does not have a cloud hanging over him. That is

merely confirmed by the Integrity Commissioner. The finance minister is not the subject of an investigation. He is not the subject of a charge. He has acted appropriately, responsibly and

reasonably in the circumstances, in my judgment, and as well, coincidentally, in the judgment of the Integrity Commissioner.

The Speaker: New question.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): Back to the Premier. Premier, thus far you have refused to stand in your place and answer a very simple

question, so I'm going to come back to it. I'm asking you a direct question on behalf of the people of Ontario: Did Greg Sorbara offer his resignation, yes or no? Stand in your place and give us a

direct answer.

Hon Mr McGuinty: I say to the members opposite that at the end of the day I can understand why you would like to devote some attention to this

particular matter. But the facts are as follows: The minister is not the subject of any investigation, to the best of our knowledge; he is not the subject of any charge, to the best of our

knowledge. In my judgment, he has acted responsibly and reasonably, he has acted as a man of integrity, and this happens to have been confirmed by the Integrity Commissioner, and there ends the

matter.

Mr Baird: Premier, you know the truth, I know the truth, we all know the truth that he did offer to resign because he did something wrong.

On March 2 you made a commitment and you made a promise to the people of Ontario. You said, and I quote, "Mr Sorbara and I have agreed that should he become

the subject of an investigation, not even a charge, that he will step aside." Do you stand by that solemn pledge, Premier?

Hon Mr McGuinty: Yes.

Mr Baird: Premier, in light of that answer, I want to ask you, what specific procedures, as Premier, have you put in place with the Royal

Canadian Mounted Police, with the investigations branch of the Ontario Securities Commission or with Revenue Canada, the federal tax authority? What mechanisms have you put in place to be

officially informed if the scope of their investigations changes? Or are you simply going to trust the man who kept you in the dark for 66 days to tell you the truth this time? Which is it,

Premier?

Hon Mr McGuinty: I'm not sure that the member opposite is intimating what he seems to be intimating. Maybe we should give him the benefit of

the doubt. But surely he is not asking us on this side of the House to interfere in any kind of an RCMP investigation, in any kind of investigation being conducted by the Ontario Securities

Commission. Surely he is not intimating, surely he is not suggesting, that we should somehow pick up the phone and get involved with whatever might be going on here. I will give him the benefit of

the doubt and suggest that that is not what he is suggesting.

ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Premier. Your government over the last six months has treated Ontario citizens

to a record number of broken promises. You told people that they should choose change, yet you seem to have recycled most of the program of the former government. We know the former government's

idea of a hydroelectricity future for Ontario was more Bruce nuclear plants, private leases, private companies and huge profits. Now, just last week your good friend and, as I refer to him, your

soulmate, John Manley, came forward and said that your government should pursue, yes, more nuclear plants, more private leases with nuclear plants, more profits and more exorbitant hydro bills.

Premier, is that the kind of change you were promoting for people or have you changed your mind again?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Let me just take this opportunity to thank Mr Manley for the work he has

done and to thank him for the advice he has tendered to this government.

I want to assure you that we remain firm in our resolve to put this province on a sustainable footing when it comes to ensuring that Ontarians, both

immediately and in the medium and long term, have access to a lasting supply of affordable, reliable and clean electricity. But speaking of change, something that shocked me was to learn that just

a few days ago the member opposite, the one directing the question to me, is now no longer committed to getting rid of coal-fired generation in the province of Ontario. I want to say that we

remain, with that one, together with our other promise, firmly resolved to move ahead.

Mr Hampton: Premier, if you're firmly resolved to move ahead with the closure of the coal-fired plants, why have we seen nothing other than

hiring a consultant in the first six months? And to top it off, whom did you hire as a consultant? Why, the same consultant the Conservatives used to have. That's all you've done in six months of

supposedly closing down the coal-fired stations.

But the question, Premier, was this. We know the direction of the former government. It was to see more Bruce Powers, more public investment -- public subsidy

-- but the profits go to a private company. And John Manley, your good friend and soulmate, lo and behold, what is he recommending for you? More of the same: public investment, private company

operates, private company leases, private company makes off with the profits, and people's hydro bills go through the roof. Premier, what is your position? Do you endorse the Manley report -- more

privatization and more nuclear -- or do you reject it? What's your government's position? The people of Ontario need to know.

Hon Mr McGuinty: I want to make it clear that Mr Manley has offered this government advice and we look forward to carefully considering that

advice. But I'm also on record -- and I'm sure the member opposite knows this -- that I believe that we simply cannot proceed with any kind of a progressive, responsible plan to meet Ontario's

energy needs into the future without nuclear generation playing some part of that plan. I just believe that to reject that outright would be to act in a very irresponsible way.

We intend to move forward to ensure that we have more renewable energy being supplied in the province of Ontario. We intend to be very aggressive when it comes

to exploiting all of the conservation opportunities. We will do what we can when it comes to nurturing hydroelectric and cogeneration possibilities and the like, but at the end of the day, I remain

convinced that we're going to have to consider nuclear as part of our energy future.

PUBLIC HEALTH

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): Before the election, Premier, you promised to make public health priority number one. In your election

platform, you pledged that, "Unlike the Harris-Eves government, we will not turn our back on public health." Yet we now have documents before the Ontario Supreme Court in the case involving West

Nile virus where your government says that you have "no responsibility to protect public health."

I seem to remember Walkerton and the disaster there. Have you not learned anything from Walkerton? Have you not learned anything from the SARS crisis that we

witnessed? Those were all questions of the protection of public health.

Which is the real position, Premier -- the position that you announced before the election, or the position you are taking now where you say you have no

responsibility to protect public health?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): The Attorney General will speak to this.

Hon Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): I say to the

member that the particular procedure before the House, the motion before the House, is dealing with the question of whether or not governments held accountable by the Legislature, held accountable

by the people, ought to be determining our public health policy, or whether or not we ought to have, through the justice system, the courts determining the future of public health policy.

The specifics of what the policy is, I will gladly refer to the Minister of Health on this. But you know, sir, as a lawyer and former Attorney General, that we

want to have Legislatures and governments making decisions about public policy and public health, and we don't want to have these matters determined based upon the evidentiary standards and common

law tests -- far more restrictive -- that are before the courts. I know that you know that, and I know you have fought for that as Attorney General.

Mr Hampton: Like many other people in the province, I can read what you're saying in this statement, and you're saying something much broader.

Yes, the lawyers may use the words "protecting public health isn't my job," but what your government is saying is something much broader. You are essentially saying that you don't have to fund

those public health units for those mandatory public health protection strategies. You don't have to take on that responsibility. That statement would make even Ernie Eves and Mike Harris blush.

They wouldn't even take that position. Yes, there is the instant court battle, but your government is trying to say something much broader in this court case, much more serious, something that even

Mike Harris and Ernie Eves wouldn't say. Which is it? Are you about protecting public health or are you about now stepping away and saying to municipalities, "It's all your responsibility. You take

the responsibility"? Which is it?

Hon Mr Bryant: I refer this to the Minister of Health.

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): The honourable member, my colleague the Attorney General, well answered the

first part of your question. With respect to who has responsibility for protecting public health, this government takes responsibility for its actions.

On that point, I'm very happy to point out to the member that we have taken important strides in that regard. The hiring of Dr Sheela Basrur, a woman of

extraordinary accomplishment, as the new chief medical officer of health stands out as a signature appointment.

Shortly we'll have the opportunity to respond to the excellent work of Dr David Walker, the dean of medical sciences at Queen's University.

I would say, in terms of our relationship with the municipalities, in terms of those important public health programs that they deliver, that we work with them

in partnership; I'm working very hard with them right now. I think if you spoke to them, you'd find that the attitude of this government is remarkably improved from attitudes of past governments

and that we look forward to building an even stronger partnership with public health delivery across the province of Ontario and the national level as well.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Mr Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Ajax): My question is for the Premier. I heard you say a few minutes ago in this place that in your view the Minister

of Finance has acted appropriately -- that was the phrase you used. I'm sure that is your view about recent events.

But I say to you and I ask you this: to think about what you're suggesting now as we go back. You don't know, I don't know and, quite frankly, no one in this

House knows whether or not the minister acted appropriately during the period from 1994 to 2004 when he served as a director and the chair of the audit committee. Indeed, there is an investigation

going on now by the Ontario Securities Commission, by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, by the Canada Revenue Agency.

That's the problem, and I'm sure you understand that. The problem is that you may have a Minister of Finance presenting a budget in this place and he may later

have been found to be alleged to have breached various rules by the RCMP, the Ontario Securities Commission and the Canada Revenue Agency. Don't you see the issue there? That's what ministerial

responsibility --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Premier.

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Well, it's apparent to me that the member opposite wants to stretch this

far beyond the realm of the reasonable.

Minister Sorbara, in his capacity as Minister of Finance, is accountable to myself and ultimately to the people of Ontario for the actions that he has taken in

his capacity as minister, not for something -- whatever you happen to be intimating -- that might have taken place 20 or 30 years before. This is all about what happened during a particular period

of time. I believe that he has acted appropriately, that he has acted responsibly. It so happens that the Integrity Commissioner agrees.

Mr Flaherty: Premier, the minister is not responsible to you, he's responsible to the people of Ontario and to the crown. He's not responsible

to you. The responsibility is to the people of Ontario.

The people of Canada and the people of Ontario have seen nothing but Liberal scandal for the last few weeks: slush funds in Quebec; scandal in Ontario. Don't

you appreciate that when these kinds of allegations are made --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Mr Flaherty: The standard of ministerial responsibility is high, or it has been high, in Ontario. I want to ask you, given what we saw in

Ottawa on Thursday and Friday, when in the course of this scandal with the Minister of Finance did you lower your standard from the British parliamentary standard to the Liberal Gagliano

standard?

Hon Mr McGuinty: Speaking of a deliberate effort to reduce the standards of this Legislature, all of that was found within the kind of

question that was put by the member opposite.

Let me say again to all and sundry, I have every confidence in our Minister of Finance. I believe that he has acted responsibly, that he has acted

appropriately and that he has acted with integrity, and it happens that the Integrity Commissioner confirms that.

HATE CRIMES

Mr Mario G. Racco (Thornhill): My question is to the Attorney General. Last week I was in Israel, and I learned that criminals had defaced

private property with hateful anti-Semitic vandalism in our predominantly Jewish neighbourhood in Thornhill. When I arrived from Israel, I found my community in shock from terrible anti-Semitic

slurs and swastikas spray-painted on homes and cars -- 13 of them. This weekend in North York, more cowardly, insidious acts of vandalism took place on Jewish targets such as a synagogue, an

education centre and a cemetery.

Many of my neighbours came to Canada to be free from hate and fear. Now, sadly, they are again living in fear. They want to hear and know that our government

is on their side. Minister, can you assure my neighbours that our Ontario government will protect them?

Hon Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): The people you

are speaking to who are in fear should not be in fear. Every part of the federal, provincial and municipal governments and every member of your community and the Ontario community is standing

shoulder to shoulder with the Jewish community at this very moment, and with all those who may be targeted and are targeted for racism.

I went up on Sunday as soon as I heard about what happened at the cemetery and saw stained glass windows smashed at schools. At the synagogue I saw swastikas,

and unspeakable words on the schools and on signs, posts knocked over and tombstones knocked over. It was one of the most awful things I've ever seen in my life.

I want you to know, and I want everybody to know, that this government is going to do everything it can to address that particular situation, and everything it

can so that people are not living in fear, because they should not live in fear. We will do the investigation and the prosecution to the full extent of the law. People must not live in fear, and we

must not let this happen again.

Mr Racco: Minister, I was in Thornhill on Sunday morning, where there were other politicians and some members of the community removing the

last writing from the house they left swastikas on, and we did participate in the cleaning up. But while the paint can be removed, its damage stays in the community much longer, as you know. The

people of my community want the idiots who did this to be brought to justice.

Yesterday, I spoke with Chief La Barge, who had spoken to Chief Fantino earlier. I understand that the two are putting together a team to deal with this

matter. My community wants to feel safe in their homes, as everybody expects to. They want to know that the Ontario government will do everything possible to stop those crimes. What are you, as

Attorney General, doing to crack down on hate crimes like we have seen in the last eight days?

Hon Mr Bryant: People need to understand that their government is in action; we're not talking about future proposals. They need to know that

things are happening right now. There is, as has been said before, a team of specialized prosecutorial units made up of experts in hate crime law. They are there not only to direct others, but also

to assist police officers in questions as these investigations move along.

It is the policy of the crown in this province that we will pursue to the full extent of the law any crime that involves hate toward any identifiable group. We

will pursue these crimes as vigorously as possible. That's what we must do. We must send out a general message to the streets, to any people who might want to consider engaging in crimes like this,

that they will in fact be held accountable under law, because that is what a civil society does. We will make sure this doesn't happen again.

GAMING CONTROL

Mr Frank Klees (Oak Ridges): My question is to the Minister of Consumer and Business Services. You will know that Ontario has worked

diligently over the years to ensure that its gambling industry is subject to the highest standards. You will probably also know that one way to achieve that is through a system of international

agreements that are entered into with various jurisdictions around the world to ensure that gaming operations exchange information.

Minister, I'd like to ask you a question with regard to an offshore gaming operation on the island of St Kitts: I would like to know whether you can confirm

for the House if that jurisdiction has ever entered into such an agreement with Ontario, as that would certainly be a reflection of the kind of operation that is going on there. Of course, your

Minister of Finance has had some very intimate knowledge of that particular operation over the years. Can you confirm for this House whether such an agreement exists?

Interjection.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: The member for Oak Ridges has just asked a very serious question that he

obviously thinks is important to his constituents, and the Minister of Finance made an outrageous comment that I know you'll want to ask him to withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): I didn't hear it.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I didn't hear it. If the member felt that he had made --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I'm dealing with one aspect of things now. If the member felt that he had made some comment and wants to withdraw it, it

is up to him.

Hon Greg Sorbara (Minister of Finance): Mr Speaker, if I made a comment that offended the member opposite, I certainly withdraw it.

Mr Baird: He used a four-letter word --

The Speaker: Order.

Minister.

Hon Jim Watson (Minister of Consumer and Business Services): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I'd be pleased to look into the matter. I'm not aware of

any connection between St Kitts and AGCO or any operation in Ontario but I'd be pleased to get back to the member, hopefully tomorrow.

Mr Klees: Thank you very much, Minister. I look forward to your response. I can share with this House that it's my understanding that some 40

agreements like that do exist with other jurisdictions. These are typically jurisdictions that are willing to provide that kind of information for the purpose of ensuring legitimacy within the

industry. I'm sure the minister will know that these regulations, these practices, exist for the purpose of ensuring the highest standards in this industry. So I would ask the minister to comment

on whether it would have been appropriate for that facility to have registered such an agreement with the jurisdiction of Ontario.

Hon Mr Watson: As I said, I'd be pleased to get back on the specific case, but I can tell the honourable member that I have great confidence

in the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario, which is viewed as a world leader in terms of ensuring standards are at the highest for the gaming industry within Ontario. The AGCO and our

ministry are often looked at as world leaders in terms of ensuring that the operations that we're responsible for, through the slots operations in casinos and charity casinos, do meet all

international standards.

ONTARIO POWER GENERATION

Mr Kevin Daniel Flynn (Oakville): My question is for the Minister of Energy. People in Oakville have been shocked recently by allegations of

impropriety at Hydro One. They were troubled to hear that during the term of the previous PC government, people who were well known to be friends of the government were awarded lucrative,

untendered contracts. Minister, can you outline to the people and businesses in my riding what process you plan to use to ensure that contracts are awarded in an open and transparent manner, unlike

the previous government's method of dealing with contracts?

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): I think it's fair to say that many people throughout Ontario have been asking

the very same question. We have come to learn since we came to office that the Tory government were anything but good managers. They left us a $5.6-billion deficit, and at the same time they were

letting untendered contracts out to their friends. They didn't subject them to freedom of information, they didn't allow public access. Five point six million dollars at Hydro One alone, and they

kept the lights off when it came to that. That was their legacy.

Let me conclude by saying that all the while they were awarding these friendly agreements that weren't subject to public scrutiny, the electricity sector in

this province was falling apart. But the McGuinty government's going to fix it with a proper remedy to make sure we have electricity and lights going forward.

Mr Flynn: My constituents are also disturbed by the fact that during the term of the previous PC government, Ontario Power Generation plunged

further and further into debt, while the future electricity needs of the province were all but ignored.

Minister, I know you have heard back from the Electricity Conservation and Supply Task Force, the OPG review committee and hundreds of stakeholders from around

the province. Can you outline to the people and businesses in my riding what process you plan to use to ensure that the energy supply for Ontarians is reliable, affordable and secure in both the

long and short term?

Hon Mr Duncan: The first step we've already taken is to make sure that, unlike the Conservative government --

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. Member from Simcoe North, don't let me call you to order again. You're preventing the minister from

responding.

Hon Mr Duncan: The first step we took was to make sure that, unlike the Conservative government, we won't treat Hydro One and OPG like our own

private country club; that's ended. Their record on hydroelectricity: no new generation in eight years; a price cap that cost the taxpayers of Ontario $850 million; no renewable electricity in

Ontario; no development under your administration. But all the while they had money for their friends and contacts, people who didn't have to go through a tender, people who would work for a year

or two and go off and get all kinds of goodies.

Well, those days are over, thank goodness. This government's bringing change to electricity. We're bringing safe, secure, reliable new supply at an affordable,

predictable price for the people they ignored for eight long, painful years.

NURSES

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): My question is for the Minister of Health. Before the election, your party promised to create a rewarding

environment for nurses and to ease the health care deficit in communities in the province.

Kevin Crigger is a student nurse from Dryden who wants to provide nursing care in his community; his community is underserviced. He wanted to access the free

tuition program for nurses, so that a portion of his tuition costs will be covered in exchange for him working for a set number of years in an underserviced community. Imagine his surprise when

last week he learned that the Liberals have quietly scrapped this program and, further, that the government does not have any incentives now in place to either recruit or retain nurses in

underserviced areas.

My question to you, Minister, is, why are you breaking your promise to nurses and to underserviced communities?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'd like to thank the member for the question and the opportunity to highlight

the extent to which, in five short months, we've begun to fulfill our commitments to nurses. Nurses are, at the end of the day, the heart and soul of health care. The foundations of nursing in this

province are in pretty rough shape, by any analysis of the statistics.

What have we done? We've undertaken to enhance the percentage of nurses working full time, something that that party, while in government, spent $400 million

talking about and achieving very little. Already, through a recent announcement on February 24, we have created 400 or 500 new, full-time spots for nurses in this province. Second, we acknowledge

that the foundations of nursing are challenged from a workplace health and safety standpoint. We've begun to work with the nursing community in Ontario's hospitals and long-term-care facilities to

enhance health and safety standards. They're working in concert with my colleague the Minister of Labour.

With respect to providing opportunities for nurses -- and for doctors, for that matter -- in underserviced communities, our ministry is working very hard on

plans that we'll roll out through 2004-05 and beyond that will enhance the capacity of the ministry to help to direct resources to those communities across the breadth of our province which are

desperately in need of the resources of great health care workers.

Ms Martel: The question was about the free tuition program for nurses. You see, Kevin Crigger wants to practise his nursing skills and

expertise in his underserviced community of Dryden. There has been in place a program that would allow him to do that, and he would get a portion of his high tuition costs covered in exchange for a

work service program in that community. Your government has quietly cancelled that program. Not only that, but Mr Crigger was further told that the government has no incentive program in place now

to either recruit or retain nurses. So it's no small wonder that hundreds of graduating nurses will go to the United States, where they can get some of their tuition covered, instead of staying in

Ontario.

The question is very simple, Minister. Your government cancelled this program. Why are you breaking your promises, both to nurses and to underserviced

communities?

Hon Mr Smitherman: I'm happy to repeat to the honourable member, who clearly didn't hear it the first time, that we've already begun to move

on the commitments we made to enhance opportunities for nurses who are graduating from our classes this year. And I repeat what I said in my earlier statement: Our government is in the midst of

developing our plans to enhance opportunities for nurses, for doctors and for other health care professionals to work in interdisciplinary approaches in those communities across our province that

are currently underserviced. I'm very pleased to say that great progress will be made on this very soon.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): My question is to the Premier. In 1996, I was the first minister under the Harris government to step aside when

there was any question of ministerial impropriety or impropriety of our staff. I did that. The privacy commissioner made a report, and I was exonerated and came back. Bob Runciman, the Solicitor

General, was the second minister, and he did the honourable thing and stepped aside. We offered our resignations to Mr Harris, the Premier of the day. We did the honourable thing. We upheld a

parliamentary tradition, and we were both exonerated.

We're bewildered over here why you simply won't ask for the resignation of your finance minister, pending the outcome of several investigations that are going

on, including police investigations. Could that be because Mr Sorbara, as president of the Liberal Party of Ontario, arranged for the purchase of the house you live in in Toronto, a

three-quarters-of-a-million-dollar house near Rosedale?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Order. That is completely out of order.

Mr Wilson: What's wrong with that?

The Speaker: You're accusing a member of making some arrangements, for which you have no grounds. Will you withdraw it, please?

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. Will you withdraw the comment?

Mr Wilson: No, Mr Speaker, because what I've said was --

The Speaker: Order. New question.

Mr Wilson: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I don't understand how you can make that ruling. It's public knowledge. I'm repeating media --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I'm sure you're familiar with the standing order that no member may impute "false or unavowed motives to another

member."

New question.

FAMILY RESPONSIBILITY OFFICE

Mr Kim Craitor (Niagara Falls): My question is to the Minister of Community and Social Services. My community office in Niagara Falls receives

many calls on a daily basis from concerned supporters who are either receiving or paying benefits to the Family Responsibility Office. First, Minister, on behalf of my constituents, I want to thank

you for taking the time to come down to Niagara Falls and personally handle one of the Family Responsibility round table sessions. The people who participated were extremely pleased, not only to

have the opportunity to express their concerns, but also to share with you their ideas on how to improve the FRO. Can you please tell the people of Ontario what your ministry is doing to improve

the service at the Family Responsibility Office?

Hon Sandra Pupatello (Minister of Community and Social Services, minister responsible for women's issues): I'm very pleased to answer

questions about the Family Responsibility Office. In a very few short months we've made some enormous strides in an office that has a tremendous amount of work to do.

As most members in this House know, we in opposition were one of the heaviest critics of this office, and for good reason. It was virtually ignored for years.

We have taken the time from the very outset to make some significant changes in the filing system, changes in the document scanning system, and implementing administrative changes to begin to allow

people to even get through on the telephone.

I was very pleased to participate in round tables in Ottawa and in Niagara Falls, as the member has mentioned. It has been very fruitful, especially talking to

individuals who use the system and tell us that it's important that government play a role in helping to change attitudes about people who must pay support. So I'm very pleased to have that

opportunity to work with the member from Niagara Falls.

Mr Craitor: You talked about the initiatives your ministry is taking to address the problems at the Family Responsibility Office. What

specific changes can you share with my constituents in Niagara Falls and the people of Ontario on what you count on seeing in the future?

Hon Ms Pupatello: In about seven days we're going to begin with the launch of a pilot project using 200 individuals who use the system and

advancing them PIN numbers, for example, so they can use a telephone-enhanced system 24 hours a day. That same PIN number can be used on the Internet so that they can access our office 24 hours a

day, seven days a week, and get very pertinent information to their case.

Probably the most significant part of the announcement that we made at the early part of February involves a pre-release of an RFP for a case management

computer system so that we can move the Family Responsibility Office to a case management model. May I tell the House that the Provincial Auditor has called for this since 1994 and it was virtually

ignored by both the NDP and the Progressive Conservatives. The Liberals will not ignore these families and we are moving quickly in order to help people get the money they deserve.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Mr Robert W. Runciman (Leeds-Grenville): I have a question for the Premier. It's an issue that was raised earlier by my leader related to the

appointment of Susan Jenah as the vice-chair of the Ontario Securities Commission. Ms Jenah -- I hope I have the pronunciation right -- replaced Howard Wetston as vice-chair. During his tenure, Mr

Wetston rendered judgment on former Premier Peterson's activities as a member of the board of directors. On February 18 this appointment came before the executive council.

We on this side of the House would like to know how that matter was dealt with at the executive council. We know it is the Premier's appointment.

Traditionally, certainly in an appointment of this significance, the involvement of the Minister of Finance would be required and his opinion would be asked for. We would like to know if his

opinion was asked for, and if not, why not, and did he declare a conflict of interest?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I know the Chair of Management Board wants to speak to this.

Hon Gerry Phillips (Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet): In response to the question, I think the public should be aware that Ms Jenah

is an individual of impeccable credentials. The Ontario Securities commissioners examined a whole series of individuals who might be appropriate for the position of vice-chair and Ms Jenah was

selected unanimously by the securities commissioners to be appointed to this role. This is a person of impeccable credentials who was recommended by the Ontario Securities Commission unanimously.

It came to the cabinet and the cabinet approved that on the strong recommendation of the Ontario Securities Commission for an individual, as I said, with impeccable credentials.

Mr Runciman: We're not talking about Ms Jenah's standards; we're talking about your standards. It appears that this is a banana-republic

approach to appointments, appointing a judge who may sit in judgment. You did not answer the question. I clearly asked you, I asked the Premier: Where was the Minister of Finance? Was he sitting in

on this? Did he declare a conflict? He knew at the time that an OSC investigation had been undertaken. He knew the potential for this individual to be sitting in judgment of his activities on the

board of Royal. Did he or did he not declare a conflict? Is that not a concern to you as the man responsible for OSC? Is that of concern to the Premier of the province, that this individual could

sit there while a person was appointed to sit in judgment of the Minister of Finance's activities?

Hon Mr Phillips: Again, I repeat the process that was followed. The Ontario Securities Commission was asked for their recommendations and they

unanimously recommended this individual. It was recommended to the Premier to appoint this individual with impeccable credentials. That individual was appointed. I would add to the public that one

of the opportunities is for the opposition to call forward these appointments, to review these appointments. I don't believe that they have yet called forward that individual, so I would just say

to the public that what we're talking about here is an individual with 10 years of experience, impeccable credentials recommended unanimously by the securities commission and who was appointed to a

position for which I think she is eminently qualified after having been unanimously recommended by the securities commission.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): If it's a question you're asking, it is not your turn.

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): I'm trying.

The Speaker: That's good. Good effort.

HEALTH CARE

Mr Kuldip Kular (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): My question is for the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Minister, as you know, I am a

practising family doctor. It's a job I view as a welcome break from the daily grind of legislative work. Both as an MPP and a family doctor, I am seriously concerned about the eight years of

erosion that befell our province's primary health system under the previous government. During those years I saw a larger number of patients and they had to wait longer to see me. Minister, my

question is, what has your ministry done to ensure that this situation improves in the coming years? Will Ontario families enjoy timely access to the community health care providers?

Hon George Smitherman (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'd like to thank the member from Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale for his

question. I think everybody agrees that enhanced access to primary care physicians and interdisciplinary teams of practitioners is essential for families all across the province of Ontario.

A few points that we have taken to date in our mandate to make the supply all the more ready to serve the needs of our growing population: I have made it clear

in my work with Dr Larry Erlick, the head of the Ontario Medical Association, and to our teams currently negotiating a new agreement, that improving the viability of family practice is the number

one goal that we all have. Our party's commitment in the last election was to build 100 family health teams across the province of Ontario. We're building on existing reforms in the area of primary

care to be able to deliver on these. I'm very pleased that last week, as a result of resources made available through the primary care fund from the federal government -- some $213 million to

Ontario over four years -- we've introduced 45 projects that will enhance the viability of family practice all across the province of Ontario.

Mr Kular: Residents of my riding will be glad to know that the government has a plan that will allow them to access primary health care

providers at all hours of the day. However, Minister, the front-line situation in our health care system needs improvement. Between 2002 and 2003, Ontario hospitals purchased two million hours of

services from nursing agencies, sometimes at more than double the cost of employee nurses. Moreover, only 55% of our nurses are full-time employees, and they worked more than 2.7 million hours of

overtime. The nurses I have worked with are wonderful, dedicated people, under a tremendous amount of stress. Minister, what have we done to ease the burden and pressure that is all too often

placed on our nurses?

Hon Mr Smitherman: In an earlier answer to the member from Nickel Belt, I had the opportunity to say what I am very pleased to say again,

which is that nurses are the heart and soul of health care. The state of nursing when we took responsibility for health care in this province was a sorry state indeed. Instead of hiring full-time

nurses and offering those opportunities, Ontario's hospitals were far too reliant on overtime and agency nursing.

We are working aggressively with the Ontario Hospital Association and Ontario's hospitals to enhance the opportunities inside hospital environments for nurses,

and I am pleased to say, as a result of our funding announcements on February 24, some 400 to 500 new nurses are beginning full-time opportunities for stable employment in Ontario's hospitals.

We've also targeted resources, some $14 million already, to improve the health and safety conditions for nurses operating in our hospitals. In order to have a

better quality, high-performance, high-performing health care system in the province of Ontario, we need to rebuild the foundations --

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Thank you.

SPORT FISHING

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): My question is to the Premier. Premier, before the election, you promised to northerners that you were

going to have no-limit fishing in northern Ontario. That irresponsible promise is right here on the cover of your northern platform. If you look at it, there's a guy on a boat and he's got six

lines in the water, fishing, at the same time.

The guy is saying, "To heck with the fish stocks." The Liberals said, by way of this picture, "Use as many lines as you want when you go fishing." The cover of

your northern platform advocates no rules, no conscience, no limits.

Now, true to form, you've broken that promise, another broken promise, because recently an angler in northern Ontario was charged for fishing with four lines

in the water. My question simply is this: Why are you charging people for doing something that you advocated on the cover of your northern electoral platform?

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Premier, before you do that, you know that no props are allowed.

Interjections.

The Speaker: How many Speakers are in the House?

I caution you on how much you use those props.

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): I know the Minister of Natural Resources would like to speak to

this.

Hon David Ramsay (Minister of Natural Resources): This is amazing, that the member from Timmins-James Bay has his best question of the day in

bringing this forward, looking at the picture of our platform document, True North. First of all, I would say that our northern colleagues and all the candidates were very proud to run under that

platform, True North. As you know from the ONTC announcement that Minister Bartolucci brought forward last week, and I did in Timmins -- you were very supportive of that, and I know we'll look for

your continued support.

This picture that you refer to: There's an anchor line out there; they're not all fishing lines. If you look at those -- stringer lines to hold the fish. I

would just say to the member that if he looks very closely, I'm sure the angler in question was using one of the lines to keep his soda pop cool in the water also, and he should be examining that.

But I think seriously --

The Speaker: Thank you.

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): I wanted to hear more.

The Speaker: Maybe he can follow up in the supplementary.

Mr Bisson: Minister, it wasn't soda pop, I'm sure. Mr Speaker, you asked me not to use this prop. I'm just using an election document that the

Liberals put out from the previous election. So not for me to call it a prop, but listen, Minister, you talk about this particular fisherman having his anchor. Did you notice that inside that

particular --

Interjections.

The Speaker: New question.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Mr John R. Baird (Nepean-Carleton): I want to return to the Premier. The St Catharines Standard quoted Jennifer Mossop, the Liberal member for

Stoney Creek, on February 28 as follows: "Mossop" --

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: The member was asking a legitimate question. On what basis is he

simply told, "Your question is not in order"?

The Speaker (Hon Alvin Curling): Let me remind you that I warned the member twice about props and he continued deliberately to show it. If he

decided to continue to do that, I had no alternative but to move on. If he wants to get his question in -- you follow the procedures of the House.

Member from Nepean --

Mr Hampton: With respect, Speaker, this is an auditor's report. Is it a prop?

The Speaker: Order.

Mr Baird: Could we get the time restored on the clock? Thank you, Speaker.

The St Catharines Standard quoted Jennifer Mossop, the Liberal member for Stoney Creek, on February 28 as follows: "Mossop said the entire Liberal caucus was

put through integrity sessions with the party shortly after being elected and before the cabinet was selected." Premier, there are now three investigations going on, including a criminal probe by

the RCMP. I want to ask you specifically, before you offered the Minister of Finance the twin responsibilities as the custodian of investor confidence, protecting seniors' pensions, and chief

steward of global confidence in our capital market, did he report to you any problems or irregularities with respect to his nine-year involvement with Royal Group Technologies?

Hon Dalton McGuinty (Premier, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr Speaker, I want to take the opportunity to inform you and the member

opposite that we went to extraordinary lengths in meetings with all members, prospective cabinet ministers, to ensure they were people of integrity, and if there were any problems, that we might do

what had to be done in order to address those. I can assure you that all those members in my cabinet have been subjected to the most rigorous examination and have met the highest standard, and the

rest speaks for itself.

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): The Toronto Star reported on January 31 --

The Speaker: Supplementary.

Interjections.

The Speaker: You should withdraw the comment that you made. You said that you refuse to.

Mr Wilson: I tried twice to stand up here after --

The Speaker: Let me hear it now, then.

Mr Wilson: Right. So much for democracy. I withdraw the previous question.

The Speaker: Supplementary.

Mr Wilson: I would like the opportunity, Mr Speaker, to ask that question.

The Speaker: They can have the supplementary now.

Mr Wilson: Mr Speaker, in the Toronto Star of January 31 this year the headline reads, "Premier Gets a House, Courtesy of Party." My point was

that Greg Sorbara was president of the Liberal Party of Ontario, who bought the Premier the house.

Secondly, on March 8 the Toronto Star said, "Absent-minded Premier Forgets to Return the Keys.

"McGuinty, who stayed at Finance Minister Greg Sorbara's Palm Beach, Florida, home in January, forgot to return the keys," blah, blah blah.

My question to the Premier is -- because we're wondering why he won't ask his minister to resign and do the honourable and parliamentary thing -- Mr Premier,

are you sure you're not in the pockets, so deep, of Mr Sorbara that you're unable to have clear judgment with respect to the --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order.

Hon Dwight Duncan (Minister of Energy, Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: That clearly violates --

Interjection.

Hon Mr Duncan: Standing orders are not --

Interjections.

Hon Mr Duncan: All right. Standing order 23(

i) very clearly prohibits imputing motive by one member to the other. If he doesn't withdraw it,

he should be removed from the House. You've cut him too much slack.

The Speaker: Are you going to put a question?

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. I presume you don't want to hear the answer, then. Premier.

Hon Mr McGuinty: I will do my utmost in the most trying circumstances to answer each and every question put to me by the members opposite, but

I choose very deliberately not to dignify this question by answering it.

Mr Baird: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I would like to give notice of my dissatisfaction with all of the Premier's answers, and we will be

filing the necessary paperwork.

The Speaker: Do the necessary paperwork and let me have it.

PETITIONS

ENERGY CONSERVATION

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

"Whereas smart meter technology, which allows electricity users to read the exact amount of electricity they save by turning off air conditioners, individual

lights etc, has been found to reduce users' hydro bills by 15% to 20%;

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

"That all hydro consumers in Oxford county have the option of using smart meter technology."

I present this on behalf of a lot of signatories from Oxford county, one of best counties in Ontario.

PROPERTY TAXATION

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I received this petition by registered mail. It is addressed to the government of Ontario and it reads as

follows:

"We, the undersigned property owners and tenants, strongly oppose the current value assessment system in Ontario. The 2003 current value assessment system is

too high and we will show strong resistance. There may be a tax revolt.

"We believe the municipal tax system should reflect the following principles: (1) ability to pay should be a consideration; (2) property taxes should be

related to services 100%; (3) homeowners should not be penalized for improving their properties; (4) dependence on the residential property tax to raise provincial and municipal revenues should be

reduced; (5) the assessment system should be stable over a long period of time -- 10 years; (6) assessments should be objective, accurate, consistent, correct, equitable and easily understood --

house sf class price; lot sf class price, garage sf class price; and (7) the owner should be authorized to approve the assessment."

Since I agree with this petition, I am delighted to sign it.

CHILDREN'S NUTRITION

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

"Whereas recent scientific research has proven there is a link between children's nutrition and academic performance; and

"Whereas less than 25% of Canadian children eat in accordance with Canada's food guidelines; and

"Whereas Breakfast for Learning, the Canadian Living Foundation, is the only national non-profit organization solely dedicated to supporting child nutrition

programs in Canada; and

"Whereas the need for nutrition programs in schools has more than doubled, resulting in grant requests that far exceed the level of funding received from the

Ontario provincial government;

"We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to commit government support to child nutrition programs by increasing funding to Breakfast

for Learning, the Canadian Living Foundation, from $4.5 million to $9 million, as requested in their submitted proposal."

I support the petition.

SUDBURY REGIONAL HOSPITAL

Ms Shelley Martel (Nickel Belt): It is my great pleasure to introduce this petition in the Legislature. It says:

"I agree it's time. Our community can't afford to pay more for the construction at the Sudbury Regional Hospital. We have already done more than our fair

share. The Liberal government should immediately pay 85% of the cost of construction at the Sudbury Regional Hospital. The time for action is now."

It's my pleasure to introduce this petition on behalf of my constituents, and of course I agree with them entirely.

CHILD CARE

Mr Jean-Marc Lalonde (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell): I have a petition from hundreds of concerned parents à l'Assemblée

législative de l'Ontario.

"Whereas the caregivers of private day nurseries are limited to a maximum of five children at the same time based on the day nursery act;

"Whereas the schoolchildren need a place before and after school for 90 minutes at a time;

"Whereas the youngest children learn from the older children...;

"Whereas the before- and after-school programs are full and the children are on the waiting list, and do not have anywhere to go because of the limit of five

children;

"Whereas the parents will be relieved to have a place for the schoolchildren who have been with the same caregivers for a long time;

"Whereas the caregivers are not part of a union, they also need to work the same as the union public daycare;

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

"That the government of Ontario amend the day nursery act to authorize the caregivers to have a higher number than five children of less than 10 years

old."

I gladly sign this petition.

ONTARIO DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr Jim Wilson (Simcoe-Grey): I have a petition that's signed by several hundred people in my riding of Simcoe-Grey. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the McGuinty Liberals by no means campaigned on raising the rates associated with the Ontario drug benefit program; and

"Whereas the majority of seniors, many of which live on a fixed income, cannot meet the expense of higher costs for essential medication; and

"Whereas seniors in Simcoe-Grey and across Ontario should never have to make the choice between eating and filling a prescription;

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

"To cancel any plans to raise costs for prescription drugs for our seniors and to embark on making vital medication more affordable for Ontarians."

I agree with the several hundred signatures already on this petition and I affix my name to it.

OAK RIDGES MORAINE

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): It's my pleasure to present a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas the Oak Ridges moraine is an ecological treasure that warrants protection and careful stewardship now and in future generations;

"Whereas the province of Ontario has recognized the importance of the moraine with the passage of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, 2001, to protect

natural and water resources, preserve agricultural lands and provide clarity on where development can and cannot occur;

"Whereas the act has resulted in certain limitations on citizens' use of their property within the moraine;

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

"That the Parliament of Ontario take action to ensure there are no undue restrictions on Oak Ridges moraine residents making minor improvements to their homes

and property; and

"That the province of Ontario work together with municipalities and land owners to ensure the

interpretation and enforcement of the act continues to fully

protect the moraine while also giving residents the right to fair and reasonable enjoyment of their property."

I'm pleased to support and sign this on behalf of my constituents.

TUITION

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition here that was sent to me by the Canadian Federation of Students, and it's signed by students

from George Brown College. It reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas average undergraduate tuition fees in Ontario are the second highest in Canada; and

"Whereas average undergraduate tuition fees in Ontario have more than doubled in the past 10 years; and

"Whereas tuition fees for deregulated programs have, in certain cases, doubled and" even "tripled; and

"Whereas Statistics Canada has documented a link between increasing tuition fees and diminishing access to post-secondary education; and

"Whereas four other provincial governments have taken the leadership role by freezing and reducing tuition fees;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Assembly of Ontario to:

"Freeze tuition fees for all programs at their current levels; and

"Take steps to reduce the tuition fees of all graduate programs, post-diploma programs, and professional programs for which tuition fees have been deregulated

since 1998."

I present this to you, Mr Speaker. Thank you very much.

ABORTION

Mr Gerry Martiniuk (Cambridge): I have a petition signed by good citizens of Cambridge, addressed:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario in Parliament assembled:

"We, the undersigned citizens of Ontario, draw the attention of the House to the following:

"That Ontarians are being asked to consider alternate forms of health care delivery due to escalating costs; and

"That 65% of Ontarians surveyed in October 2002 objected to the public funding of abortion on demand; and

"That almost all abortions are done for `socio-economic' reasons in Canada; and

"That the Canada Health Act imposes no duty on provinces to fund any services other than those that are medically necessary; and

"That there are no legal impediments preventing provinces from de-insuring abortion.

"Therefore, your petitioners call on the province of Ontario to enact legislation which will de-insure induced abortion."

I attach my name thereto.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr Bruce Crozier): It being 4 of the clock, and according to standing order 30(b), I am now required to call for orders of

the day.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

THRONE SPEECH DEBATE /

DÉBAT SUR LE DISCOURS DU TRÔNE

Resuming the debate adjourned on December 16, 2003, on the motion for an address in reply to the speech of His Honour the Lieutenant Governor at the opening of

the session.

Mr Joseph N. Tascona (Barrie-Simcoe-Bradford): I am very pleased to join in the debate with respect to the speech from the throne. I am here

today with the member from Durham. I hope he remains here with me to listen to this debate. I know he always does.

I'd just like to say that we're entering the spring session. I can tell you that it's going to be a very interesting session, in terms of the agenda. I'm

looking forward to a number of government initiatives. Hopefully, they're going to keep their promises on some of these initiatives. I don't know which ones, but I know that during the break there

were a lot of issues that came about with respect to the nuances, I would say, of the Premier in terms of what he was going to do one day versus another day. He was talking about now putting tolls

on all the 400 series of highways. He was talking about selling off the LCBO. He was talking about bringing back photo radar, all different measures that I think will probably irritate the voter as

opposed to building a consensus in terms of living up to your promises.

But I think the one that really struck the nerve of my constituents in terms of all these musings by the Premier during the break before the spring session

began was the Ontario drug benefit program for seniors with respect to the comments that were made about delisting drugs and imposing user fees on seniors and talking about a means test for seniors

with respect to drugs. I've got a petition here of close to 500 names that has been building steadily with respect to this particular issue. It's a very serious issue for seniors. And seniors don't

like it. They don't think it's fair. I don't think it's fair with respect to having seniors who have paid their taxes, who have an expectation that they're going to be supported by the government

with respect to their health care, suddenly read in the paper comments by the government -- that never ran on this -- that they were going to start to means-test seniors, delist drugs and impose

user fees on seniors. I can tell you that the message they're conveying to me is that it just won't wash. Seniors do not want that. We're going to continue to push on this issue in terms of making

sure that the government backs down from means-testing seniors with respect to their drugs.

I guess we're going to have to wait until the budget comes out, depending on who's going to deliver the budget, whether it's the current Minister of Finance or

some other individual, depending on what happens with respect to the issues of the day. But that is a serious issue, and it's not one that this government should take lightly. They never ran on

imposing a means test on seniors. They didn't run on any issue that was going to detrimentally and negatively impact on the quality of life or the quality of health care provided to seniors. It's

an important issue.

I have elderly parents, and I can tell you that they rely on health care. The older they get, obviously they rely on the community care access centres, they

rely on the fundamental system of making their health what it should be. To now talk about cutting back on drugs and means testing of drugs for seniors, I can tell you, I didn't see any of that in

the speech from the throne. I didn't see it in the Liberal agenda, in terms of when they were running, that they were going to go after seniors.

But it seems that they're going after a lot of things, let alone breaking their promises in terms of what they've done with hydro. When people get their hydro

bills this month from their local utilities or Hydro One, they're going to have what we call shock from their bill. There's going to be sticker shock, I can tell you, from what's going to happen

with respect to that hydro -- the 9% that the government has allowed the hydro utilities to put on their bill. Then we know, come April 1, we're going to move into the Liberal agenda or formula for

hydro prices, which is going to be another impact on consumers with respect to what they're going to pay.

The Liberals can talk about what was going on with how hydro was handled and whatever; the bottom line is, if this government had run on the platform that they

were going to do what they did to hydro on the second day after they were elected, they wouldn't have been elected; not a chance. If they'd come out with a program saying that, "We're going to make

sure that you pay for hydro based on this particular formula" that they have come up with that they think is fair -- and they're going to put all that on their books too, in terms of trying to

achieve a balanced budget on the backs of all the consumers here. They basically broke th